I Gravity of the Sun: Einstein's Calculation and Beyond

Nik_2213
Messages
1,218
Reaction score
493
IIRC, the Sun's gravity was calculated by Einstein et-al to provide a 'focus' about 550 AU out. Current value is ~542 AU.
Aside from effects due solar oblateness, frame dragging etc, may I assume this value also applies to eg neutrinos, gravitational waves etc etc ??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes and no.

The calculation is for rays grazing the Sun, and I would expect that neutrinos and gravitational waves grazing the same surface would focus at the same distance, give or take a small bit. But gravitational lenses are terrible lenses, and the focal distance depends very much on the distance of the ray from the Sun center at perihelion. And I suspect the Sun is transparent to neutrinos for some depth below where it becomes opaque to light. And it's transparent to gravitational waves right through. So you may well be able to find focuses for them closer to the Sun.

Note that we don't have good enough neutrino or gravitational wave astronomy instruments to test anything like gravitational lensing of these things, so this is purely theoretical at this stage. We've no reason to doubt it works, but it hasn't been tested.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes topsquark, Dale and Nik_2213
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...
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top