Gravity on the Minkowski spacetime

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on tensor gravitation theories within Minkowski spacetime, emphasizing that these field theories assume matter does not influence the geometry of spacetime. Participants note that despite efforts to differentiate these theories from General Relativity (GR), they often yield the same field equations. Historical references include significant contributions from Poincaré, Birkhoff, Moshinsky, Thirring, Kalman, Feynman, Weinberg, and Deser, highlighting the ongoing debate regarding the physical viability of these theories compared to GR.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensor calculus and its application in physics.
  • Familiarity with General Relativity (GR) principles and equations.
  • Knowledge of Minkowski spacetime and its properties.
  • Awareness of historical developments in gravitational theories, particularly the works of Poincaré and Feynman.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Field Theory of Gravitation (FTG) and its historical context.
  • Explore the implications of tensor gravitation theories on Minkowski spacetime.
  • Study the differences and similarities between field theory gravity and General Relativity.
  • Investigate contemporary papers and sources discussing the limitations of FTG compared to GR.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physicists, researchers in gravitational theories, and students studying advanced concepts in general relativity and field theory.

Altabeh
Messages
657
Reaction score
0
Would someone please provide me with some papers or sources about the tensor gravitation theories on the Minkowski spacetime? They are field theories wherein the matter is supposed to not affect the geometry of spacetime and thus leaving the background spacetime unchangend with respect to the interactions of matter!


Thanks in advance
AB
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Altabeh,

the most recent one I've got is attached. There are references within. Work in this area is discouraging because one always ends up with the same field equations as GR. Some people think there is no difference in the predictions made by field theory gravity and GR, but some disagree.

For the casual reader here is a quote from the introduction

There is a common statement both in scientific publications and popular literature dealing with General Relativity (GR) that geometrical description of gravity is the only logically consistent generalization of the Newtonian classical theory of gravitation. However, a reader, non-aligned to general relativity may put a natural question why it is impossible to consider gravitation in the same way as other physical interactions, i.e. as a quantum field in flat space-time background.
Indeed, such a field approach to gravity has been discussed in the literature and known since the works of Poincar´e in 1905-1906 on the special theory of relativity. The Field Theory of Gravitation (FTG) was considered in classical works of Birkhoff, Moshinsky, Thirring, Kalman, Feynman, Weinberg, and Deser. The history of FTG is full of misleading claims and it demonstrates the hard way of creation and development of scientific ideas.
 

Attachments

Mentz114 said:
Hi Altabeh,

the most recent one I've got is attached. There are references within. Work in this area is discouraging because one always ends up with the same field equations as GR. Some people think there is no difference in the predictions made by field theory gravity and GR, but some disagree.

For the casual reader here is a quote from the introduction

This was very helpful, though I'm not so fond of such theories because it can never be something possible physically, but since they lead to the results of GR one can think they provide a good and simpler framework for the mathematics of GR!

AB
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 230 ·
8
Replies
230
Views
22K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
2K