Gravitational effects on particles orbit in a box

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effects of gravitational fields on the motion of particles within a box in a curved spacetime, specifically comparing classical mechanics in Minkowski space to general relativity (GR). Participants explore the implications of metric coefficients on the period of a particle's motion and the calculations required to determine the geodesic path in a spherically symmetric gravitational field.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that the time taken for a particle to traverse a box in Minkowski space is L/v, where v is the particle's velocity.
  • Another participant questions the initial claim about the distance traveled in GR being longer, asking for clarification on the notation and the specific metric used.
  • A participant provides a specific metric for the discussion, expressing the expectation that the geodesic path length in a gravitational field would be longer than in flat space.
  • Another participant suggests finding a radial geodesic path using the metric provided, noting the presence of a time-like Killing vector and the conservation of energy for the particle.
  • Further elaboration includes the use of the geodesic equations and the potential for non-radial paths, with a suggestion to explore the implications of Killing vectors for conserved quantities.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing levels of understanding and clarity regarding the calculations involved in determining the geodesic path in curved spacetime. There is no consensus on the specific methods or interpretations of the effects of gravity on the period of motion.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for assumptions regarding the metric coefficients and the nature of the gravitational potential, as well as the complexity introduced by non-radial paths and the use of Killing vectors.

FunkyDwarf
Messages
481
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

If one were to consider a classical particle in a box of length L in Minkowski space then clearly the time taken to go between the walls of the box is L/v with v velocity.

In the GR case with some metric coefficients A(r) and B(r) (spherically symmetric system, say) it's clear that the distance traveled is longer and so the period should be longer as well, my question is how to calculate this? Let's say m = 0 so v = c.

Do I take dt = 0 and integrate the line element ds from 0 to L over dr? I thought of trying to take the already computed flat space period and applying the time dilation method to it but that contains a radial coordinate component (obviously as it must be position dependent) but I'm unsure as to how to 'get rid' of this part, i.e. would r here simply represent the end points or again is some integral/averaging needed?

I know this is probably kind of a trivial question but still it's doing my head in a bit =P
Cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
FunkyDwarf said:
In the GR case with some metric coefficients A(r) and B(r) (spherically symmetric system, say)
Could you explain your notation and give the metric explicitly?

FunkyDwarf said:
it's clear that the distance traveled is longer and so the period should be longer as well, my question is how to calculate this?

Longer than what? Longer why?
 
Sure, sorry.

Lets say i have a metric
[tex] ds^2 = -A(r) dt^2 + B(r) dr^2 +r^2 d\Omega^2[/tex]

I would expect that if i were to designate length L as the size of the box in Minkowski space then the geodesic path length traveled to go between ends of the box in a curved space, say that for an attractive gravitational potential, would be longer.
 
So, you want to find a radial geodesic path for the above metric? The easy way to do is to note that none of the coordinates depends on t. So our system has a time-like Killing vector. And the dot product of the time-like killing vector with the four velocity of the particle remains constant

In your example, if we assume that the particle has some 4-velocity r(tau), t(tau), then we can write

g_{ij} [(dt/dtau), (dr/dtau) ] dot [1,0] = constant,which can be simplified to

-A(r) dt/dtau = constant

This constant can be thought of as the energy of the particle.

Add one more constraint, that the magnitude of the four-velocity is always -1 (with your sign convention), and you've got enough equations to solve for a radial geodesic.

IT's not that much harder to do a non-radial path. You could also write out the Christoffel symbols and use the geodesic equation, but that's MUCH harder - it's a lot easier if you can find the Killing vectors. If you're interested in the concpets, though, it's worth working it out with the Killiing vector approach first, then confirming that your solution satisfies the geodesic equations.

[add]...the geodesic equations are well known, but I'll jot them down anyway

[tex] \frac {d^2 x^i}{d \tau^2} + \Gamma^{i}{}_{jk} \: \frac{dx^j}{d\tau} \: \frac{dx^k}{d\tau} = 0[/tex]Maybe you want a non-radial geodesic. That's a little harder, but not much. You can assume that the motion occurs in the equatorial plane (theta=0), and then you have another Killing vector (a spacelike one) due to the fact that the metric doesn't depend on phi, giving you the other equation you need. This space-like killing vector corrseponds to a conserved angular momentum, because position invariance -> a conserved momentum, angular momentum because your coordinate is an angular coordinate.

Most textbooks should go through this in more detial if my run-through has been too fast.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K