Gravitomagnetism & Gravitational Waves

Marin
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
Hi all!

I was browsing Wikipedia when I came upon the following article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitomagnetism

It seems here they state a form of the complete linearized Einstein equations that resembles very much (or is mathematically identical to that of) Maxwell's equations, which are clearly linear.

However, it seems to me that this is inconsistent with the theory of gravitational waves, for the following reason:

It is a fact that from Maxwell's eqn's a wave eqn arises, EM waves being a consequence of accelerated charge. Mathematically /please, correct me, if I'm wrong/ it is the 1st time derivative of the dipole moment of the charge distribution that is responsible for the EM radiation, whereas it's power is proportional to the second time derivative of the charge distribution.

Unlike in EM, G waves arise from the 2nd time derivative of the transverse traceless part of the quadrupole moment of the energy/mass distribution. The power going like the 3rd derivative of it. So it turns out we need the rate of change of the acceleration for them.

Since the mathematics of gravitomagnetism seems pretty much the same as this of electromagnetism, I suspect the corresponding radiation has to also possesses the same mathematical characteristics which looks like a contradiction to the theory of G waves...


So, what do you think of it?

PS: I probably overlook something, since there are various papers listed in the references, but what is it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The first sentence of the article answers most of your questions:
"Gravitomagnetism ... refers to a set of formal analogies between Maxwell's field equations and an approximation, valid under certain conditions, to the Einstein field equations for general relativity."
GEM can be applied to the weak field limit of GR, and thus understandably doesn't apply to gravitational waves.
 
Ok, so suppose the gravitomagnetic eqn's, as stated in the article, are a valid approximation under some physical conditions, whatever they may be.

There's still a wave equation arising from them, which accounts for the description of radiation in this particular limit.

Clearly, it's not gravitational waves, so what can it be? Is it observed at all?
 
Marin said:
Ok, so suppose the gravitomagnetic eqn's, as stated in the article, are a valid approximation under some physical conditions, whatever they may be.

There's still a wave equation arising from them, which accounts for the description of radiation in this particular limit.

Clearly, it's not gravitational waves, so what can it be? Is it observed at all?

Wave equation, and "gravitational waves" are apples and oranges.
 
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...
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...
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...
Back
Top