Dirac's statement about conservation

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter exmarine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Conservation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around Dirac's statement regarding the conservation of energy and momentum in curved space, as presented in his book on General Relativity (GRT). Participants explore the implications of Dirac's assertion, particularly in relation to angular momentum conservation in various metrics, and the challenges posed by gravitational fields in defining local conservation laws.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions Dirac's assertion, noting that deriving the geodesic equations from the Schwarzschild metric appears to yield conservation of angular momentum without approximation.
  • Another participant suggests that Dirac's statement may pertain to arbitrary metrics, where angular momentum is not conserved along geodesics lacking angular symmetry.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes that Dirac's statement addresses the complexities of local conservation of energy-momentum in the context of gravitational fields, contrasting it with electromagnetic fields where energy-momentum conservation can be more clearly defined.
  • One participant distinguishes between conservation of angular momentum for test particles in fixed metrics and for the field theory, including gravitational fields, arguing that Dirac's focus is on the latter.
  • It is noted that General Relativity lacks general conservation laws for vectors and higher-order tensors, complicating the definition of conserved quantities due to path-dependent parallel transport.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of Dirac's statement and its implications, indicating that multiple competing views remain without a consensus on the matter.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations in defining local energy-density for gravitational fields and the challenges in establishing general conservation laws in General Relativity, which may affect the understanding of Dirac's claims.

exmarine
Messages
241
Reaction score
11
In Dirac's book on GRT, he says the following, p. 45: "In curved space the conservation of energy and momentum is only approximate. The error is to be ascribed to the gravitational field working on the matter and having itself some energy and momentum."

Yet when I work my way from the Schwarzschild metric to the geodesic equations, one of them produces the conservation of angular momentum. There is no approximation that I am aware of.

What am I missing? Was Dirac wrong? Can anyone explain? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think he was referring to arbitrary metrics. A general metric without angular symmetry will not conserve angular momentum along the geodesic.
 
exmarine said:
In Dirac's book on GRT, he says the following, p. 45: "In curved space the conservation of energy and momentum is only approximate. The error is to be ascribed to the gravitational field working on the matter and having itself some energy and momentum."

Say instead we were talking about the EM field. Then ##T_{\mu\nu} = T^{\text{charges}}_{\mu\nu} + T^{\text{EM}}_{\mu\nu}## hence ##\nabla^{\mu}T_{\mu\nu} = 0## already takes into account the energy-momentum of the EM field when talking about the local conservation of energy-momentum of the charge distribution interacting with this EM field. It is immediate from this why there comes a difficulty when wanting to take into account the energy-momentum of the gravitational field interacting with a given matter distribution in speaking of the local conservation of energy-momentum because we cannot write down the local energy-density of the gravitational field; ##\nabla^{\mu}T_{\mu\nu} = 0## does not account for this! In fact in GR we can only talk about the energy-momentum of the gravitational field using global quantities (such as the Komar energy/angular momentum, ADM energy-momentum etc.) or pseudo-tensorial quantities (such as the LL pseudo-tensor).

So Dirac's statement is much deeper and much more general than that of an axially symmetric space-time possessing an axial Killing field conserving angular momentum.
 
Last edited:
There are two different things here:

(1) Conservation of angular momentum for a test particle moving in a fixed background metric.

(2) Conservation of angular momentum for the field theory in general, including the angular momentum contained in the gravitational fields itself.

Dirac is talking about #2.

GR doesn't have general conservation laws for vectors and higher-order tensors. As an alternative to Dirac's explanation, this can be seen from the fact that parallel transport is path dependent in GR. Therefore you can't define any unique way to add up the conserved quantity.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K