Deflection angles of photons passing by black holes

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the computation of deflection angles for photons passing near black holes, specifically focusing on the numerical integration of a differential equation related to the trajectory of light. Participants explore the initial conditions necessary for this integration and the implications of the impact parameter on the results.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant is attempting to numerically integrate a differential equation related to photon trajectories but is uncertain about the initial condition for the derivative based on the impact parameter.
  • Another participant suggests that the impact parameter may depend on the initial trajectory in a complex manner, complicating the determination of initial conditions.
  • A different participant proposes a method to solve the equation by integrating and separating variables, indicating that numerical evaluation is still necessary.
  • One participant considers using the impact parameter as an initial condition starting close to the black hole, reflecting on the challenges of numerical integration limits.
  • Another participant references a textbook exercise that relates to the discussion, noting a potential discrepancy in the formulation of the equation due to an extraneous term.
  • A later reply indicates that using a specific expression for the initial condition in the numerical integration has proven helpful.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the best approach to establish initial conditions and the implications of the impact parameter on deflection angles. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives on how to proceed with the numerical integration.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential limitations in their approaches, including the complexity of the relationship between the impact parameter and initial conditions, as well as the challenges in determining appropriate limits for numerical integration.

tcw
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
In trying to compute deflection angles for photons given their impact parameter (closest distance of trajectory to centre of black hole if unaffected) I am trying to numerically integrate the following equation (d^2/d(phi)^2)(u)+u=3Mu^2. However I am stuck as to how to work out the initial condition for du/d(phi) given the impact parameter of the photon. I have a feeling I'm missing something simple geometrically...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi, tcw,

You'll be more likely to get helpful replies if you mark up your math in LaTeX so it's readable. Here's an example of how to do that with your diffeq: (d^2/d\phi^2)u+u=3mu^2. To see how I did that, click on the QUOTE button on my post.

Could you explain your notation? What is u?

Here is a calculation like the one you're talking about: http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/genrel/ch06/ch06.html#Section6.2 (see subsection 6.2.7)

I don't think it will be easy to find the initial conditions given the impact parameter. I would think that in the strong-field case, the impact parameter would depend in some complicated way on the initial trajectory. Given the initial conditions, the results of your numerical calculation should tell you the impact parameter.

-Ben
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tcw, Do you realize that your equation can be easily solved? Multiplying both sides by 2 du/dφ and integrating leads to a first integral, the particle's energy:

(du/dφ)2 + u2 = 2mu3 + C

Now separate the variables:

(C - u2 + 2mu3) du = dφ

and integrate again:

φ = ∫(C - u2 + 2mu3) du

Of course you still have to evaluate the integral numerically!
 
Thank you both for your help.

Ben, I have read through the article linked and it has given me some thoughts on how to approach the initial conditions problem; namely, instead of using the initial conditions from far off we use the impact parameter (b, say) as an initial condition starting close to the black hole. I tried to implement their code given but it didn't quite work for me in Matlab.

Bill, I had a look through your suggestion. The idea is interesting. For the first constant of integration we can deduce C=E^2/L^2=1/b^2. Now as for the numerical integration, I'm trying to work out the limits of integration for u. Since we start from far off and end far away, it seems like we should u=0 and u=0 for the two limits but of course that's nonsense. I thought about taking one of the limits as 1/b 1/distance of closest approach. However what puzzles me is that as we increase b, the numerical value for the integration gets larger which is counter intuitive as we expect less deflection for a larger b.
 
It sounds like you are doing what MTW does in exercise 25.24 pg 679 - except for an extraneous M in your equation

MTW defines u = M/r, and ub = M/b, and the equations of motion for an infalling light ray are then

(du/dphi)^2 + (1-2u)u^2 = ub ^2

Differentiating this with respect to phi, one gets

2 (du/dphi) (d^2 u / dphi^2) + 2u (du/dphi) -6u^2 (du/dphi) = 0, or

(d^2 u / dphi^2) + u = 3 u^2

which is your equation - except for that pesky M. You are correct to note u(phi) starts out at zero when phi has its initial value (probably easiest to take that initial value as zero), this corresponds to r=infinity, and ends up there too.

The impact parameter is given by the first, undifferentiated equation simply as

(du/phi) = ub = M/b, evaluated at u=0, using MTW's notation.

I don't know what to do about your extra "M".
 
Thanks pervect, your post has helped me out. For the initial conditions in my original numerical integration, it turns out using 2M/b for (du/dphi) works.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
1K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K