Orbital period decay and gravitational waves

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the decay of the orbital period of binary stars due to gravitational wave emission, exploring the nature of energy loss in the system and the characteristics of gravitational waves. Participants examine whether the energy loss is primarily kinetic, potential, or a combination of both, and delve into the implications of gravitational waves on other objects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the energy loss from binary stars is a combination of kinetic and potential energy, with potential energy becoming more negative and kinetic energy increasing.
  • There is a question about whether potential and kinetic energy components can be discerned in gravitational waves themselves, with some suggesting that the energy loss may not directly correlate to gravitational effects on other objects.
  • One participant argues that gravitational waves do not cause gravitational motion toward the source, describing the interaction with a dust sphere as an elliptical motion in perpendicular directions.
  • Another participant challenges the notion that gravitational waves are not gravitational, explaining that they are ripples in space-time and still involve gravitational interactions, albeit in a complex manner.
  • There is a discussion about the production of gravitational waves, emphasizing that changes in matter configurations propagate as ripples in space-time, which can lead to the emission of gravitational waves.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of gravitational waves and their effects, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved regarding the characterization of energy loss and the behavior of gravitational waves.

Contextual Notes

Some claims about the nature of gravitational waves and their interactions with matter are not fully substantiated, and there are unresolved questions regarding the definitions of potential and kinetic energy in this context.

Ranku
Messages
434
Reaction score
18
We know that the orbital period of binary stars decay due to the emission of gravity waves that carry away energy from the system. What is the form of the energy loss of the system: kinetic energy or potential energy?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Ranku said:
We know that the orbital period of binary stars decay due to the emission of gravity waves that carry away energy from the system. What is the form of the energy loss of the system: kinetic energy or potential energy?
It's a combination of the two. The potential energy becomes more negative, while the kinetic energy increases.
 
Chalnoth said:
It's a combination of the two. The potential energy becomes more negative, while the kinetic energy increases.

Can we discern potential and kinetic energy components in the gravitational waves themselves?
When gravitational waves impact an object, say a dust sphere, the effect is not gravitational. That would seem to suggest there is no potential energy component in the gravitational waves themselves, even though the energy loss of the source of gravitational waves may well be a combination of potential and kinetic energy.
 
Ranku said:
Can we discern potential and kinetic energy components in the gravitational waves themselves?
I'm not sure that question makes a whole lot of sense. The essential thing is that they transport energy away from the binary system, and can, in principle, deposit that energy elsewhere.

Ranku said:
When gravitational waves impact an object, say a dust sphere, the effect is not gravitational.
What do you mean the effect is not gravitational?
 
Chalnoth said:
What do you mean the effect is not gravitational?

When gravitational waves impact a dust sphere, it alternately ellipses in perpendicular directions transverse to the direction of the waves. Gravitational waves do not cause gravitational motion of the dust sphere toward the source of the gravity waves.

Indeed not only are gravity waves not gravitational, primordial gravity waves could actually be repulsive! http://arxiv.org/abs/0909.1922v1
 
Ranku said:
When gravitational waves impact a dust sphere, it alternately ellipses in perpendicular directions transverse to the direction of the waves. Gravitational waves do not cause gravitational motion of the dust sphere toward the source of the gravity waves.

Indeed not only are gravity waves not gravitational, primordial gravity waves could actually be repulsive! http://arxiv.org/abs/0909.1922v1
That's not a statement that they're not gravitational. I don't think anybody who studied General Relativity would even begin to think that gravity waves should cause matter to be attracted to a source.

Gravity waves are basically ripples in the fabric of space-time. Part of the gravity wave will be space-time that is sort of squeezed, while another part will be sort of stretched. There is no net curvature to a gravity wave. They're still gravitational in the sense that they are gravity acting on matter. It's just not in an overly-simplistic way.

The basic idea of how gravity waves are produced is this:
Imagine you have some configuration of matter. We could be talking about a solar system, or a galaxy, or just an amorphous blob of dust. The specific bit of matter we're considering is irrelevant.

Now, this bit of matter undergoes a change, for whatever reason (say, a large collision, such as between two black holes). It is impossible for a change in the configuration of this matter to propagate faster than light, and so the gravitational field away from the bit of matter cannot respond instantly to the change. What happens is that the effect of the change ripples outward from the source, until the space-time settles down to match the new configuration. But some of those ripples keep going, and become free-flowing gravitational waves.

Granted, it's not quite as simple as this. Space-time has no trouble keeping up with some sorts of changes to the distribution of matter fields. For example, the gravity wave emission from the Earth-Sun system is completely and utterly negligible. The potential well of the Earth basically moves along with the Earth, and isn't left behind just because the Earth is moving.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
7K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K