Light Beams Attraction: e=mc^2 & Asymmetry

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interaction between two beams of light in a vacuum, particularly focusing on whether they attract each other and how their frequencies affect this interaction. It touches on concepts from special relativity (SR) and general relativity (GR), exploring the implications of relativistic mass and energy density in the context of gravitational effects on light beams.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that two beams of light are attracted to each other due to their relativistic mass, as indicated by the mass-energy equivalence formula e=mc^2.
  • Others argue that the application of special relativity concepts to general relativity is problematic, noting that light beams traveling parallel do not attract each other, while those traveling in opposite directions do.
  • A participant mentions that the source of gravity in GR is the stress-energy tensor, which includes energy and pressure, and that for parallel light beams, these effects cancel out.
  • It is suggested that the attraction between non-parallel beams is proportional to the product of their energies and pressures, rather than one beam bending more than the other.
  • A later reply questions the meaning of "symmetrical" in the context of the interaction between beams of different frequencies, implying a dependence on the chosen coordinate system.
  • One participant expresses curiosity about the implications of these interactions, questioning whether a powerful laser beam could be diverted by a less powerful one based on the discussed effects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of the attraction between light beams, with multiple competing views regarding the effects of frequency and the relevance of relativistic mass versus energy in gravitational interactions.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the coordinate systems and the definitions of energy and pressure in the context of GR. The discussion also highlights unresolved mathematical steps related to the attraction between beams of different frequencies.

c704710
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Appearently, two beams of light in a vacuum are attracted to each other. Photons have no Newtonian mass, but their relativistic mass (e=mc^2 or mass-energy equivalence) causes this (as is my understanding). So will a 10^4 Hz beam bend more towards a 10^20 Hz beam than the 10^20 Hz bends towards the 10^4 Hz beam? After all, e=mc^2 indicates the 10^20 Hz beam has more relativistic mass doesn't it? However, if they equally bend, why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are applying special relativity concepts to GR. In GR, the problem you pose is not simple. For example, are you aware that two beams of light traveling in the same direction do not attract, while if traveling in opposite directions they do? Note that relativistic mass is a dubious construct in SR, and has no relevance whatsoever for gravity (GR).

Published research I've seen using GR uses identical beams. However, one thing to note is that there is always a frame of reference where the beams have equal energy density. One may then state that deflection is equal such coordinates.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Pyter
c704710 said:
two beams of light in a vacuum are attracted to each other

Only if they are not moving parallel to each other. See below.

c704710 said:
Photons have no Newtonian mass, but their relativistic mass (e=mc^2 or mass-energy equivalence) causes this (as is my understanding)

The source of gravity in GR is the stress-energy tensor. This includes energy (what you are calling "relativistic mass", but it's better to just call it energy), but also pressure (and other stresses, but pressure is the relevant one here).

It turns out that, for light beams moving parallel to each other, the effects of energy and pressure exactly cancel, so the beams don't attract each other at all. For light beams moving antiparallel, the effects of energy and pressure add, and the actual attraction between them turns out to be four times what you would expect based on the energy alone.

c704710 said:
will a 10^4 Hz beam bend more towards a 10^20 Hz beam than the 10^20 Hz bends towards the 10^4 Hz beam?

The attraction (for beams not parallel to each other--see above) is proportional to the product of the beam energies (and pressures, see above), so it's not really a question of which one "bends more".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Pyter and stoomart
Thank you for the information concerning the parallelism of the beams. I was unaware of that and the 4 times effect as well. So I _think_ my question was answered. The result is a shared effect of the beams rather the each beam effecting the other? Therefore symmetrical regardless of asymmetric frequencies?

This means a 14 TeV laser beam can be diverted with a pocket laser!?
 
c704710 said:
Therefore symmetrical

What does "symmetrical" mean? I think you will find that you are implicitly adopting a particular coordinate system.
 
c704710 said:
Thank you for the information concerning the parallelism of the beams. I was unaware of that and the 4 times effect as well. So I _think_ my question was answered. The result is a shared effect of the beams rather the each beam effecting the other? Therefore symmetrical regardless of asymmetric frequencies?

This means a 14 TeV laser beam can be diverted with a pocket laser!?
Note that in a frame moving near c in the direction of powerful laser, the two beams have equal energy due to Doppler. The description of deflection in these coordinates is symmetric. Then, a Lorentz transform gets you the description in any other frame.

Specifically, if the power ratio in one frame is r > 1, then the fraction of lightspeed needed to equalize the power is (r-1)/(r+1) in the direction of the more powerful beam.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 125 ·
5
Replies
125
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K