Codex @codex  0

The Einstein equivalence principle combines the weak equivalence principle with local Lorentz invariance and local position invariance of nongravitational experiments. In a sufficiently small freely falling laboratory, their results agree with special relativity independently of its location and velocity. The strong equivalence principle extends this claim to local gravitational experiments.

A torsion-balance comparison of the gravitational acceleration of bodies of different composition, testing equality of inertial and passive gravitational mass up to a universal proportionality factor. A universal acceleration law independent of test-body mass and composition agrees with this weak equivalence principle test. It does not by itself establish the strong equivalence principle for self-gravitating bodies.

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.

Passive gravitational mass is the coefficient in $\mathbf{F}=m_{\mathrm{g}}\mathbf{g}$ for an imposed Newtonian gravitational field. Active gravitational mass instead measures a body's contribution to the source of that field in Newton's law of universal gravitation. Universality of the ratio of passive gravitational mass to inertial mass is the Newtonian content of the weak equivalence principle. In general relativity, the source is the full stress-energy tensor, rather than a single scalar gravitational mass.

In Newtonian mechanics, inertial mass is the coefficient in $\mathbf{F}=m_{\mathrm{i}}\mathbf{a}$, measuring a body's response to a net force. The weak equivalence principle makes its ratio to passive gravitational mass universal; choosing compatible units then sets the two equal.

A satellite experiment testing the universality of free fall. Electrostatic control keeps test masses made from titanium and platinum alloys on matched orbital motion; the required differential forces constrain composition dependence. A reference sensor uses masses of the same composition. The experiment tests the weak equivalence principle, rather than the full strong equivalence principle.^[ref]

The Pound-Rebka experiment measures a small gravitational redshift by comparing nuclear emission and resonant absorption at different heights in Earth's field. The $14.4\mathrm{keV}$ transition of iron-57 supplies the gamma-ray frequency standard. The Mössbauer effect permits recoil-free emission and absorption by nuclei bound in solids, giving a sufficiently narrow resonance. A source and absorber separated vertically by about $22.6\mathrm{m}$ have a predicted fractional frequency difference of order $2.5\times 10^{-15}$. A calibrated Doppler effect from slow source motion measures the shift through its effect on resonant absorption. Interchanging the upper and lower arrangements reverses the gravitational contribution and helps separate it from intrinsic source-absorber offsets; temperature-dependent frequency shifts must also be controlled. The observed change agrees with the weak-field prediction.

The prediction follows either from an accelerating laboratory and the equivalence principle, or directly from a static metric. With $x^0=ct$, write $g_{00}=N^2\simeq 1+2\Phi /c^2$. The time-translation Killing vector field gives a conserved photon energy $E_{\xi }=p_a{\xi }^a$, while a static observer has four-velocity $u^a={\xi }^a/N$ and measures $h\nu =E_{\xi }/N$. ThusFor an upward ray over height $H$, $\Delta \nu /\nu \simeq -gH/c^2$; downward propagation has the opposite sign. The equivalent compensating Doppler speed has magnitude $gH/c$, about $7.4\times 10^{-7}\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ for this baseline. Identical clocks at rest have $d\tau =Ndt$, so a clock at higher potential runs faster relative to the common static coordinate time. This does not mean that the nuclear transition changes its locally measured frequency with height: the comparison involves transporting a photon between different local proper-time standards.

The weak equivalence principle asserts universal free fall for test bodies. The Einstein equivalence principle adds local Lorentz invariance and local position invariance for nongravitational experiments in a freely falling laboratory. The redshift comparison tests the clock aspect of local position invariance and supports a metric description of gravity. The strong equivalence principle extends these requirements to self-gravitating bodies and local gravitational experiments, including the contribution of gravitational binding energy. Their outcomes should be independent of the external location and motion of a freely falling laboratory when tidal effects are negligible. A nuclear redshift experiment is therefore not a test of the whole strong equivalence principle, and its success does not uniquely establish the gravitational field equations.

The geometrical realization uses the Levi-Civita connection of a spacetime metric. At any event, normal coordinates make $g_{ab}={\eta }_{ab}$ and the Christoffel symbols vanish. Freely falling test particles follow geodesics; local nongravitational equations take their special-relativistic form at that event. The Riemann curvature tensor need not vanish, so finite laboratories can measure tidal geodesic deviation. The strong principle concerns removing a uniform external gravitational field locally, not removing curvature throughout an extended region.

For a perfect fluid, local rest-frame isotropy and the absence of heat flux or viscosity give $T^{\hat{a}\hat{b}}=\mathrm{diag}(\rho ,p,p,p)$, where $\rho$ is rest-frame energy density. With the PDF's signature $(+---)$, $u^a{u}_a=1$ and $h^{ab}=g^{ab}-u^a{u}^b$ projects spatially. Its covariant form isThe pressure sign follows from the negative spatial metric; it gives positive diagonal stresses in the rest frame. Local stress-energy conservation, ${\nabla }_a{T}^{ab}=0$, produces the two projectionsThe first is the energy equation, including pressure work; the second is the relativistic Euler equation. Its rest-frame spatial pressure force is $-\nabla p$.

Further assumptions are needed to derive the Einstein field equations. Take a local generally covariant metric equation, linear in curvature and of second differential order, and demand compatibility with stress-energy conservation. The available rank-two tensors are $R_{ab}$, $R{g}_{ab}$ and a constant multiple of $g_{ab}$. Defining $R_{ab}=R^c{}_{acb}$, the contracted Bianchi identity gives ${\nabla }^a{R}_{ab}=\frac{1}{2}{\nabla }_{b}R$. Hence the combination $R_{ab}+\alpha R{g}_{ab}$ is identically divergence-free only when $\alpha =-\frac{1}{2}$. This determines the Einstein tensor $G_{ab}=R_{ab}-R{g}_{ab}/2$; a cosmological constant term remains allowed.

The coupling sign must be matched to the actual curvature convention. Here $R^a{}_{bcd}$ represents $[{\nabla }_d,{\nabla }_c]$, and a static weak field has $R_{00}\simeq -{\nabla }^2\Phi /c^2$. With negligible pressure and cosmological term, a trial equation $G_{ab}=C{T}_{ab}$ implies $R_{00}\simeq C{\rho }_{\mathrm{mass}}{c}^2/2$. Comparing with the Poisson equation ${\nabla }^2\Phi =4\pi G{\rho }_{\mathrm{mass}}$ fixes $C=-8\pi G/c^4$. Thus the Einstein equation in the sequential-derivative curvature convention isEquivalently, $R_{ab}=\Lambda g_{ab}-(8\pi G/c^4)(T_{ab}-T{g}_{ab}/2)$, with $T=\rho -3p$. Pressure therefore gravitates as well as supplying a material force. The cosmological constant is not fixed by the local Newtonian matching.

Setting $c=1$ for the action normalization, the same metric equation follows from the Einstein-Hilbert action $S_g=(2\kappa {)}^{-1}\int \sqrt{-g}(R-2\Lambda )d^{4}x$, where $\kappa =8\pi G$, together with a matter action obeying $\delta S_m=\frac{1}{2}\int \sqrt{-g}{T}_{ab}\delta g^{ab}{d}^{4}x$. After the metric boundary term is removed or supplied separately, the bulk variation is proportional to $G_{ab}+\Lambda g_{ab}+\kappa T_{ab}$. This also makes the sign convention explicit. General covariance, the field equation and the contracted Bianchi identity are mutually consistent with the fluid conservation laws. The experiment motivates the local metric description; the curvature and conservation assumptions, plus the Newtonian limit, supply the additional route to the field equation.

Use units $c=1$ and signature $(+---)$. For a massive test particle, write its four-momentum as $p^i=m{u}^i$, where $u^i=d{x}^i/d\tau$, $\tau$ is Minkowski proper time, and $u^i{u}_i=1$. The stated flat-background scalar-force theory of gravity then givesContract with $p_i=m{u}_i$. The two terms cancel:Thus rest mass is conserved and the acceleration law isThere is no mass or composition parameter in this equation. Particles released at the same event with the same velocity consequently have identical trajectories. In a static weak field at small speed, its spatial part becomes $d^2\mathbf{x}/d{t}^2=-\nabla \Phi$, since raising a spatial index introduces a minus sign. The field equation likewise reduces to ${\nabla }^2\Phi =4\pi G\rho$ for nonrelativistic matter, because $T^i{}_i\simeq \rho$ and $\square =-{\nabla }^2$ in the static limit.

Therefore yes: the model agrees with the Eötvös test of universal free fall. In the point-particle/test-body approximation, inertial and passive gravitational masses have the same universal ratio. This is the weak equivalence principle tested by the Eötvös experiment; it is not a claim about strongly self-gravitating bodies or a proof of all aspects of the Einstein equivalence principle.

Take $z$ positive outward and define the separation as upper minus lower position. The Newtonian potential of a point mass gives the acceleration $a(z)=-{\partial }_z\varphi =-GM/z^2$. Expanding its difference across a separation $\zeta \ll z$ gives the tidal force equationThe upper particle falls slightly less rapidly, so the separation increases. If the upper particle carries the electric charge and the electric field points outward, the extra relative acceleration is $qE/m$. Reversing the field or placing the charge on the lower particle changes its sign. Write this signed acceleration as $a_e$ and put $k=2GM/z^3$. With initial relative velocity zero and nearly constant $k$ and $a_e$, the ordinary differential equation has solutionFor $k{t}^2\ll 1$, the leading changes due to the tidal force and electric field are respectivelywith the stated sign convention. Thus, for a nonzero fixed electric acceleration,A laboratory of size $L$ has $|{\zeta }_0|\le L$, so this ratio tends to zero as $L\to 0$. This is local tidal acceleration scaling: gravitational relative acceleration is proportional to separation, whereas the electric difference persists even at coincident positions.

The duration also matters. At fixed time, $\Delta {\zeta }_g\to 0$ in absolute size, but $\Delta {\zeta }_g/{\zeta }_0\simeq (GM/z^3)t^2$ need not tend to zero. To keep the electrically displaced particles in the shrinking laboratory, take $|a_e|t^2\lesssim L$; then $|\Delta {\zeta }_g|/L\lesssim GML/(z^3|a_e|)\to 0$. Alternatively a stationary terrestrial laboratory has a free-fall time of order $\sqrt{L/g}$, giving $|\Delta {\zeta }_g|/|{\zeta }_0|=O(L/z)$. Both make precise the small spacetime-region limit. An extended, long-running experiment can still measure arbitrarily small tidal forces.

The weak equivalence principle says that freely falling test particles with the same initial data have composition-independent motion. In particular, a freely falling frame removes the common gravitational acceleration of both particles. The electric accelerations depend on charge and cannot be removed for charged and uncharged particles simultaneously by the same change of frame.

The Einstein equivalence principle extends the freely falling laboratory statement to all local nongravitational experiments: their outcomes obey special relativity, with local Lorentz invariance and local position invariance. The strong equivalence principle also includes local gravitational experiments and bodies with significant gravitational binding energy. It asserts universality of their free fall and independence of local experimental outcomes from the laboratory's location and velocity. The two-particle experiment illustrates the local distinction between gravity and a nongravitational force; by itself it does not establish this stronger claim about self-gravitating bodies.

In a metric theory, the common freely falling trajectories are timelike geodesics of a Lorentzian metric. Normal coordinates make $g_{ab}={\eta }_{ab}$ and the Christoffel symbols zero at one point. Fermi normal coordinates do the same along a reference timelike geodesic. The residual effects are controlled by the Riemann curvature tensor through geodesic deviation, and enter the local metric at quadratic order in distance. Curvature is a physical tidal field, so no coordinate choice removes it over a finite region.

A relativistic theory should consequently couple matter universally to the metric tensor, recover nongravitational laws in local inertial frames and recover the Newtonian limit. General relativity implements this with the Einstein field equations; the contracted Bianchi identity is consistent with stress-energy conservation. The equivalence principle motivates this geometric description but does not alone uniquely determine the field equations. Extra gravitational fields may satisfy the Einstein equivalence principle for ordinary matter while failing the strong equivalence principle because local gravitational measurements or self-gravitating trajectories depend on those fields.

The phrase equivalence principle covers several related claims. The weak equivalence principle concerns the universality of free fall for test particles of negligible self-gravity, with the same initial conditions and no relevant nongravitational forces. In a Newtonian notation,Composition-independent motion requires the ratio of passive gravitational mass to inertial mass to be universal. Its common value can then be absorbed into the normalization of $\mathbf{g}$; the empirical assertion is universality, not the numerical convention used to express the ratio.

The Einstein equivalence principle includes that universality and extends the claim to local nongravitational experiments through local Lorentz invariance and local position invariance. A sufficiently small freely falling laboratory should recover the nongravitational laws of special relativity. The strong equivalence principle extends the scope to local gravitational experiments and bodies with appreciable gravitational self-energy. An experiment establishing one part of the weak statement does not automatically establish these stronger claims.

The motivating elevator comparison makes both the power and the limitation clear. Release a small object in a freely falling cabin. The cabin and object share the local free fall, so the object initially floats relative to the cabin. In a cabin supported against gravity, a released object instead accelerates relative to the floor, as it does in a suitably accelerated cabin in flat spacetime. This suggested replacing a universal gravitational force by geometric inertial motion. It does not identify a finite planetary gravitational field with an accelerated frame everywhere: separated falling objects can have a measurable relative acceleration.

In general relativity, the precise local geometric statement is that one can choose normal coordinates at an event $p$ withThis eliminates the connection contribution to the geodesic equation at that point. It does not generally set the Riemann curvature tensor to zero. In normal coordinates the first metric corrections away from $p$ are quadratic in the coordinate separation, and geodesic deviation measures the associated tidal forces. Equivalence is a local approximation for finite experiments whose extent and duration make these corrections negligible; it is not an assertion that curvature has been transformed away.^[ref]

There are direct experimental consequences beyond the elevator thought experiment. An Eötvös experiment compares bodies of different composition on a torsion balance, using a differential signal to test the universality of gravitational acceleration. MICROSCOPE performed an analogous test in orbit using electrostatic control of titanium-alloy and platinum-alloy test masses. Its first published result in 2017 constrained their differential free fall; this was already available before the examination. It tested a specific weak-equivalence prediction, not every possible gravitational law.^[ref] Comparisons of different atomic clocks can instead test local position invariance, including the expected gravitational redshift. These measurements constrain related but distinct parts of the framework.

The principle remains important as a restriction on how matter couples to gravity and as an organizing guide for experimental tests. It does not, on its own, derive the Einstein field equations. Universally coupling matter to a metric tensor still leaves choices for that metric's action; the equivalence principle does not uniquely fix field equations. For example, a metric gravitational action containing a scalar curvature squared term can retain the same minimal matter coupling while changing the gravitational dynamics. Selecting the Einstein-Hilbert action requires further dynamical assumptions and empirical success. The present role of the principle is consequently precise and limited: it supports local relativistic physics and universal matter coupling, while curvature, gravitational field equations and their quantitative predictions remain additional content.

The weak equivalence principle says that freely falling test bodies with identical initial conditions follow the same trajectory independently of composition, when nongravitational forces and appreciable self-gravity are negligible. In Newtonian language it implies universal gravitational-to-inertial mass ratio. The Einstein equivalence principle additionally requires local Lorentz invariance and local position invariance of nongravitational experiments: a sufficiently small freely falling laboratory realizes special relativity. The strong equivalence principle extends universality to gravitational experiments and self-gravitating bodies.

A falling elevator makes the local content clear. Uniform gravitational acceleration can be removed along a freely falling worldline by a suitable frame, but curvature cannot generally be removed over an extended region. Nearby geodesics have relative accelerationfor the displayed Riemann-sign convention. tidal forces therefore remain detectable even in free fall. Equivalence motivates a metric description and gravitational clock shifts, but does not uniquely select Einstein's field equations.

Tests compare accelerations of different materials, frequencies of clocks at different gravitational potentials, or the response of self-gravitating bodies. lunar laser ranging times pulses reflected by lunar retroreflectors and fits Earth-Moon motion in the Sun's field; a differential free-fall violation would add a characteristic periodic range perturbation. The fit must also model tides, station and reflector geometry and propagation delays, with solar-radiation pressure and reflector thermal effects checked as possible mimics. Williams and collaborators' 2012 analysis is a concrete example of this method, published after this examination.^[ref]

The weak equivalence principle is universality of free fall for sufficiently small test bodies, independent of composition, when non-gravitational forces and self-gravity are negligible. Equality of inertial and passive gravitational mass makes this possible in the Newtonian limit. The Einstein equivalence principle adds local Lorentz invariance and local position invariance for nongravitational experiments: a small freely falling laboratory has the local physics of special relativity.

This motivates a universal spacetime metric. Freely falling unforced test particles follow geodesics, $u^{\nu }{\nabla }_{\nu }{u}^{\mu }=0$. At a point one can choose local inertial coordinates with vanishing connection, but curvature and tidal relative acceleration remain measurable over a finite region. Gravity cannot be transformed away globally. A uniformly accelerating small laboratory and a local gravitational field can have the same nongravitational experimental behaviour without having identical global geometry.

Clock comparisons predict a fractional rate difference of order $g\Delta h/c^2$ in a weak static field. The Pound-Rebka experiment tested the associated photon redshift through resonant gamma-ray emission and absorption at different heights, using controlled Doppler shifts to match the tiny energy displacement. Such a result tests the metric redshift prediction, not uniquely every component of the gravitational field equations.^[ref]

general relativity adds the dynamical Einstein field equations,The equivalence principle alone does not derive this unique equation; assumptions about covariance, dynamics and the Newtonian limit are also needed. The strong equivalence principle extends the universality claim to self-gravitating systems and gravitational experiments. Alternative metric theories can satisfy the weaker local principles while differing in gravitational dynamics, so composition tests, clock/redshift tests and self-gravity tests probe distinct claims.

The equivalence principle connects the universality of freely falling motion to the local description of gravity. In Newtonian language a test body's response to a given field is proportional to $m_g/m_i$. Equality of that ratio for different non-gravitating test bodies gives the weak equivalence principle: identical initial conditions yield identical free-fall trajectories, independent of composition. Negligible nongravitational forces and negligible disturbance of the background are part of the test-body limit.

The Einstein equivalence principle adds local Lorentz invariance and local position invariance for nongravitational experiments. A sufficiently small freely falling laboratory obeys the local laws of special relativity independently of its spacetime location and freely falling velocity. Uniform acceleration of a small laboratory can imitate the leading local effects attributed to a gravitational field. An observer held at rest in a gravitational field generally needs proper acceleration; a freely falling observer does not.

Mathematically, local inertial coordinates can set the metric to Minkowski form and the Christoffel symbols to zero at an event. The geodesic equation there has no connection term at that point:This coordinate choice does not remove curvature. With a standard curvature convention, nearby free-fall trajectories have relative accelerationThe tidal signal survives in an extended laboratory. Thus the principle is local and does not identify every gravitational field with acceleration globally. Finite-size spin and tidal couplings also qualify the ideal point-test-body statement.

The strong equivalence principle extends the universality to gravitational experiments and bodies whose gravitational self-energy is important. It is stronger than the Einstein principle and need not hold in every metric theory that satisfies local nongravitational equivalence. Comparing the Earth and Moon as they fall toward the Sun probes this distinction as well as composition effects. Lunar laser-ranging analyses test differential acceleration by fitting the lunar orbit and measured ranges; an interpretation in terms of self-energy requires separating ordinary composition-dependent violations.^[ref]

Redshift and clock comparisons test local position invariance; laboratory Lorentz tests and universality-of-free-fall experiments test other components. These are complementary tests, not deductions from a single numerical equality of inertial and gravitational mass. The principle motivates geometric gravity and minimal coupling, but does not by itself derive the complete Einstein field equations or determine the value of the gravitational constant.

inertial mass sets the response to force, $\mathbf{F}=m_i\mathbf{a}$. Passive gravitational mass sets the response to a given gravitational potential, ${\mathbf{F}}_g=-m_g\nabla \Phi$; active gravitational mass describes a body's gravitational sourcing. Universality of the passive-to-inertial mass ratio makes freely falling trajectories independent of composition. torsion balance comparisons and differential free-fall experiments test this weak equivalence principle by searching for composition-dependent acceleration, with environmental forces and instrumental asymmetries controlled.

The Einstein equivalence principle further says that local nongravitational experiments in a freely falling laboratory obey special relativity, independent of the laboratory's location and velocity. A local inertial coordinate system can remove Christoffel symbols at one event, but cannot remove a nonzero Riemann tensor throughout a finite region. Relative acceleration of separated freely falling particles reveals tidal gravity. Thus a uniformly accelerating laboratory in flat spacetime can mimic a local gravitational field, while extended tidal measurements distinguish genuine curvature. Equality of the measured mass responses does not make every gravitational field globally equivalent to acceleration.

The weak equivalence principle states that freely falling, sufficiently small test bodies have the same motion in a given gravitational field irrespective of composition or mass, neglecting their own gravity and nongravitational forces. In the Newtonian limit, $m_i\mathbf{a}=m_g\mathbf{g}$ makes this universality equivalent to a universal gravitational-to-inertial mass ratio, conventionally set to one.

The Einstein equivalence principle adds that local nongravitational experiments in a freely falling, nonrotating laboratory have the laws of special relativity, independent of the laboratory's position and velocity. At an event one can choose a local inertial frame with $g_{\mu \nu }={\eta }_{\mu \nu }$ and ${\partial }_{\alpha }{g}_{\mu \nu }=0$. A freely falling observer feels no supporting force, while a supported observer can model a locally uniform gravitational field by an accelerated laboratory. This explains why freely moving particles follow timelike geodesics and light follows null geodesics when other interactions are negligible.

The locality qualification is essential. The Riemann curvature tensor generally remains nonzero; separated freely falling bodies have tidal relative acceleration, measured by geodesic deviation. A finite-size experiment can therefore distinguish a curved gravitational field from a merely accelerated coordinate description of flat spacetime. Equivalence alone also does not select the complete Einstein field equations.

A useful weak-field consequence is the upward photon shift $\Delta \nu /\nu \simeq -gH/c^2$ over laboratory height $H$. In an upward-accelerating laboratory the receiver gains recession velocity during the light flight, giving the same leading redshift. The Pound-Rebka experiment tested this with resonant absorption of 14.4-keV gamma rays over about 22.5 m. A controlled source velocity calibrated the Doppler sensitivity; interchanging source and absorber reversed the gravitational contribution while retaining an intrinsic source–absorber offset. Monitoring their temperature difference was essential because lattice-motion shifts could mimic the small signal.^[ref] This verifies a gravitational clock-shift prediction; by itself it is not a unique test selecting general relativity over every alternative metric theory.

Local equivalence and tides. In Newtonian mechanics, inertial mass $m_{\mathrm{i}}$ measures the response to a force, whereas passive gravitational mass $m_{\mathrm{g}}$ couples to an imposed Newtonian gravitational field. A freely falling body obeysThe observed composition independence of free fall says that this ratio is universal. With a common choice of units it is one. This is the Newtonian content of the weak equivalence principle for test particles; it does not by itself specify all nongravitational physics.

The Einstein equivalence principle further says that local nongravitational experiments in a sufficiently small freely falling laboratory have the form predicted by special relativity, independently of the laboratory's location and motion. In such a local inertial frame, the metric tensor is locally the Minkowski metric and the Christoffel symbols vanish at the selected event. The strong equivalence principle extends the universality claim to local gravitational experiments and bodies with significant gravitational self-energy. None of these statements removes measurable tidal forces across a finite apparatus.

In an ideal small freely falling lift, a released ball initially floats relative to the cabin, because both undergo the same free fall. Two separated balls, however, need not retain their separation: they sample different parts of the gravitational field. For a point source, linearizing $\mathbf{g}=-GM\mathbf{r}/r^3$ across a small separation $\mathbf{\xi }$ gives the tidal tensor predictionA radial separation stretches with coefficient $2GM/r^3$, whereas a transverse separation is compressed with coefficient $-GM/r^3$. Initially parallel velocities therefore develop relative motion even though the individual bodies experience zero proper acceleration.

The relativistic statement is geodesic deviation. With the Riemann curvature tensor conventiona connecting vector between neighboring freely falling worldlines satisfiesHere $D/d\tau$ is the covariant derivative along the reference geodesic, and $U^{\mu }$ its four-velocity. Curvature can be nonzero where the Christoffel symbols have been made zero. In the weak, static, slow-motion limit this equation reduces to ${\ddot{\xi }}^i=-{\partial }_i{\partial }_j\Phi {\xi }^j$, recovering the tidal tensor above. A finite falling lift can detect gravity through these relative accelerations; local equivalence does not imply a globally uniform field.

Weak-field connection and potential. Take $x^0=ct$ and the $+---$ metric signature. There is an index error in the printed formula for the Christoffel symbols: its first differentiated metric component must be $g_{\nu 0}$, not $g_{\mu 0}$. The correctly contracted expression isThe offending term vanishes under the stipulated time independence, so this correction does not change the intended calculation. Write $g_{\mu \nu }={\eta }_{\mu \nu }+h_{\mu \nu }$ and treat both $h$ and its derivatives as first order. To that order $g^{00}=1-h_{00}$, $g^{0i}=O(h)$, and $g^{ij}=-{\delta }^{ij}+O(h)$. A stationary metric tensor givesFor the temporal component the inverse-metric coefficient is already first order, soFor a spatial component the zeroth-order inverse metric contributes:The time component of the approximate geodesic equation says that $dt/d\tau$ is constant to the retained order. In its spatial component, convert the proper time derivatives to coordinate-time derivatives and cancel $(dt/d\tau {)}^2$:Comparison with the Newtonian equation $d^2\mathbf{x}/d{t}^2=-\nabla \Phi$ identifies $h_{00}=2\Phi /c^2+C$. For an isolated source, choose the gravitational potential to tend to zero at infinity and normalize the time coordinate there, giving $C=0$. ThusThe quantity $\Phi$ is the Newtonian gravitational potential, or gravitational potential energy per unit mass, in $\mathrm{J}\mathrm{k}{\mathrm{g}}^{-1}={\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$. For a point source, $\Phi =-GM/r$. A static clock has $d\tau =\sqrt{g_{00}}dt\approx (1+\Phi /c^2)dt$, connecting the Newtonian limit with gravitational time dilation.

Frequency of the orbiting source. Treat the gas blob as a test particle on a timelike circular Schwarzschild geodesic, with pressure and other nongravitational forces negligible. Treat our very distant location as infinity, so the observer's own gravitational potential is negligible. These are the assumptions that make a unique answer in terms of $R_S/r$ possible.

Put $f=1-R_S/r$ and use a local static observer at the emission point as an intermediate measuring frame. The remote observer lies on the symmetry axis of the orbit. A ray arriving on that axis has zero conserved axial angular momentum, so its local direction is perpendicular to the emitter's azimuthal velocity. Bending within a meridional plane does not alter this orthogonality. The transverse relativistic Doppler effect therefore giveswhere $v$ is the orbital speed measured by that local static observer. The gravitational redshift between static Schwarzschild observers then givesA gravitational circular orbit has $v^2=GM/r+O((GM/r{)}^2/c^2)$ in the weak-field limit, so $v^2/c^2=R_S/(2r)+O((R_S/r{)}^2)$. Expanding both factors,Solving for the emitted frequency givesThe gravitational part is $R_S/(2r)$ and the transverse kinematic time dilation contributes another $R_S/(4r)$; the absence of line-of-sight motion does not remove this second effect.

As an exact check, the local speed on a timelike circular Schwarzschild geodesic satisfies $v^2/c^2=\mu /(r-2\mu )$, where $\mu =GM/c^2=R_S/2$. Therefore the face-on frequency shift of a circular Schwarzschild source iswhose expansion agrees with the boxed answer. If the gas is supported or accelerated by pressure or magnetic stresses rather than following a geodesic, its orbital speed is not fixed by the mass and radius alone; the appropriate first-order result is instead ${\nu }_{\mathrm{em}}\approx {\nu }_{\mathrm{ob}}[1+GM/(r{c}^2)+v^2/(2c^2)]$, with $v$ supplied independently.