Inertial observers explanation for unruh thermalization

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter T S Bailey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Explanation Inertial
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Unruh effect, specifically the differing perceptions of thermalization between an accelerating observer and an inertial observer. Participants explore the implications of quantum mechanics and special relativity on these observations, addressing the nature of energy and particle detection in different frames of reference.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the accelerating observer detects a thermal bath while the inertial observer perceives a vacuum, raising questions about the origin of energy in this scenario.
  • Others challenge the assertion that the inertial observer would not see the thermal bath, suggesting that energy states are frame-dependent due to the nature of the Hamiltonian in quantum mechanics.
  • A participant introduces the idea of using an inertial frame that is momentarily co-moving with the accelerating observer to study accelerated frames, implying a potential resolution to the perceived discrepancies.
  • Another participant mentions Rindler coordinates and discusses the relationship between increased entropy for the accelerating observer and the thermal bath phenomenon.
  • Some contributions reference the Unruh effect and its implications on particle detection, noting that the inertial observer might see a particle emitted from the detector while the detector absorbs an antiparticle.
  • A participant elaborates on the process of energy transfer between the detector and the quantum field, suggesting that the thermalization process involves complex interactions that differ between observers.
  • One participant concludes that the energy ultimately comes from the source causing the acceleration of the detector.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion contains multiple competing views regarding the observations of the inertial and accelerating observers, and no consensus is reached on the implications of the Unruh effect or the nature of energy transfer in this context.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the definitions and implications of energy states in different frames, and the discussion highlights the complexity of translating observations between inertial and accelerated frames without resolving these issues.

T S Bailey
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Imagine two observers, one accelerating and one inertial. The accelerating observer detects a thermal bath whereas the inertial observer detects a vacuum. I would imagine that this hot gas would thermalize the accelerating observers spaceship, but how does the inertial observer reconcile this? They saw no such gas, so what is the origin of the energy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Why do you say that the inertial observer would not see the thermal bath?
 
Geofleur said:
Why do you say that the inertial observer would not see the thermal bath?
Because in quantum mechanics energy states are defined by a hamiltonian which is dependent on a time coordinate. But in special relativity Lorentz transformations only work for inertial frames, there is no way to transform to an accelerated frame. Since they don't share a time coordinate the observed energy for the vacuum will be different for an accelerating observer, ie the hamiltonian for each frame is different and so different quantum states are observed.
 
There is, in fact, a way to use special relativity to study accelerated frames. Choose an inertial frame that is instantaneously traveling at the same velocity as the spaceship. There will then be a Lorentz transformation relating time in the first inertial frame to that in the momentarily co-moving inertial frame.
 
Geofleur said:
There is, in fact, a way to use special relativity to study accelerated frames. Choose an inertial frame that is instantaneously traveling at the same velocity as the spaceship. There will then be a Lorentz transformation relating time in the first inertial frame to that in the momentarily co-moving inertial frame.
It sounds like you're talking about Rindler coordinates which has the same effect. In this case I believe the problem is that, since a greatly accelerating observer has less available information (their light cone has diminished), there has been a corresponding increase in entropy. This increased entropy is then invoked as the reason for the thermal bath.
 
It seems that you are describing the Unruh effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_effect), which I had not heard of before! Ah, I see it in the question title... erg. Maybe someone else can shed some light on this - I'm still learning QFT.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: T S Bailey
Did you read the very first thread that comes up when searching PF for "Unruh"? It's fairly enlightening.
The general idea is that the inertial observer sees a particle being emitted from the accelerated detector, while the accelerated detector hits an antiparticle.
The Unruh effect is certainly a fascinating subject, with many interesting aspects, most notably what does a "particle" even mean.
 
SlowThinker said:
Did you read the very first thread that comes up when searching PF for "Unruh"? It's fairly enlightening.
The general idea is that the inertial observer sees a particle being emitted from the accelerated detector, while the accelerated detector hits an antiparticle.
The Unruh effect is certainly a fascinating subject, with many interesting aspects, most notably what does a "particle" even mean.
I will check it out.
 
T S Bailey said:
I would imagine that this hot gas would thermalize the accelerating observers spaceship, but how does the inertial observer reconcile this?

Suppose the accelerating detector detects a particle from the hot gas. This means that the detector undergoes a state transition: heuristically, it gains a quantum of energy from the quantum field (by absorbing the detected particle). But that means the quantum field must also undergo a state transition; heuristically, it must lose a quantum of energy corresponding to the energy absorbed by the detector.

To an inertial observer, this process will look like the detector is emitting a particle into the vacuum. In other words, to an inertial observer, the detector will lose a quantum of energy (but "energy" is now defined according to the inertial observer's time translation symmetry), and the field will gain one. So the quantum field will no longer be a vacuum; it will have a particle in it, emitted by the detector.

The thermalization of the accelerating detector by the hot gas will just be the total effect of a lot of these processes; assuming that the detector starts out at zero temperature, according to the accelerated observer, it will gradually heat up by absorbing particles from the hot gas, and the gas will cool down as it loses particles to the detector. They will eventually equilibrate at some intermediate state where the detector has absorbed a bunch of particles, and the quantum field has changed state to one containing that many fewer particles.

To an inertial observer, this process will look like the detector is cooling down--losing energy by emitting particles--while the quantum field is heating up--gaining energy by changing state from the vacuum to one containing a bunch of particles.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: T S Bailey
  • #10
T S Bailey said:
They saw no such gas, so what is the origin of the energy?

Ultimately, it's coming from the energy that is causing the detector to accelerate.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: T S Bailey

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K