Gravitationally accelerated electron

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ardenbook
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Electron
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the behavior of a charged object dropped through a hole in a motionless asteroid, particularly focusing on whether the oscillations of the object dampen due to radiation as it moves under the influence of gravity. The conversation explores concepts from general relativity, the equivalence principle, and the nature of gravitational forces.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that the charged object will oscillate as it moves through the asteroid, with potential damping of oscillations due to radiation and gravitational potential energy conversion.
  • Another participant argues that according to the equivalence principle, the charged object in free-fall should not radiate, implying that oscillations would not dampen.
  • A later reply challenges the interpretation of the equivalence principle, stating that radiation is a far field effect and the experiment is nonlocal, suggesting that the oscillations may dampen.
  • Another participant questions the implications of damping, stating that if damping occurs, it would suggest that gravity acts as a force, which contradicts the principles of general relativity where gravity is not considered a force.
  • One participant asserts that the oscillations do dampen but clarifies that gravity is not a real four-vector force, emphasizing the role of spacetime curvature instead.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express conflicting views regarding whether the oscillations dampen or not, with no consensus reached on the interpretation of the equivalence principle and the nature of gravitational effects in this context.

Contextual Notes

The discussion involves complex interpretations of general relativity and the equivalence principle, with participants highlighting the nonlocal nature of the experiment and the implications for understanding gravity as a force versus a geometric property of spacetime.

ardenbook
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
If I drill a hole through the center of a motionless asteroid,
and drop a charged object down it, If the hole goes all the way through,
the particle will oscillate, speeding up as it moves towards the center,
and slowing down as it moves away. If radiating, we'd expect the
oscillations to dampen as some gravitational potential energy gets
irreversibly converted. But according to "equivalence principle",
the charged object is in free-fall and should not feel any gravity,
then it should not radiate.
If not radiating, oscillations wouldn't dampen.
So which one is true, dampen or not dampen ??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ardenbook said:
If I drill a hole through the center of a motionless asteroid,
and drop a charged object down it, If the hole goes all the way through,
the particle will oscillate, speeding up as it moves towards the center,
and slowing down as it moves away. If radiating, we'd expect the
oscillations to dampen as some gravitational potential energy gets
irreversibly converted. But according to "equivalence principle",
the charged object is in free-fall and should not feel any gravity,
then it should not radiate.
If not radiating, oscillations wouldn't dampen.
So which one is true, dampen or not dampen ??

That is not "what" the equivalence principle says. Radiation is a far field effect. The field of the electron extends to a global scale. The experiment is intrinsically nonlocal. See section 2 of chapter 7 at
http://www.geocities.com/zcphysicsms/chap7.htm#BM7_2
 
DW said:
That is not "what" the equivalence principle says. Radiation is a far field effect. The field of the electron extends to a global scale. The experiment is intrinsically nonlocal. See section 2 of chapter 7 at
http://www.geocities.com/zcphysicsms/chap7.htm#BM7_2

Can you tell me if it dampen or not dampen ??
If it dampens, then the radiating energy comes from gravity and
shows that gravity is a force.
But in GR, we were taught that gravity is not a force and objects move in geodesic if no other force acts on it.
 
ardenbook said:
Can you tell me if it dampen or not dampen ??
If it dampens, then the radiating energy comes from gravity and
shows that gravity is a force.
But in GR, we were taught that gravity is not a force and objects move in geodesic if no other force acts on it.

I thought I did. Yes, it damps. No, gravity is not a real four-vector force. However the spacetime curvature is expressed by a tensor. That is what is real and has real gravitational effects on nonlocal experiments including this one. That level of equivalence is only a statement about local experiments and as such does not apply.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 114 ·
4
Replies
114
Views
13K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K