B Gravitational Lensing: Refraction or Something Else?

Paige_Turner
Messages
44
Reaction score
9
TL;DR Summary
Does 4D spacetime, bent by mass, act like "compressed space" in 3D?
It seems like a strong gravitational field acts like spacetime is denser in some sense. Light passing through a gravitational lens is delayed, just like in a glass lens (which refracts because it's denser than air).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
While there are similarities between gravitational lensing and refraction by an ordinary glass lens, they are only similarities and can't be taken too far. There is nothing in the actual mathematical model in GR that corresponds to "density of spacetime", so that part of the analogy does not hold.
 
Paige_Turner said:
Summary:: Does 4D spacetime, bent by mass, act like "compressed space" in 3D?

It seems like a strong gravitational field acts like spacetime is denser in some sense. Light passing through a gravitational lens is delayed, just like in a glass lens (which refracts because it's denser than air).
I have never seen any paper that made that analogy.
 
Paige_Turner said:
Summary:: Does 4D spacetime, bent by mass, act like "compressed space" in 3D?

It seems like a strong gravitational field acts like spacetime is denser in some sense. Light passing through a gravitational lens is delayed, just like in a glass lens (which refracts because it's denser than air).
Light follows similar geometry if you only consider a convex (converging) lens (left-side diagrams).

If this analogy really held, you could theoretically find a galaxy or galaxy cluster that is concave in shape. One would naively expect light passing through volume of space with a concave-shaped mass to diverge (right-side diagrams).

1626401086219.png
 
Paige_Turner said:
Summary:: Does 4D spacetime, bent by mass, act like "compressed space" in 3D?

It seems like a strong gravitational field acts like spacetime is denser in some sense. Light passing through a gravitational lens is delayed, just like in a glass lens (which refracts because it's denser than air).
As was stressed before, it is not literally the same to have refraction, which is usually naming the phenomena related to the interaction of the electromagnetic field with matter, i.e., due to scattering of em. waves with charged particles, and empty space is not considered as any kind of matter anymore since Einstein got rid of the aether.

Mathematically in some sense there's an analogy, because to describe "lensing" you can use for both usual refraction as well as the "bending of light" by gravitational fields using geometrical optics, which is the eikonal approximation of Maxwell's equations. It turns out that the light rays as defined by geometrical optics follow from Fermat's principle, and in matter-free space within GR, this leads formally to a geodesic equation for "massless particles". Fermat's principle of course is also a valid description of light propation in matter in the eikonal approximation. In this sense mathematically both effects are a bit analogous.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top