Gravitational Redshift really verification of GR?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the validity of gravitational redshift as a verification of General Relativity (GR). Participants argue that gravitational redshift can be derived using classical physics principles, specifically through the equations E = mc² and E = hv, leading to an effective mass m = hv/c². This derivation suggests that gravitational redshift is not exclusive to GR, raising questions about its role as a verification tool for the theory. The Pound and Rebka experiment is mentioned, highlighting its limitations in proving the Schwarzschild solution's validity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's mass-energy equivalence (E = mc²)
  • Familiarity with Planck's equation for photons (E = hv)
  • Basic knowledge of gravitational physics and classical gravity equations
  • Awareness of the Pound and Rebka experiment and its implications
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of gravitational time dilation and its mathematical representation
  • Study the Pound and Rebka experiment in detail to understand its methodology and limitations
  • Explore the Schwarzschild solution and its significance in General Relativity
  • Investigate alternative theories of gravity and their predictions regarding gravitational redshift
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of gravitational physics, and anyone interested in the foundational principles of General Relativity and its experimental verifications.

thehangedman
Messages
68
Reaction score
2
If we assume:

[itex]E = mc^{2}[/itex]

and for photons:

[itex]E = hv[/itex]

Then we can derive an effective mass:

[itex]m = \frac{hv}{c^{2}}[/itex]

And using simple classical gravity obtain:

[itex]hv - \frac{GMm}{r} = hv - \frac{GMhv}{c^{2}r} = Constant[/itex]

You can derive the constant by evaluating the equation above at the limit as r goes to infinity. This then gives you the gravitational red shift, all without using anything from GR.

So, since this prediction is the same for classical AND GR, how can red shift be used as verification of GR? I'm not questioning GR, just wondering why this is still listed as verification when it's clearly not.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
thehangedman said:
If we assume:

[itex]E = mc^{2}[/itex]

and for photons:

[itex]E = hv[/itex]

Then we can derive an effective mass:

[itex]m = \frac{hv}{c^{2}}[/itex]

And using simple classical gravity obtain:

[itex]hv - \frac{GMm}{r} = hv - \frac{GMhv}{c^{2}r} = Constant[/itex]

You can derive the constant by evaluating the equation above at the limit as r goes to infinity. This then gives you the gravitational red shift, all without using anything from GR.

So, since this prediction is the same for classical AND GR, how can red shift be used as verification of GR? I'm not questioning GR, just wondering why this is still listed as verification when it's clearly not.

That's not correct. The gravitational redshift factor corresponds the to change in gravitational time dilation [itex]\frac{d\tau}{dt}-1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{2GM}{rc^2}}}-1[/itex].
 
If you are referring to the Pound and Rebka experiment, it proves gravitational redshift but it does not prove the validity of the Schwarzschild solution (even when we ignore rotation) as the experiment is not accurate enough to do that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
6K