Geodesic and MiSaTaQuWa equation of motion

In summary, the geodesic equation describes the motion of a 'test particle' that is assumed to be very like a point, while the MiSaTaQuWa equation describes the motion of a small extended body that has an interaction with the field. The geodesic equation is suitable for describing the motion of a massless or negligible particle that does not interact with the field, while the MiSaTaQuWa equation is more accurate for a real, finite-sized body that interacts with the field.
  • #1
ngkamsengpeter
195
0
I am new to General Relativity and confused by the geodesic equation and MiSaTaQuWa equation. Most of the book saying that the geodesic equation is the motion of a particle in curved-spacetime. However, I read somewhere about this MiSaTaQuWa equation of motion. What is the difference between geodesic equation and this MiSaTaQuWa equation?

If I want to describe the motion of a particle in curved-spacetime, which one should I use? The geodesic equation or the MiSaTaQuWa equation?

Thanks for the help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The geodesic equations describe the motion of a 'test particle' which is assumed to be very like a point. The MiSaTaQuWa equations are for a small extended body which itself has an interaction with the field.

From Samuel E Gralla and Robert M Wald (2008) Class. Quantum Grav. 25 205009
There is general agreement that the MiSaTaQuWa equations should describe the motion of a 'small body' in general relativity, taking into account the leading order self-force effects.
 
  • #3
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2011-7/index.html
"It should be noted that Eq. (19.84) is formally equivalent to the statement that the point particle moves on a geodesic in a spacetime ..."

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0202086
"While geodesic motion has been demonstrated in the past, only in our case is the reference metric ... a vacuum solution of the Einstein equations through O(μ)."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
Mentz114 said:
The geodesic equations describe the motion of a 'test particle' which is assumed to be very like a point. The MiSaTaQuWa equations are for a small extended body which itself has an interaction with the field.
In that case I would think it better to say that it co-determines the field as opposed to interact with the field.
 
  • #5
Mentz114 said:
The geodesic equations describe the motion of a 'test particle' which is assumed to be very like a point. The MiSaTaQuWa equations are for a small extended body which itself has an interaction with the field.

From Samuel E Gralla and Robert M Wald (2008) Class. Quantum Grav. 25 205009

Does that means that geodesic equation describe the motion of a particle that doesn't interact with the field and the MiSaTaQuWa equation describe the motion of particle that interact with the field? Since any particle with mass will interact with the field, so does that means that geodesic equation only for massless or at least negligible particle?
 
  • #6
ngkamsengpeter said:
Does that means that geodesic equation describe the motion of a particle that doesn't interact with the field and the MiSaTaQuWa equation describe the motion of particle that interact with the field? Since any particle with mass will interact with the field, so does that means that geodesic equation only for massless or at least negligible particle?

yep. Think of a real, finite-sized body that is small compared to its surroundings, and "Taylor expand" its motion in [size of body] / [scale of variation of external universe]. At lowest order you get geodesic motion, which is accurate enough for almost everything. The first correction is the gravitational self-force (described in a particular gauge by the MiSaTaQuWa equation).
 

1. What is a geodesic equation of motion?

The geodesic equation of motion is a mathematical expression used in the study of geodesics, which are the shortest paths between two points on a curved surface. It is used to calculate the trajectory of a moving object in a curved space, such as a planet orbiting around a star.

2. How is the geodesic equation of motion related to general relativity?

The geodesic equation of motion is a fundamental principle in general relativity, which is a theory of gravity proposed by Albert Einstein. In this theory, the path of a freely moving object is determined by the curvature of space-time, and the geodesic equation of motion describes this path.

3. What does the MiSaTaQuWa equation of motion stand for?

The MiSaTaQuWa equation of motion is a shortened form of the "Minimal Surface Tachyon Quantum Wave" equation of motion. It is a modification of the geodesic equation of motion that takes into account the effects of quantum mechanics and tachyons, which are hypothetical particles that travel faster than the speed of light.

4. What is the significance of the MiSaTaQuWa equation of motion?

The MiSaTaQuWa equation of motion has been proposed as a possible solution to some of the problems in modern physics, such as the unification of quantum mechanics and general relativity. It also has implications for the study of black holes and the behavior of particles at the quantum level.

5. How is the MiSaTaQuWa equation of motion applied in practical research?

The MiSaTaQuWa equation of motion is still a theoretical concept and has not yet been empirically tested. However, it has generated a lot of interest among physicists and is being studied as a potential framework for understanding the behavior of particles at the smallest scales and the nature of space-time itself.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
58
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
30
Views
645
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
5
Replies
155
Views
6K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
600
Back
Top