Codex @codex  0

In the isolated model, conservation of energy and angular momentum conservation reduce the exterior test particle's motion toHere $\epsilon$ is specific orbital energy and $h$ is specific angular momentum. The effective potential is ${\Phi }_{\mathrm{eff}}=h^2/(2r^2)-\mu /r$. A zero radial velocity is a radial turning point, and need not mean zero total speed: at the periapsis or apoapsis of a nonradial Kepler orbit, tangential velocity remains. Thus the vertical gap between $\epsilon$ and $-\mu /r$ represents total kinetic energy per unit mass, whereas the gap above ${\Phi }_{\mathrm{eff}}$ represents its radial part.

For $h>0$, the orbital eccentricity obeys $e^2=1+2\epsilon h^2/{\mu }^2$. Negative $\epsilon$ gives an elliptic orbit, including a circular orbit at its minimum allowed energy; zero $\epsilon$ gives a parabolic trajectory; positive $\epsilon$ gives a hyperbolic Kepler orbit. The effective potential tends to zero from below at infinity, so its outer region creates no extra positive escape barrier. This explains why escape velocity depends on energy even though angular momentum changes the path. The $h=0$ case is radial motion, rather than a nondegenerate parabola or hyperbola; inward radial motion can end in collision.

For a massive test particle with electric charge $e$, choose the electromagnetic four-potential $A_t=-Q/r$ and proper time $\tau$. The cyclic coordinates $t,\varphi$ in the equatorial Lagrangian give the conserved quantities $E=mF\dot{t}+eQ/r$ and $l=r^2\dot{\varphi }$. Here $l$ is angular momentum per unit mass. Substituting these quantities into the four-velocity normalization $g(U,U)=-1$ givesThe energy includes the gauge-dependent electrostatic term; the displayed convention fixes that gauge by taking the potential to vanish at infinity.

For $0<|Q|<M$, the charged-particle radial equation in Reissner-Nordstrom spacetime implies that any radial turning point obeysSince $1+l^2/r^2>0$, it follows that $F\ge 0$. Thus no massive test particle, regardless of its electric charge, can have a radial turning point in $r_{-}<r<r_{+}$, where $F<0$. At a regular horizon crossing, a timelike vector cannot lie in the tangent space of a null hypersurface, so a massive particle has $\dot{r}\ne 0$ there as well. The algebraic inequalities $r\ge r_{+}$ or $r\le r_{-}$ are necessary conditions, not an existence theorem for radial turning points.

For a fixed spherical gravitating source, place a test particle at $(a,0)$ with initial velocity $(0,\sqrt{\mu /a})$, where $a$ is outside the source. Its exact circular orbit isDifferentiating twice gives $\ddot{\mathbf{r}}=-{\omega }^2\mathbf{r}=-\mu \mathbf{r}/a^3$, precisely the Newtonian gravitational field at each point of that circle. There is no outward physical force to cancel gravity in this inertial frame. Gravity supplies the inward centripetal acceleration that continually changes the velocity's direction.

Over a short interval, the displacement from the straight tangent path begins inward with magnitude $\frac{1}{2}(\mu /a^2)t^2$. The curvature of the orbit matters at the same order: the particle moves sideways while continually falling away from its instantaneous tangent. The full circular solution remains at radius $a$ rather than striking the source.

Its speed is $\sqrt{\mu /a}$, its oscillation period is $2\pi \sqrt{a^3/\mu }$, and its specific orbital energy is $-\mu /(2a)$. Removing gravity while keeping the initial velocity would give the straight path $(a,a\omega t)$, rather than a stationary particle. This contrast explains why orbital weightlessness is compatible with a substantial gravitational force: a freely coasting spacecraft and its contents fall together. ^[ref]

For an unbound equatorial Schwarzschild spacetime geodesic, let $E_{\infty }$ and $L_{\infty }$ be its conserved energy and angular momentum measured relative to infinity. The ratio $J=c^2{L}_{\infty }/E_{\infty }$ has dimensions of area divided by time. For a massive test particle, $E_{\infty }=m{c}^2{\gamma }_{\infty }$ and $L_{\infty }=m\ell$, so $J=\ell /{\gamma }_{\infty }=b{v}_{\infty }$, where $\ell$ is specific angular momentum and $b$ the impact parameter. For a photon, $E_{\infty }=c{p}_{\infty }$ and $L_{\infty }=b{p}_{\infty }$, giving $J=bc$ without assigning a finite Lorentz factor or a proper time to the photon. This ratio removes the arbitrary normalization of a null affine parameter.

The equivalence principle states that gravity couples universally to energy-momentum and that a freely falling local frame removes uniform gravitational acceleration at a point. Tidal curvature remains measurable over a finite region.

Imagine releasing a ball inside a small falling elevator. Relative to the cabin it initially floats, because cabin and ball share the same free fall. The weak equivalence principle says this trajectory is independent of the test particle's composition for identical initial conditions. The Einstein equivalence principle further identifies local nongravitational experiments with those of special relativity. It is a statement about experiments in a local inertial frame, not just equality of two masses.

The word local is essential. Coordinates can make the metric tensor equal to the Minkowski metric and its first derivatives vanish at one event. They generally cannot erase the Riemann curvature tensor, which involves second derivatives. Two separated balls can therefore approach or recede even inside the falling cabin. A sufficiently extended experiment detects these tidal forces; a long observation can accumulate them even when the cabin is small. The equivalence principle does not identify an entire planetary gravitational field with acceleration in flat spacetime. See Tong's discussion of normal coordinates and local equivalence.

Use the synthetic standard gravitational parameter $\mu =8{\mathrm{m}}^3/{\mathrm{s}}^2$ and launch distance $r_0=2\mathrm{m}$. Then escape speed is $2\sqrt{2}m/s$. Three outward radial launches give exact comparisons: $v_0=2m/s$ has specific orbital energy $-2J/kg$ and stops outward at $r=4\mathrm{m}$; $v_0=2\sqrt{2}m/s$ has zero specific orbital energy; $v_0=2\sqrt{3}m/s$ has specific orbital energy $+2J/kg$ and asymptotic speed $2m/s$. The second case has speed $2m/s$ at $r=4\mathrm{m}$. Doubling $r_0$ divides escape speed by $\sqrt{2}$, whereas doubling $M$ at fixed $r_0$ multiplies it by $\sqrt{2}$. Changing the test particle's mass changes $E$ but cancels from the escape speed.

The escape velocity is the least initial speed that permits a freely coasting body to move arbitrarily far from an isolated attracting body. Despite its conventional name, it is a speed, not a unique velocity vector. For a fixed point mass $M$, or outside a body with spherical symmetry, set Newtonian gravitational potential energy zero at infinity. An exterior test particle of constant mass $m\ll M$ then hasHere $\mu =GM$ is the standard gravitational parameter, and $r$ is distance from the centre, not height above the surface. Set $r=R$ for surface escape velocity. Evaluate velocity in the body's rest inertial frame. Neglect drag, later rocket thrust, other bodies' gravity, and relativistic effects.^[ref]

Conservation of energy gives the threshold by requiring $E\ge 0$: at infinity the potential energy tends to zero and the kinetic energy cannot be negative. If $E=0$, the outward motion loses speed continuously toward zero. If $E>0$, the asymptotic speed is $v_{\infty }=\sqrt{2E/m}=\sqrt{v_0^2-v_{\mathrm{esc}}(r_0{)}^2}$. If $E<0$, infinity is inaccessible. For a radial outward launch, its outer turning point is $r_{\max }=-GMm/E$. For nonradial motion use angular momentum and the escape energy threshold to distinguish zero radial velocity from zero total speed.

Direction still determines the orbit and whether the body hits an obstacle. An initially inward velocity can cause collision even when $E\ge 0$. For an isolated spherical body, an exterior outward launch, or a tangential launch at or above escape velocity, has an outward escape branch without intersecting the body. A parabolic trajectory is the nonradial threshold path; a hyperbolic Kepler orbit has positive energy. The formula specifies their required local speed, not their orientation.^[ref]

Stipulate a fixed source point mass $M=10^{12}\mathrm{kg}$, two equal test particles of mass $m=1\mathrm{kg}$, and $G=6.67430\times 10^{-11}{\mathrm{m}}^3\mathrm{k}{\mathrm{g}}^{-1}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$. This is a chosen model, not a measurement of a particular object. Place the test particles on the outward radial axis at $R-L/2$ and $R+L/2$, with midpoint distance $R=100\mathrm{m}$ and separation $L=2\mathrm{m}$. Neglect their mutual attraction, other sources and all supporting forces.

Each signed radial gravitational acceleration is inward:Their separation has outward relative accelerationThe exact value is $2.6702540\times 10^{-4}\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$. The midpoint tidal tensor predicts $2\mu L/R^3=2.6697200\times 10^{-4}\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$, an underestimate of $0.019999\%$ relative to the exact value. For these equal $1\mathrm{kg}$ masses, the difference of external forces has the same numerical value in the SI unit of force, the newton. It is not an additional mutual force between the test particles.

The exact formula requires $L<2R$ and describes the instantaneous relative acceleration. Because the two sample positions are symmetric about the midpoint, the Taylor expansion error relative to the linear result starts at order $(L/R{)}^2$; a one-sided comparison with a reference point generally has relative error of order $L/R$. If either test particle enters an extended source, use that source's interior Newtonian gravitational field instead of extrapolating the singular point mass model.

This covariant scalar-force model uses the Minkowski metric and the displayed momentum law, with $\square \Phi =-4\pi G{T}^i{}_i$. For a massive test particle, write $p^i=m{u}^i$, $u^i{u}_i=1$. Contracting the force law with $p_i$ gives constant rest mass; the acceleration is $d{u}^i/d\tau ={\partial }^i\Phi -u^i(u^j{\partial }_j\Phi )$, independent of the mass. A static weak field obeys the Poisson equation and yields Newtonian acceleration $-\nabla \Phi$. For a photon, $p\cdot dx=0$ and $dx$ is parallel to $p$, so $d{p}^i=-p^{i}d\Phi$: photon energies change but their unparametrized paths remain straight. The motion law has the same unparametrized curves as the conformal metric $e^{2\Phi }\eta$, but the field equation must not be silently identified with a different scalar-gravity theory.

Free fall is motion under gravity alone: there is no supporting normal force, engine thrust or appreciable drag force. In the Newtonian mechanics model, a test particle of mass $m$ obeys $m\ddot{\mathbf{r}}=m\mathbf{g}(\mathbf{r})$, hence $\ddot{\mathbf{r}}=\mathbf{g}(\mathbf{r})$. The mass cancels. Bodies released at the same position with the same velocity follow the same path in this model, even if their gravitational weights differ. ^[ref]

A dropped stone is one example; a coasting satellite is another. Free fall does not require motion straight down or decreasing distance to the attracting body. An ideal circular orbit has constant radius while its velocity continually turns under centripetal acceleration. The circular orbit as continuous free fall connects the familiar drop with orbital motion.

Near a surface, treating the gravitational acceleration as constant gives a useful first prediction. Over larger heights, the inverse-square law changes the acceleration during the fall. Radial free fall from rest uses conservation of mechanical energy to account for that change exactly, within the specified Newtonian gravitational field. The contrast matters: the simplest formula is an approximation to a physical model, rather than a law with the same numerical $g$ everywhere.

History also makes the idealization tangible. Galileo's Two New Sciences (1638), Third Day, Theorem II, derives distance proportional to the square of time for uniformly accelerated motion from rest; its first corollary gives successive distances in the ratios $1,3,5,7,\dots$ over equal time intervals. This is a kinematic statement, predating the gravitational inverse-square law. ^[ref]

On Apollo 15's final lunar surface excursion, David Scott released a hammer and a feather together. The near-vacuum removed the large difference in drag force familiar on Earth. NASA's report describes their arrival together within the accuracy of the release; this demonstration illustrates the free fall prediction without establishing infinite experimental precision. ^[ref]

General relativity describes gravity through the geometry of spacetime. Its metric tensor specifies distances, proper time measured by clocks, and the causal structure that limits communication. Matter and radiation affect this geometry through the Einstein field equations; freely falling test particles follow geodesics of the resulting geometry. A planet's orbit and a falling apple therefore belong to the same geometric story. The Newtonian limit recovers familiar Newtonian gravity when fields are weak and speeds are small compared with the speed of light. See David Tong's introduction to general relativity.

The most direct way to understand spacetime curvature is to compare neighboring freely falling bodies. Even when each body feels weightless, their separation can change: this is geodesic deviation, observed as a tidal force. Curvature concerns these relative measurements, rather than the shape of a drawing in an imagined surrounding space. A second accessible measurement is gravitational time dilation: identical clocks maintained at different heights accumulate different proper times. Together, tides and clocks turn an abstract geometry into laboratory questions.

Each Killing vector field supplies a conserved quantity for freely moving test particles: it turns a geometric symmetry into a first integral of the geodesic equation. Let $\gamma (\lambda )$ be a geodesic with affine parameter $\lambda$, tangent vector $U^{\mu }=d{x}^{\mu }/d\lambda$, and ${\nabla }_{U}U=0$. Wherever a Killing vector field $K$ is defined along the geodesic,The statement applies to Riemannian manifolds and to timelike geodesics, null geodesics and spacelike geodesics in a Lorentzian manifold. It requires an affine parameter; for a massive test particle, proper time is one choice. See Tong, section 4.3.2, equation (4.32).

For a worked example in the Euclidean plane, take $\gamma (t)=(1+t,2-t)$ with affine parameter $t$ and velocity $U=(1,-1)$. The Euclidean Killing vector fields for translation and rotation giveThe rotational field along the geodesic is $K_{\mathrm{rot}}(\gamma (t))=(t-2,1+t)$: it changes from $(-2,1)$ at $t=0$ to $(-1,2)$ at $t=1$, yet its pairing with $U$ stays $-3$. With toy mass $m=1$ and $t$ interpreted as time, the first constant is the $x$ component of linear momentum, and the second is the signed $z$ component of angular momentum about the origin. Their numerical values use toy units. The geodesic is straight; the rotation flow orbits are circles.

This conservation law follows from metric compatibility and the Killing equation:The geodesic equation kills the acceleration term, and the symmetric product $U^{\mu }{U}^{\nu }$ selects the vanishing symmetric derivative. This tensor contraction is the whole proof outline; see Carroll, equation (5.43).

In a stationary spacetime, a chosen time-translation Killing vector field $K$ gives Killing energy. With metric signature $(-+++)$, $c=1$, and a massive test particle's four-momentum $p^{\mu }=m{U}^{\mu }$, the physical normalization isHere $\Phi$ generates the axial rotational symmetry when one exists. In coordinates with $K={\partial }_t$ and $\Phi ={\partial }_{\varphi }$, these are $E=-p_t$ and $L_z=p_{\varphi }$. Both are conserved quantities along the geodesic, even if the metric has a time-angle cross term. A future timelike $K$ makes $E$ positive for a future massive particle; the scale of $E$ depends on the normalization of $K$. Not every spacetime has a global timelike Killing vector field, and a stationary field can become spacelike in an ergoregion of a stationary spacetime. Conservation on the field's domain does not imply a universal global positive energy; see Tong, sections 4.3.1-4.3.2 on the timelike-domain qualification and conserved charges.

Gravitational acceleration is the acceleration of a test particle in free fall in a Newtonian gravitational field. It is a vector pointing along that field; $g$ commonly denotes its positive magnitude. Near Earth's surface, the magnitude is approximately constant over shallow vertical scales. For a fixed spherical source it instead varies as $g(r)=\mu /r^2$, where $\mu$ is the standard gravitational parameter.

This is distinct from gravitational weight, the force $m\mathbf{g}$, and from apparent weight, the support force a scale measures. An orbiting body can have substantial gravitational acceleration while its apparent weight is zero.

The gravitational constant $G$ sets the strength of Newton's law of universal gravitation. Two point masses $M$ and $m$ a center-to-center distance $r$ apart attract with force magnitudeFor fixed masses and separation, doubling $G$ would double the force. For bodies with spherical symmetry, the same exterior formula follows from the spherical shell theorem; for arbitrary extended bodies, add the attractions of their mass density elements instead. The gravitational constant connects a laboratory attraction to the Newtonian gravitational field controlling a Kepler orbit.

The gravitational constant $G$ and local gravitational acceleration $g$ are different quantities. Applying Newton's second law to a test particle gives $g=F/m=GM/r^2$ for one spherical source. The source's mass and the observer's position change $g$; $G$ remains the same parameter of the law. A local falling-body experiment therefore measures a field, not $G$ alone. On rotating Earth, an instrument fixed to the surface also responds to centrifugal acceleration, while surrounding mass density and altitude change the gravitational contribution.

Dimensional analysis explains the units. Denote the base physical dimensions of length, mass and time by $\mathsf{L},\mathsf{M},\mathsf{T}$. Since force has dimension $\mathsf{ML}{\mathsf{T}}^{-2}$,By contrast, $[g]=\mathsf{L}{\mathsf{T}}^{-2}$ and the standard gravitational parameter $\mu =GM$ has dimension ${\mathsf{L}}^3{\mathsf{T}}^{-2}$. A small numerical value of a dimensional constant depends on the units chosen: it is the resulting force for specified physical masses and separation that conveys the laboratory scale.

NIST's current complete listing givesfor the 2022 CODATA adjustment, the latest adjustment listed when checked on 14 October 2026. Parentheses indicate a standard uncertainty $u(G)=0.00015\times 10^{-11}{\mathrm{m}}^3\mathrm{k}{\mathrm{g}}^{-1}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$, approximately $22$ parts per million relative to $G$. The adjustment year is 2022; NIST's May 2024 data update is a different date.^{[ref] [ref]}

For an original scale calculation, stipulate two $1\mathrm{kg}$ point masses separated by $1\mathrm{m}$ and insert this recommended $G$: $F=6.67430\times 10^{-11}\mathrm{N}$. The corresponding acceleration of either mass is $6.67430\times 10^{-11}\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$ at that instant. Reducing the separation to $0.10\mathrm{m}$ multiplies both by $100$. These are ideal model predictions, not observations; their tiny scale explains why stray forces matter.

Being a constant of a physical law does not make the numerical value exact. The SI fixes the numerical values of seven defining constants, including the speed of light and Planck constant; $G$ is determined experimentally. Exact unit definitions still require physical realizations with measurement uncertainty: calibrating a length or a mass does not become error-free.^[ref]

In Newtonian gravity, the gravitational field $\mathbf{g}$ specifies the acceleration of a freely falling test particle at each position. A gravitational potential $\Phi$ gives $\mathbf{g}=-\nabla \Phi$, with the gradient taken in the spatial geometry of the model. In general relativity, the metric tensor describes gravitational effects, and tidal forces are encoded by spacetime curvature.

An orbit around an isolated source constrains its standard gravitational parameter $\mu =GM$ rather than independently measuring the source's mass and the gravitational constant. In the test particle approximation, a circular orbit of radius $a$ and orbital period $T$ satisfiesThe left equation equates the required centripetal acceleration to the gravitational acceleration. More generally, a Kepler orbit depends on the same $\mu$. In the exact relative two-body problem, replace $GM$ by $G(M+m)$.

For any positive dimensionless number $q$, replacing $G$ by $qG$ and $M$ by $M/q$ leaves $GM$ and every predicted test particle trajectory unchanged. This is the gravitational mass degeneracy: more observations of the same orbit can refine $GM$ without separating its factors. A laboratory source whose mass is calibrated independently supplies the missing information.

Consequently an astronomical mass expressed in kilograms as $M=\mu /G$ inherits measurement uncertainty from $G$, even if $\mu$ is known much more precisely. To first order,When the relative standard uncertainty of $\mu$ is negligible, that of $M$ is approximately $u(G)/G$. Conversely, the ratio of two source masses inferred using the same $G$ is $M_1/M_2={\mu }_1/{\mu }_2$, so this common factor cancels. That distinction explains how excellent orbit determination can coexist with less precise absolute astronomical masses.

For a fixed source point mass, the magnitude $g=\mu /R^2$ of the gravitational acceleration measures the local pull; the radial eigenvalue ${\lambda }_r=2\mu /R^3$ of the tidal tensor measures how that pull changes across space. Doubling $R$ divides $g$ by four but ${\lambda }_r$ by eight. For a fixed small radial separation $L$, the linear relative acceleration is $\Delta a\simeq {\lambda }_{r}L$, soA small body can therefore experience strong common gravitational acceleration with a comparatively small tidal force. A measurement of $g$ alone does not determine the tidal tensor: sources at different distances can have the same $g$ but different spatial variation.

The local stretching time scale is ${\lambda }_r^{-1/2}=\sqrt{R^3/(2\mu )}$: it marks when an initially resting separation could change by order itself if the tidal tensor stayed fixed. During free fall, $R$ changes, so this scale is not a complete trajectory or a universal disruption time. Tidal disruption additionally compares the tidal force with binding by self-gravity and material forces; $g$ by itself supplies no such comparison.

The unforced planar equation of motion in a rotating frame near a circular Kepler orbit has components $\ddot{x}-2n\dot{y}-3n^{2}x=0$ and $\ddot{y}+2n\dot{x}=0$. They describe epicyclic motion and Keplerian shear; mutual gravity adds close-encounter forcing.

Here inverse-square potential means the potential energy associated with an attractive inverse-square law for a central force: the potential energy itself varies as inverse distance. For $k>0$ and position $\mathbf{r}$ with $r=|\mathbf{r}|>0$,The gradient makes the distinction explicit: doubling $r$ halves the magnitude of potential energy but quarters the magnitude of force. The neighboring repulsive inverse-square potential instead has potential energy proportional to $r^{-2}$ and an inverse-cube force; the two naming conventions must be distinguished.

For Newton's law of universal gravitation, $k=GMm$, where $G$ is the gravitational constant. Treat the attracting mass $M$ as an isolated fixed point mass, or as a body with spherical symmetry and exterior test particle of constant mass $m\ll M$. The spherical shell theorem gives the same exterior Newtonian gravitational potential energy $U=-GMm/r$ without requiring uniform mass density. Here $r$ is measured from the centre, and the formula applies outside the body; it does not describe its interior. The Newtonian gravitational potential per unit mass is $\Phi =U/m=-GM/r$.^[ref]

The negative sign records binding relative to infinite separation, rather than a negative kinetic energy. Moving from $r_1$ to $r_2>r_1$ increases potential energy byBecause the force is a conservative force, this work depends on the endpoints, including for a curved path. Integrating $dV/dr=k/r^2$ with zero at infinity gives $V=-k/r$; adding a constant leaves the force unchanged but shifts the numerical escape energy threshold by that same constant. This is why the reference at infinity must accompany an escape velocity calculation.

For an exact synthetic comparison, stipulate the standard gravitational parameter $\mu =GM=8{\mathrm{m}}^3/{\mathrm{s}}^2$ and a $1\mathrm{kg}$ test particle. At $r=2\mathrm{m}$, $U=-4\mathrm{J}$ and the inward force has magnitude $2\mathrm{N}$; at $r=4\mathrm{m}$, $U=-2\mathrm{J}$ and the inward force has magnitude $0.5\mathrm{N}$. The increase is $2\mathrm{J}$ of potential energy. These stipulated parameters are an arithmetic example, not observations of a particular body. The escape-energy balance diagram uses the same parameters.