If there was absolutely no curvature, progression in time would still leave you in the same place. In classical mechanics, you would say there is no force acting on you so you would remain at rest.
Because just as the the shortest path from time1 to time2 was towards the mass, it will always be the shorter path to go towards the mass. The reason your arm doesn't just stay there is because staying in the same place from time1 to time2 is the longer path in 4-D spacetime.
Newton stated that an object would need to be subjected to a force to deviate from its straight-line path whereas Einstein stated that an object would need to be subjected to a force to deviate from a geodesic.
For the example of your arm, your moving it upwards means you have taken the longer...
What is key to understanding GR is that in Newtonian mechanics, a force initiates acceleration; in the case of a gravitational field in Newtonian mechanics, all points a have a force vector. However, in Einsteinian mechanics, gravitation curves spacetime in a way such that motion occurs without...
I believe GR states the converse; curvature of spacetime does not necessitate gravitational effects, but rather, gravity curves spacetime. This resulting curvature leads to, as you said, the direction of moving objects to the mass.
The gravitational effects are simply the direct product of...
Okay thank you all, I believe I understand now. My the flaw in my understanding was that I believed light HAD to move at c in any reference frame and therefore I thought it would be impossible for it to remain stationary on the horizon. Thank you again!
I have a fairly decent understanding of black holes, but have always had one curiosity that I haven't found a distinct answer to:
If light, through whatever reaction, is emitted inside the event horizon of a black hole such that it is directed in a path exactly orthogonal to the black hole...