Is Antigravity Possible with Negative Energy Density Matter?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Anael
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Noob
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of antigravity and the possibility of negative energy density matter. Participants explore theoretical implications, definitions, and the relationship between gravity and mass, as well as the potential for exotic forms of matter that could exhibit antigravitational properties.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the impossibility of antigravity, seeking clarification on the concept and its definitions.
  • One participant suggests that gravity is inherently attractive due to the absence of negative mass, linking this to the properties of gravitons as spin-2 particles.
  • Another participant raises the need for experimental or mathematical proof regarding the non-existence of negative mass.
  • It is proposed that gravity warps space rather than attracting in a manner similar to electromagnetism, with all matter and antimatter affecting space in the same way.
  • Some participants discuss the cosmological constant and its implications for dark energy, suggesting that it could be interpreted as a form of antigravitating energy.
  • One participant introduces the Alcubierre drive concept, noting that it requires exotic forms of matter that violate known energy conditions.
  • Another viewpoint posits that negative energy density could theoretically allow for antigravity effects, where negative energy density matter would repel ordinary matter.
  • There is acknowledgment of the speculative nature of these ideas, with participants expressing uncertainty about the future understanding of these concepts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the possibility of antigravity, with no consensus reached. Some agree on the theoretical framework of gravity and mass, while others propose alternative interpretations involving negative energy density and cosmological constants.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions in the discussion, including the nature of mass, energy conditions, and the implications of the cosmological constant. The discussion remains open-ended regarding the potential for future discoveries that could alter current understandings.

Anael
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi, I am a first year physics student and i was just wondering, why is anti Gravity impossible? (iv'e read it many times without clear explanation). if an anti graviton would exist (IF a graviton) would it have negative mass.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
who has claimed it?
 
What you mean by anti-gravity? Something like a repulsive force as in electromagnetism?

A simple explanation is that gravity is always attractice as there is no "negative mass". In terms of gravitons (which should be massless particles as the range of the force is infinite; or, as the potential is ~1/r) this is due to the fact that gravitons should be spin-2 particles which corresponds to the fact that classical gravitational waves are quadrupol waves. Compare this to electromagnetism: photons are spin-1 particles and el.-mag waves are dipol waves.
 
has it been experimentally or mathematically proven that there is no possibility of a "negative mass"??
 
to understand why there is no possibility of antigravity you have to remember that gravity is mass warping space, not attracting normally as a magnetic field would. All matter and antimatter warps space the same way.
 
ok, that makes a lot of sense thanks :P

just being curious (and stubborn), there is not even a minute possibility that something might warp space differently?? so far in our universe there is no indication to such a thing?
 
as far as i know there has never been the slightest indication of antigravity from a credible source.
 
thats too bad, i already wasted my money on a Delorian :P Lolz
 
there are a lot of assumptions ...

If you look at the cosmological constant you see that it warps space differently which leads to accelarated expansion of the universe - instead of slowed down expansion as you expected for ordinary matter. Now there are attempts to interpret the cosmological constant as "dark energy", which means energy that obeys a rather strange equation of state (you will find phantom energy, Chaplygin gas etc. in the literature).

But this interpretation as "dark energy" is equivalent with "antigravitating energy".
 
  • #10
tom.stoer said:
there are a lot of assumptions ...

If you look at the cosmological constant you see that it warps space differently which leads to accelarated expansion of the universe - instead of slowed down expansion as you expected for ordinary matter. Now there are attempts to interpret the cosmological constant as "dark energy", which means energy that obeys a rather strange equation of state (you will find phantom energy, Chaplygin gas etc. in the literature).

But this interpretation as "dark energy" is equivalent with "antigravitating energy".

interesting, thanks! ill read into that. (here's hoping i can understand 1% :P)
 
  • #11
Anael said:
ok, that makes a lot of sense thanks :P

just being curious (and stubborn), there is not even a minute possibility that something might warp space differently?? so far in our universe there is no indication to such a thing?

People have probably been considering the possibility ever since Einstein wrote down his field equations. In case you're not familiar, in words they say the curvature of spacetime is caused by the distribution of mass, energy, momentum, etc. This is the way we typically think about it: a given distribution of mass (etc.) causes space to curve into some shape.

However, we can imagine looking at it the other way around and asking: what distribution of mass, energy, etc. will produce a given curvature of spacetime? In essence, this is exactly what Alcubierre did when he invented his famous "warp drive", a spacetime which allows objects to travel at many multiples of c (the details aren't important, but suffice it to say that they don't go faster than c locally, but to an outside observer). Unforunately, we also find that to produce such a spacetime geometry, we need highly exotic forms of mass, energy, etc. Specifically, the matter distribution that creates this geometry violates what are known as energy conditions which we believe to be true of our universe (they include things like mass is always positive).

So, people certainly think about it, and it's possible that in the future we may come to understand these subjects better and the energy conditions might not be the final story (some quantum mechanical discoveries already suggest this may be the case).

Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_conditions
 
  • #12
There's a big difference between nullifying gravity and having a propellantless propulsion system. Both ate coloquially referred to as antigravity.

As a physics problem, all you need is a negative energy density.

The "simple" way to visualize this is like so: reverse time. Then gravity becomes repulsive just like electric charge but weaker. If you then have positive energy density and negative energy density you can work out what antigravity would be like. Negative energy-density matter would be repelled by ordinary matter but be attracted to other negative energy density matter.

We don't know how to create matter with a negative energy density.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K