Expanding/Collapsing Universe vs Bouncing Ball: Kinetic & Potential Energy?

Spinnor
Gold Member
Messages
2,227
Reaction score
419
I think in a piece by John Baez we learn that the physics of an expanding and collapsing dust filled universe is the same as the physics of a bouncing ball,
Radius, R, verses time and height, h, verses time?

If so are there counterparts to the kinetic and potential energy of a bouncing ball and an expanding and colapsing dust filled universe? It seems that when R and h are maximum we have max potential energy and when R and h are near zero we have max kinetic energy, if General Relativity has "things" like potential and kinetic energy?

If you and I were nearby dust particles, in an expanding and collapsing universe, in the expansion stage say, we could estimate our potential and kinetic energies of each other by observation? I can "measure" your distance and velocity and thus estimate kinetic and potential energy? If

When a gravitational wave goes by does space-time kind of "vibrate"? If so can we identify parts of the energy of a gravitational wave as being part "kinetic" and part "potential"?

Could an oscillating dust filled universe be considered a "standing wave" because the potential and kinetic energy are 90 degrees out of phase?

Thanks for any help!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
When a gravitational wave goes by does space-time kind of "vibrate"? If so can we identify parts of the energy of a gravitational wave as being part "kinetic" and part "potential"?
Gravitational and electromagnetic waves are closely similar. Can you do this for an electromagnetic wave?

Think - the electromagnetic energy density is (E2 + B2)/2. But in an electromagnetic wave, E and B are in phase. They reach maximum at the same time, and fall to zero at the same time. So the analogy with a mechanical wave, where energy goes back and forth between a "kinetic" part and a "potential" part simply does not hold. Like for gravitational waves.
 
Bill_K said:
Gravitational and electromagnetic waves are closely similar. Can you do this for an electromagnetic wave?

Think - the electromagnetic energy density is (E2 + B2)/2. But in an electromagnetic wave, E and B are in phase. They reach maximum at the same time, and fall to zero at the same time. So the analogy with a mechanical wave, where energy goes back and forth between a "kinetic" part and a "potential" part simply does not hold. Like for gravitational waves.

Unless we have a standing E and M wave?
 
Last edited:
Unless we have a standing E and M wave?
How is that different? E and B are still in phase.
 
Bill_K said:
How is that different? E and B are still in phase.

In a standing wave its all E and then all B? I would normally defer to your expertise but I think you are wrong.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top