- #1

zonde

Gold Member

- 2,961

- 224

- TL;DR Summary
- I am trying to analyze the idea of "potential energy as a property of field".

I will quote this statement from another thread:

For the sake of my questions let's say we limit GR to Schwarzschild spacetime and if there are problems with gravitational potential energy we can associate it with factual binding energy.

There is a thing that potential energy of bound bodies is negative. So as I see it this negative energy can be interpreted as absence of other energy (rest mass/energy). Alternative would be to consider this negative mass/energy as independent physical phenomena with antigravitating effect. This alternative seems to me much more radical with very unclear way how to incorporate it into some usable physical model.

And so if we think of this absent energy of bound bodies as property of field then (rejecting the alternative interpretation of antigravitating mass/energy) it implies that

So that's the question. Do you accept that implication? The argumentation seems quite simple to me.

In that thread number of other posters seemed to agree with this statement. So I tried to analyze it a bit.Ibix said:Gravitational potential energy (to the extent it can be defined in relativity) isn't a property of the body, but of its interaction with the gravitational field. It's very difficult to pin down "where" gravitational energy is, but you can loosely think of it as a property of the field rather than the body.

So the total energy of the body is higher when it's moving relative to a hovering observer than when it isn't. Probably best not to think of that as mass, though, since GR is formulated in terms of invariants.

For the sake of my questions let's say we limit GR to Schwarzschild spacetime and if there are problems with gravitational potential energy we can associate it with factual binding energy.

There is a thing that potential energy of bound bodies is negative. So as I see it this negative energy can be interpreted as absence of other energy (rest mass/energy). Alternative would be to consider this negative mass/energy as independent physical phenomena with antigravitating effect. This alternative seems to me much more radical with very unclear way how to incorporate it into some usable physical model.

And so if we think of this absent energy of bound bodies as property of field then (rejecting the alternative interpretation of antigravitating mass/energy) it implies that

__the rest mass/energy is property of field as well__because negative potential energy does not exist by itself but only as an absence of rest mass/energy that was there, before bound state formed.So that's the question. Do you accept that implication? The argumentation seems quite simple to me.