Gravitational field of photons

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the gravitational field associated with photons, referencing L. Susskind's lectures on general relativity (GR). Participants debate the implications of photons having energy and how this affects spacetime curvature, particularly through the concept of pp-waves. Key points include the assertion that gravitational fields cannot vanish and that photon gas must create a gravitational field, despite photons lacking a defined location. The conversation also touches on the misconception that energy contributes to gravitational attraction in GR, emphasizing the distinction between relativistic mass and energy density.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of general relativity (GR) principles
  • Familiarity with the concept of pp-waves in spacetime
  • Knowledge of the stress-energy tensor and its role in spacetime curvature
  • Basic grasp of the relationship between energy, mass, and gravity in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of pp-waves in general relativity
  • Study the stress-energy tensor and its contributions to gravitational fields
  • Explore the concept of gravitational magnetism and frame-dragging
  • Investigate the relationship between energy density and gravitational attraction in GR
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, astrophysicists, and students of general relativity interested in the gravitational effects of light and the complexities of photon interactions in spacetime.

  • #31
kev said:
Note the modern usage does not use the symbols m_0 for rest mass and m for relativistic mass. The unqualified symbol "m" and the unqualified term "mass" simply mean rest mass and generally in modern GR, there is not considerd to be any other kind of mass.

From my understanding, it's not meaningful to distinguish between mass and energy in GR. In SR it is neccesary because it determines acceleration, but in GR mass really plays no role. Only energy is important.

Rasalhague said:
The only one of these terms that I hadn't heard of is "momentum energy". Taylor and Wheeler just call this momentum (i.e. 3-momentum). I see Blandford & Thorne call the vector 4-momentum, \vec{p}. They call its time component "energy \varepsilon". This energy minus its length (i.e. mass) they call "energy E" (well, at least they were thoughtful enough to give them different symbols, if not different names...), and its spatial components they call "momentum \textbf{p}". They call the first row of components of a matrix representing the stress-energy tensor "energy flux". Presumbly the other rows are "momentum flux".

I think this comes from E2=(pc)2+(mc2)2.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
espen180 said:
From my understanding, it's not meaningful to distinguish between mass and energy in GR. In SR it is neccesary because it determines acceleration, but in GR mass really plays no role. Only energy is important.

Rest mass has significance in relativity because any particle with rest mass is excluded from traveling at the speed of light and any particle with zero rest mass can only move at the speed of light. A baryon and a photon behave differently due to the presence or absence of rest mass even if they have identical total energy. The importance of the absense or presence of rest mass in active gravitational terms, especially in the case of a photon, has yet to be determined in this thread.
 
  • #33
I think that if you take two masses moving slowly along parallel paths with a gravitational attraction between them and Lorentz transform the system to a frame from which they are moving very rapidly, then adjust the rest masses so that the total energy is the same as it was to start with, you can show that when you take the limit of velocity c (where the rest masses are zero and there is only kinetic energy) the relative acceleration reaches zero.

There is a subtle difference between energy and mass in general relativity when you consider the effective mass in a non-isotropic coordinate system. As the coordinate speed of light varies with direction in that case, the coordinate mass is no longer a scalar but has different values depending on the direction in which the speed of light is measured.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K