Model for Gravity -- What mechanism distorts space in the real case?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of gravity and the mechanisms that distort space-time, particularly in the context of General Relativity. Participants explore various models, including the rubber sheet analogy, and question the adequacy of these representations in explaining the underlying physics of gravity.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that General Relativity does not provide a clear mechanism for how mass distorts space-time.
  • Others emphasize that it is space-time, rather than just space, that is distorted.
  • A few participants propose that animations illustrating mass distortion in space-time are not sufficient to define a mechanism scientifically.
  • There is a discussion about the definition of "mechanism," with some suggesting it should involve a mathematical framework that yields measurable outcomes.
  • Participants highlight the challenges of accurately representing Minkowski space-time and the limitations of diagrams in conveying complex concepts.
  • Some express skepticism about the ability of popular science analogies to effectively communicate the intricacies of gravitational phenomena.
  • There is a debate over the nature of paths in space-time, particularly concerning null segments and their representation in diagrams.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the definition of "mechanism" or the adequacy of various models and analogies for explaining gravity. Multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of General Relativity and the representation of space-time.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the ambiguity in defining "mechanism," the reliance on visual aids that may mislead, and the inherent difficulties in representing complex space-time geometries accurately in Euclidean space.

  • #61
PeterDonis said:
These are interesting, but I would make one caution: the "sector model" approach helps to visualize spatial curvature, but that is not the same as spacetime curvature. And the difference can often be quite stark.

For example, consider the black hole example. The "sector models" visualizations show that the spatial curvature around a black hole is positive radially but negative tangentially. However, the spacetime curvature is the opposite: radially it is negative (geodesics diverge) while tangentially it is positive (geodesics converge).

So I think one has to be very careful with such pedagogical methods.
That is an issue, and while the author does explicitly address it, the solution does require a fairly advanced knowledge of special relativity.

To quote from the first paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.0323.pdf

In a spatial sector model a sector is rotated in order to lay it alongside the neighbouring sector. In the spatiotemporal case the rotation is replaced by a Lorentz transformation.

It's a step up from the proposal I often uses, saying that General relativity can be thought of as drawing space-time diagrams on "curved surfaces", going into much more detail about what is meant by a "curved surface". I always give that a very short shrift when I mention it, saying that a sphere is an example of what I mean by a curved surface and not attempting a more general definition.

While the required knowledge of special relativity is a bit advanced, it's IMO more accessible and practical than trying to present differential geometry at the same intermediate level to the same audience.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: robphy

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
15K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 95 ·
4
Replies
95
Views
8K