The speed of light in a Schwarzschild space-time

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the behavior of the speed of light in a Schwarzschild space-time, particularly how it varies with radial position (r) and the implications for local reference frames. Participants explore whether these effects are measurable and why they were not observed in historical experiments like the Michelson-Morley experiment.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the speed of light depends on the radial position in Schwarzschild space-time, with different dependencies for radial and tangential light rays.
  • One participant mentions that while remote observer effects on the speed of light have been noted, local measurements would yield the invariant speed of light (c).
  • Another participant questions the derivation of the speed of light for radial rays and seeks clarification on the assumptions regarding local versus remote observers.
  • There is a discussion about the appropriateness of Schwarzschild coordinates for remote observers, with references to other coordinate systems like Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates.
  • Participants express interest in understanding the criteria for recognizing when Schwarzschild coordinates are suitable for remote observers.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the implications of Schwarzschild coordinates and the measurement of light speed in different contexts. No consensus is reached on the measurability of the effects discussed or the clarity of the derivations presented.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions about the assumptions made in the derivations and the implications of using different coordinate systems. The discussion highlights the complexity of interpreting results in the context of general relativity.

hellfire
Science Advisor
Messages
1,048
Reaction score
1
I have seen a derivation of the dependence of the speed of light inside a Schwarzschild space-time: c depends on the radial position (r), but a light ray which moves radially has a different dependence on r as a light ray which moves tangentially. My question is whether such an effect may be measurable somehow in a local reference frame and why did not the Michelson-Morley experiement record such an effect. Sorry if this question was already answered here, but after a short search I didn’t find any clear answer.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by hellfire
I have seen a derivation of the dependence of the speed of light inside a Schwarzschild space-time: c depends on the radial position (r), but a light ray which moves radially has a different dependence on r as a light ray which moves tangentially. My question is whether such an effect may be measurable somehow in a local reference frame and why did not the Michelson-Morley experiement record such an effect. Sorry if this question was already answered here, but after a short search I didn’t find any clear answer.

Thanks.

Yes the remote observer variance in the vacuum speed of light has been observed from signals relayed from other planets, but this is a remote observer effect. The local vacuum speed of light is the invariant c and so a local experiment like their interferometer wouldn't observe it.
 
Thanks for your answer, it seams to be a trivial point, but I am afraid I still do not get this. May be you can help me. Let’s take the derivation of for a radial light ray for example.

For light ds^2 = 0.

In a Schwarzschild space-time:
0 = (1-2m/r)(dt)^2 – (1-2m/r)^-1 (dr)^2
(the angular components vanish, since it moves only radially)

therefore:
(dr/dt)^2 = (1-2m/r)^2

and with:
dr/dt = c_r

one obtains:
c_r = 1 - 2m/r

Where is here the step with the assumption that this is for the remote observer only and not inside a local frame?
 
Originally posted by hellfire
Thanks for your answer, it seams to be a trivial point, but I am afraid I still do not get this. May be you can help me. Let’s take the derivation of for a radial light ray for example.

For light ds^2 = 0.

In a Schwarzschild space-time:
0 = (1-2m/r)(dt)^2 – (1-2m/r)^-1 (dr)^2
(the angular components vanish, since it moves only radially)

therefore:
(dr/dt)^2 = (1-2m/r)^2

and with:
dr/dt = c_r

one obtains:
c_r = 1 - 2m/r

Where is here the step with the assumption that this is for the remote observer only and not inside a local frame?

You made it prior to your second equation when you chose to express ds^2 in terms of Schwarzschild coordinates. Those coordinates are appropriate for a remote observer's reconing.
 
Originally posted by DW
You made it prior to your second equation when you chose to express ds^2 in terms of Schwarzschild coordinates. Those coordinates are appropriate for a remote observer's reconing.
I see. Are there other coordinates which are not appropiate for remote observers? Could you give me a hint or a link which explains which are the criteria to recognize that Schwarzschild coordinates are appropiate for remote observers? Regards.
 
Originally posted by hellfire
I see. Are there other coordinates which are not appropiate for remote observers?

Yes infinitely many, take your pick. A well know class of coordinates that are not the remote observers coordinates are Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates for example.

Could you give me a hint or a link which explains which are the criteria to recognize that Schwarzschild coordinates are appropiate for remote observers? Regards.

Look at the limit as r goes to infinity and see that the metric approaches that of special relativity except transformed to spherical coordinates. That is what tells you that the coordinates are representative of a remote observer's appropriate choice.
 
Excellent, this was of great help. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
Replies
60
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K