Error in Concepts: Intro to Mechanics Kolenkow & Kleppner

In summary: Can't be, the ratio of frequencies has to be less than one for upwards-moving light to be redshifted.There has to be a difference in frequency for light to be redshifted.
  • #1
Ramanathan k s
3
0
TL;DR Summary
While reading "The Equivalence Principle and the Gravitational Red Shift" in the book (Introduction to Mechanic by Kolenkow & Kleppner) I'm having doubts about how they arrived at the result gL/(c^2).
They are treating the spacetime curve as a parabola, but is it a parabola?
And I think there is some serious conceptual error in the analysis.
please help me
1677244582020.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Ramanathan k s said:
They are treating the spacetime curve as a parabola, but is it a parabola?
Every differentiable curve is a parabola to 2nd order about any given point.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50 and vanhees71
  • #3
Dale said:
Every differentiable curve is a parabola to 2nd order about any given point.
But what will be the actual curve in this case?
 
  • #4
Ramanathan k s said:
But what will be the actual curve in this case?
It is actually a hyperbola. However, that does not make the derivation wrong. It just makes the derivation a derivation to 2nd order. This is not a "conceptual error", it is a valid approximation.
 
  • Like
Likes Ramanathan k s, PeterDonis, vanhees71 and 1 other person
  • #5
It's still a somewhat hand-waving argument, but it's correct given the approximations made.

A simple argument is to use the exact Schwarzschild solution, of which we only need
$$\mathrm{d} s^2=(1-2m/r) c^2 \mathrm{d} t^2 + \ldots$$
Now a wave is emitted from a source at rest at ##r=r_0##. The time it takes from one maximum of the wave to the next is
$$\frac{2 \pi}{\omega_{\text{em}}} = \mathrm{d} \tau (r_0)=\sqrt{1-2m/r_0} \mathrm{d} t_{\text{em}}.$$
Then it's received by an observer at rest at ##r_0+h##, and there
$$\frac{2 \pi}{\omega_{\text{obs}}}=\mathrm{d} \tau (r_0+h) = \sqrt{1-2m/(r_0+h)} \mathrm{d} t_{\text{obs}}.$$
Now ##\mathrm{d} t_{\text{obs}}=\mathrm{d} t_{\text{em}}##, from which
$$\frac{\omega_{\text{obs}}}{\omega_{\text{em}}}=\sqrt{\frac{1-2m/r_0}{1-2m/(r_0+h)}} \simeq 1-\frac{m h}{(r_0-2m)r_0}.$$
Now ##m=G M/c^2=R_{\text{S}}/2## is half the Schwarzschild radius. For ##r_0 \gg R_{\text{S}}##, where the Newtonian limit is valid, we have
$$\frac{\omega_{\text{obs}}}{\omega_{\text{em}}}=1-\frac{m h}{r_0^2}=1-\frac{G M/(c^2 r_0^2)} h =1-\frac{g h}{c^2}.$$
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby, Ramanathan k s and Dale
  • #6
vanhees71 said:
It's still a somewhat hand-waving argument, but it's correct given the approximations made.

A simple argument is to use the exact Schwarzschild solution, of which we only need
$$\mathrm{d} s^2=(1-2m/r) c^2 \mathrm{d} t^2 + \ldots$$
Now a wave is emitted from a source at rest at ##r=r_0##. The time it takes from one maximum of the wave to the next is
$$\frac{2 \pi}{\omega_{\text{em}}} = \mathrm{d} \tau (r_0)=\sqrt{1-2m/r_0} \mathrm{d} t_{\text{em}}.$$
Then it's received by an observer at rest at ##r_0+h##, and there
$$\frac{2 \pi}{\omega_{\text{obs}}}=\mathrm{d} \tau (r_0+h) = \sqrt{1-2m/(r_0+h)} \mathrm{d} t_{\text{obs}}.$$
Now ##\mathrm{d} t_{\text{obs}}=\mathrm{d} t_{\text{em}}##, from which
$$\frac{\omega_{\text{obs}}}{\omega_{\text{em}}}=\sqrt{\frac{1-2m/r_0}{1-2m/(r_0+h)}} \simeq 1-\frac{m h}{(r_0-2m)r_0}.$$
Now ##m=G M/c^2=R_{\text{S}}/2## is half the Schwarzschild radius. For ##r_0 \gg R_{\text{S}}##, where the Newtonian limit is valid, we have
$$\frac{\omega_{\text{obs}}}{\omega_{\text{em}}}=1-\frac{m h}{r_0^2}=1-\frac{G M/(c^2 r_0^2)} h =1-\frac{g h}{c^2}.$$
actually the result is $$\ 1+\frac{g h}{c^2}.$$
 
  • #7
Ramanathan k s said:
actually the result is ## 1+\frac{g h}{c^2}##
Can’t be, the ratio of frequencies has to be less than one for upwards-moving light to be redshifted.
 
  • Like
Likes PeterDonis and vanhees71
  • #8
I think my sign is correct, because for ##h>0## there must be red shift, because the "naive photon" looses energy moving "upwards".
 
  • Like
Likes PeterDonis

1. What is the main concept behind "Error in Concepts: Intro to Mechanics Kolenkow & Kleppner"?

The main concept behind "Error in Concepts: Intro to Mechanics Kolenkow & Kleppner" is to help students understand and identify common errors that occur in the study of mechanics. This book aims to improve students' understanding of the fundamental principles of mechanics by addressing common misconceptions and providing clear explanations and examples.

2. How is this book different from other textbooks on mechanics?

This book differs from other textbooks on mechanics by focusing specifically on common errors and misconceptions that students may have. It also includes detailed explanations and examples to help students understand the correct concepts and avoid making these errors in the future.

3. Is this book suitable for beginners in mechanics?

Yes, this book is suitable for beginners in mechanics. It starts with basic concepts and gradually builds upon them, making it easy for beginners to follow and understand. However, it also includes more advanced topics that can benefit intermediate and advanced students as well.

4. Can this book be used as a reference for problem-solving?

Yes, this book can be used as a reference for problem-solving. It includes a variety of practice problems with detailed solutions that can help students test their understanding of the concepts and improve their problem-solving skills.

5. How can this book help students prepare for exams?

This book can help students prepare for exams by providing a comprehensive review of key concepts and addressing common errors that students may make. It also includes practice problems and solutions that can help students test their knowledge and identify areas that need more focus.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
482
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
700
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
738
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
22
Views
3K
Back
Top