Special Relativity vs Newtonian Gravity: Understanding Their Compatibility

In summary: Planetary orbits are not unstable.In summary, Carlo Rovelli, in his book Seven Brief Lessons on Physics, discusses how Einstein's theory of special relativity is incompatible with Newton's law of universal gravity. This is due to the instantaneous nature of Newtonian gravity, which conflicts with the concept of relativity. Various attempts were made to reconcile the two theories, but it was ultimately Einstein's development of general relativity that resolved the issue. It was also pointed out that experiments, such as the stability of planetary orbits, serve as evidence for the instantaneous nature of gravity.
  • #1
Peter Martin
32
2
In his little book for the layman, Seven Brief Lessons on Physics author Carlo Rovelli states:
But something disturbed [Einstein], his theory of [special] relativity does not fit with what we know about gravity, namely, with how things fall. He began to wonder if the law of "universal gravity" as formulated by the father of physics himself, Isaac Newton, was in need of revision in order to make it compatible with the new concept of relativity.

What is it about SR which is incompatible with gravity-as-a-force?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The reason Newtonian gravity is not compatible with relativity is that its influence is instantaneous. If I move a mass over here, the gravitational effect will be felt light years away immediately. But one of the key facts about special relativity is that "instantaneous" is an incomplete sentence. You need to specify instantaneous from whose perspective. And in general there is no answer to whose notion of instantaneous should be used - so there's a problem.

I believe there were some attempts to reconcile Newton and special relativity by adding a propagation speed for gravity (thus removing the "instantaneous" problem), but they were not entirely successful. Ultimately, Einstein settled the question by developing general relaitivity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3
There are two immediate issues:

SR showed that no signal can travel faster than light. But, Newton's gravity has instantaneous "action at a distance". As I see @Ibix has just posted.

Also, the basic formula for the gravitational force is ##F = \frac{GMm}{r^2}##, where ##r## is the distance between masses ##M## and ##m##. But, SR had shown that distance was relative and the distance measured in one reference frame would not equal the distance measured in another. That was another fundamental problem.
 
  • Like
Likes Nugatory and Ibix
  • #4
You can make the Poisson eqn. special relativistic; it becomes the massless Klein Gordon eqn. This theory is consistent but e.g. couples to the trace of the energy momentum tensor and as such cannot describe the deflection of light.
 
  • #5
Ibix said:
I believe there were some attempts to reconcile Newton and special relativity by adding a propagation speed for gravity (thus removing the "instantaneous" problem), but they were not entirely successful.

Yes, Einstein tried this, since it was the obvious first thing to try, by analogy with electromagnetism. "Not entirely successful" is being charitable. :wink: This theory made predictions grossly contradictory to observation, for example that the orbits of the planets around the Sun should be unstable on fairly short time scales.
 
  • Like
Likes Paul Colby
  • #6
Thanks to Peter Donis, houshoffer, PeroK, and Ibix for their quick and clear responses. I should have thought a little deeper before posting the question. Many thanks!
 
  • #7
Ibix said:
The reason Newtonian gravity is not compatible with relativity is that its influence is instantaneous. If I move a mass over here, the gravitational effect will be felt light years away immediately. But one of the key facts about special relativity is that "instantaneous" is an incomplete sentence. You need to specify instantaneous from whose perspective. And in general there is no answer to whose notion of instantaneous should be used - so there's a problem.

I believe there were some attempts to reconcile Newton and special relativity by adding a propagation speed for gravity (thus removing the "instantaneous" problem), but they were not entirely successful. Ultimately, Einstein settled the question by developing general relaitivity.
________________________________

Thanks for the reply. But how do we know that "gravity is instantaneous"? Wikipedia says that gravitational waves travel at lightspeed. If the Sun disappeared Earth would stay in orbit for eight minutes (I'm told). What experiment shows that gravitational effect is instantaneous?
 
  • #8
Thanks for your response. Wikipedia says that gravitational waves travel at lightspeed. So if the Sun were to disappear, Earth would remain in orbit for eight minutes (I've always been told). So what experiment could show that "gravity is instantaneous"?
 
  • #9
Peter Martin said:
________________________________

Thanks for the reply. But how do we know that "gravity is instantaneous"? Wikipedia says that gravitational waves travel at lightspeed. If the Sun disappeared Earth would stay in orbit for eight minutes (I'm told). What experiment shows that gravitational effect is instantaneous?
Newtonian gravity is instant action at a distance by mathematical construction. Newton didn't like this, but it is what fit observation. It became well known way before special relativity that even very small delays in the effect of gravity in a Newtonian framework would lead to wildly unstable orbits, inconsistent with observation.

GR is what solved this problem, providing a framework for finite propagation speed while reproducing orbital stability over required time scales. (In principle, no orbits in GR are stable due to gravitational radiation causing orbital decay; but the time scale for this in the solar system is many, many orders of magnitude greater than the age of the universe)
 
  • #10
Peter Martin said:
Thanks for your response. Wikipedia says that gravitational waves travel at lightspeed. So if the Sun were to disappear, Earth would remain in orbit for eight minutes (I've always been told). So what experiment could show that "gravity is instantaneous"?

In Newton's theory of gravity it is instantaneous - that was one of things that couldn't be fixed.
 
  • #11
Peter Martin said:
Wikipedia says that gravitational waves travel at lightspeed. So if the Sun were to disappear, Earth would remain in orbit for eight minutes (I've always been told)
That's a prediction of general relativity, using the equations of general relativity. If you take Newton's equations as your starting point, you won't even have any gravitational waves; Newton's equations predict a different behavior than waves traveling outwards at any speed when you change the mass distribution, and predicts that Earth would immediately fall out of orbit if the sun were to disappear.
So what experiment could show that "gravity is instantaneous"?
If Newton's theory is correct but "gravity is instantaneous" is not, then planetary orbits would be unstable; thus our centuries of observation of stable planetary orbits is the experiment that shows that Newtonian gravity must be instantaneous. This is the basic problem that puts Newtonian gravity in conflict with SR: You can't have Newtonian gravity without instantaneous propagation, and you can't have instantaneous propagation and SR, so you can't have Newtonian gravity and SR.
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
  • #12
Peter Martin said:
Thanks for your response. Wikipedia says that gravitational waves travel at lightspeed.
Gravitational waves don't exist in Newtonian gravity. They're a solution of Einstein's Field Equations, and they do indeed travel at the speed of light.
Peter Martin said:
So if the Sun were to disappear, Earth would remain in orbit for eight minutes (I've always been told).
That's a complicated question. GR won't let you just make the Sun disappear, so asking what would happen if it did isn't likely to give you a sensible answer.
Peter Martin said:
So what experiment could show that "gravity is instantaneous"?
We don't believe it is. Newton's theory of gravity predicts that it is, but even Newton himself wasn't comfortable with it. The problem is that relativity is completely incompatible with instantaneous action at a distance because both "instantaneous" and "distance" are not globally defined quantities. And efforts to patch Newtonian gravity to fit relativity failed in a "if the world worked this way the solar system wouldn't be here" kind of way.

The ultimate solution was a ground-up re-think of how gravity works, treating it as spacetime geometry instead of a force. Incidentally, this explained a fact that astronomers had been puzzling over for some time, that Mercury was very slightly in the wrong place compared to our Newtonian prediction.
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK
  • #13
Nugatory said:
That's a prediction of general relativity, using the equations of general relativity. If you take Newton's equations as your starting point, you won't even have any gravitational waves; Newton's equations predict a different behavior than waves traveling outwards at any speed when you change the mass distribution, and predicts that Earth would immediately fall out of orbit if the sun were to disappear.

If Newton's theory is correct but "gravity is instantaneous" is not, then planetary orbits would be unstable; thus our centuries of observation of stable planetary orbits is the experiment that shows that Newtonian gravity must be instantaneous. This is the basic problem that puts Newtonian gravity in conflict with SR: You can't have Newtonian gravity without instantaneous propagation, and you can't have instantaneous propagation and SR, so you can't have Newtonian gravity and SR.
Many thanks!
 

1. What is the difference between Special Relativity and Newtonian Gravity?

Special Relativity is a theory developed by Albert Einstein in 1905 to explain the relationship between space and time in the absence of gravity. It states that the laws of physics are the same for all observers in uniform motion, and the speed of light is constant. On the other hand, Newtonian Gravity is a theory developed by Sir Isaac Newton in the 17th century to explain the force of gravity between objects. It states that the force of gravity is directly proportional to the mass of the objects and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

2. Are Special Relativity and Newtonian Gravity compatible?

Yes, Special Relativity and Newtonian Gravity are compatible in certain situations. Newtonian Gravity is still a valid and accurate theory for describing the force of gravity in most everyday situations. However, when objects are moving at speeds close to the speed of light or when dealing with extreme gravitational fields, Special Relativity must be used to accurately describe the relationship between space, time, and gravity.

3. Why do we need Special Relativity if Newtonian Gravity is still accurate?

While Newtonian Gravity is still accurate in most everyday situations, it fails to accurately describe the behavior of objects at high speeds or in strong gravitational fields. Special Relativity was developed to provide a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of the relationship between space, time, and gravity in these extreme situations.

4. Can Special Relativity and Newtonian Gravity be unified into one theory?

Many scientists have attempted to unify Special Relativity and Newtonian Gravity into one theory, but so far, no successful unification has been achieved. The theories are based on different assumptions and principles, making it challenging to reconcile them into one comprehensive theory. However, several theories, such as Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, have been developed to combine elements of both theories.

5. How does Special Relativity affect our everyday lives?

Special Relativity has a significant impact on our everyday lives, even though its effects may not be noticeable. For example, the Global Positioning System (GPS) would not function correctly if it did not account for the effects of Special Relativity. The theory is also used in many technologies, such as particle accelerators and nuclear power plants. Additionally, Special Relativity has led to advancements in our understanding of the universe and has played a crucial role in modern physics and cosmology.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
858
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
57
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
63
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
143
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
4
Replies
139
Views
14K
Back
Top