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.
 
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