Gravity and Electromagnetism

  • #1
931
56
(I'm sorry for my poor English.) In GR the explanation for the bending of light by gravity is that gravity is a curvature in space (and time) and thus light follows the curved space. I was reading about the (undiscovered) graviton. It would have spin 2. Does it mean a graviton would interact with a magnetic field? If so, can we speak of bending of light as a photon-graviton interaction, like electrons (spin 1/2) interact with magnetic fields?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
DrClaude
Mentor
7,497
3,773
(I'm sorry for my poor English.) In GR the explanation for the bending of light by gravity is that gravity is a curvature in space (and time) and thus light follows the curved space. I was reading about the (undiscovered) graviton. It would have spin 2. Does it mean a graviton would interact with a magnetic field?
No. Having spin angular momentum has no relation with interaction with a magnetic field. The electron interacts with a magnetic field because it has a magnetic moment.

If so, can we speak of bending of light as a photon-graviton interaction, like electrons (spin 1/2) interact with magnetic fields?
No. The photon doesn't "bend," it goes in a straight line in a curved space-time.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
  • #3
931
56
No. Having spin angular momentum has no relation with interaction with a magnetic field. The electron interacts with a magnetic field because it has a magnetic moment.


No. The photon doesn't "bend," it goes in a straight line in a curved space-time.
Thank you. How does the electron magnetic moment is related to its spin? And do photons and gravitons have a magnetic moment?
 
  • #6
DrClaude
Mentor
7,497
3,773
Can you show me a derivation for the spin from the magnetic moment?
I don't know that it can be "derived." There may be something coming from QFT.

Maybe @vanhees71 can help?
 
  • #7
vanhees71
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
2019 Award
16,144
7,467
The relation between spin and magnetic moment comes from minimal coupling of the electromagnetic field. For Dirac spinors, e.g., you start from the free-field Lagrangian
$$\mathcal{L}=\overline{\psi} (\mathrm{i} \gamma^{\mu} \partial_{\mu}-m) \psi,$$
and substitute
$$\partial_{\mu} \rightarrow D_{\mu}=\partial_{\mu} + \mathrm{i} q A_{\mu},$$
where ##A_{\mu}## is the electromagnetic field. This leads to the magnetic moment of the electron with the correct tree-level gyrofactor of 2.
 
  • Like
Likes kent davidge and bhobba
  • #8
931
56
The relation between spin and magnetic moment comes from minimal coupling of the electromagnetic field. For Dirac spinors, e.g., you start from the free-field Lagrangian
$$\mathcal{L}=\overline{\psi} (\mathrm{i} \gamma^{\mu} \partial_{\mu}-m) \psi,$$
and substitute
$$\partial_{\mu} \rightarrow D_{\mu}=\partial_{\mu} + \mathrm{i} q A_{\mu},$$
where ##A_{\mu}## is the electromagnetic field. This leads to the magnetic moment of the electron with the correct tree-level gyrofactor of 2.
Thank you.
 
  • #9
haushofer
Science Advisor
Insights Author
2,409
815
The relation between spin and magnetic moment comes from minimal coupling of the electromagnetic field. For Dirac spinors, e.g., you start from the free-field Lagrangian
$$\mathcal{L}=\overline{\psi} (\mathrm{i} \gamma^{\mu} \partial_{\mu}-m) \psi,$$
and substitute
$$\partial_{\mu} \rightarrow D_{\mu}=\partial_{\mu} + \mathrm{i} q A_{\mu},$$
where ##A_{\mu}## is the electromagnetic field. This leads to the magnetic moment of the electron with the correct tree-level gyrofactor of 2.
Just to add: this can also be derived non-relativistically, which shows that the gyrofactor of 2 is not a relativistic effect, as sometimes is claimed (unlike the Darwin-term and the spin-orbit coupling, which are relativistic effects). See e.g. papers by Levy-Leblond. The idea is basically to write down the Dirac equation, but demand that every spinor component obeys the Schrodinger equation instead of the Klein-Gordon equation, resulting in a "nonrelativistic Clifford algebra".
 
  • Like
Likes kent davidge
  • #10
vanhees71
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
2019 Award
16,144
7,467
Well, in the non-relativistic case it's not so convincing, because you have to write
$$\hat{\vec{p}}^2=(\vec{\sigma} \cdot \hat{\vec{p}})^2,$$
and then introduce the minimal coupling in this way ##\vec{\sigma} \cdot \hat{\vec{p}} \rightarrow \vec{\sigma}(\hat{\vec{p}}-\mathrm{i} q \hat{\vec{A}})## and then square. This is just an ad-hoc description, leading to the correct gyro factor. Why one cannot simply put the minimal substitution without introducing the Pauli matrices is not clear. In th Dirac case it's a unique procedure.
 
  • Like
Likes kent davidge

Related Threads on Gravity and Electromagnetism

  • Last Post
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
273
Top