I Quasi-local mass as a measure of the gravitational energy?

Steve Rogers
Messages
9
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
How can we talk about the gravitational energy without considering it as a force field?
I'm self-studying the mathematical aspects of quasi-local mass, or quasi-local energy (e.g. Hawking energy), and a fundamental question has been lingering in my mind for a long time: why does quasi-local mass provide us with a measure of the gravitational energy? In general relativity, gravitation is seen as a consequence of the curved spacetime instead of a force in classical mechanics. If so, how can we talk about its energy without considering it as a force field? Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Steve Rogers said:
quasi-local mass, or quasi-local energy
Please give a specific reference for where you are getting this from. Without a specific reference we do not have a valid basis for discussion.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, Steve Rogers and Vanadium 50
PeterDonis said:
Please give a specific reference for where you are getting this from. Without a specific reference we do not have a valid basis for discussion.
Hello, a quick reference for this topic can be found on arXiv, as follows.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1510.02931

I guess the term "quasi-local mass" is more familiar to people working on mathematical relativity or mathematical physics, such as Shing-Tung Yau and Robert Geroch.

Thank you for replying.
 
Steve Rogers said:
a quick reference for this topic can be found on arXiv, as follows.
Thanks for the reference. Can you point out which particular part of it is the basis for your question?

Steve Rogers said:
why does quasi-local mass provide us with a measure of the gravitational energy?
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top