Negative potential energy and negative mass

In summary: No matter how far apart I move the objects it will always require the addition of more energy to move them farther apart; so the potential energy at infinity is always greater than the energy at any finite distance, no matter how large. Thus, if...In summary, gravitational potential energy is normally negative because Ep = -G•M•m/r. This means that a system consisting of two widely separated objects will have a slightly greater mass than if the same two objects were close together.
  • #71
DrStupid said:
That sounds like we could get an answer this way but it would be limited to a Cauchy surface that includes your initial conditions.

No, it isn't. Data specified on a Cauchy surface is sufficient to determine the entire spacetime geometry.

DrStupid said:
That's what I mean with "static".

As PAllen said, that is not the correct definition of "static". The class of spacetimes that have a Cauchy surface includes many spacetimes which are not static, or even stationary.

Hawking & Ellis lays all of this out in detail. It is advanced, but definitely worth reading if you want to understand the most general theorems we have on global properties of spacetimes.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
DrStupid said:
What makes you sure that the external field can be sitched off gradually without letting the objects moving too fast and emitting gravitational waves?

It doesn't matter what happened in the past to create the condition described. There could have been waves created.

I was addressing your objection that the scenario required instantaneous switching by describing one way in which it didn't.
 

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
28
Views
507
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
875
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
36
Views
592
Replies
1
Views
901
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
875
  • Special and General Relativity
4
Replies
125
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
446
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top