Scalar gravity -Feynman lectures on gravitation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of scalar gravity as presented in Feynman's lectures on gravitation, specifically regarding how the heating or cooling of gas clouds affects their gravitational attraction. Participants explore the implications of scalar fields in gravitational interactions and the differences between scalar, vector, and tensor theories of gravity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions Feynman's claim that the interaction energy in scalar gravity is proportional to \(\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}\) and seeks clarification on the velocity dependence mentioned.
  • Another participant explains that in tensor gravity, the source of the gravitational field is the energy density \(T_{00}\), which changes under Lorentz transformations, affecting the gravitational field strength.
  • A distinction is made between vector and scalar theories of gravity, noting that while vector sources are compensated by volume contraction, scalar sources behave differently due to their Lorentz invariance.
  • One participant seeks further clarification on how volume contraction impacts scalar-mediated interactions, questioning whether it would increase the density of the gravitational source.
  • A follow-up response emphasizes that the change in density is not due to volume contraction but rather due to the nature of the scalar behavior under Lorentz transformations.
  • A participant reflects on their misunderstanding of the term "density" in the context of scalar fields, indicating a need for clearer conceptual distinctions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of scalar gravity and the effects of Lorentz transformations on gravitational sources. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus reached on the interpretation of scalar interactions.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of understanding how different gravitational theories respond to relativistic effects, particularly in terms of density and volume contraction. The nuances of scalar versus tensor and vector theories are acknowledged but not fully resolved.

muppet
Messages
602
Reaction score
0
"scalar gravity" -Feynman lectures on gravitation

Hi all,

I'm trying to understand the following claim from Feynman's lectures on gravitation, section 3.1 (p.30 in my edition). He's considering how heating or cooling two clouds of gas would change their mutual gravitational attraction.

Feynman said:
Electric forces are unchanged by random motions of the particles. Now the interaction energy is proportional to the expectation value of [itex]\gamma=1/\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}[/itex]. Since the resulting potential is not velocity dependent the proportionality factor must go as [itex]\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}[/itex]. This means that the interaction energy resulting from the operator 1, corresponding to a scalar field, must go as [itex]\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}[/itex]. This means that the spin-zero theory predicts that the attraction between masses of hot gas would be less than that for cool gas.

I don't understand this statement. The electric scalar potential is the time component of a four vector which gets dotted into another four vector, so that the resulting physics is invariant. I don't see anything in the expression for a Yukawa potential that I can identify with the velocity dependence he's talking about. Can someone please explain?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In tensor gravity the source of the field is T00, the 00 component of a rank 2 tensor. Under a Lorentz transformation, T00 → γ2 T00. But in the meanwhile, the volume element contracts, d3x → (1/γ) d3x. So the integrated source M = ∫ T00 d3x → γ M grows only as one factor of γ. Thus for tensor gravity the source of the gravitational field is the total energy, or "relativistic" mass, which grows with velocity like γ.

(Be clear that we are talking about random internal velocities, whose directions average out, not an overall velocity of the object.)

A vector theory of gravity would be like electromagnetism, in which the source density is J0, the 0th component of a vector. Under a Lorentz transformation, J0 grows like J0 → γ J0. But this is exactly compensated by the contraction of the volume element, and so the source of the gravitational field in this case is independent of internal velocities, just like the total electric charge is.

For a scalar theory of gravity, the source density is a scalar, presumably the trace of the stress-energy tensor, and is a Lorentz invariant. But the volume contraction is still present to contribute a (1/γ), and so the effective total strength of the source will decrease with increasing internal velocities.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thanks for your reply. How exactly is the volume contraction affecting the scalar mediated interaction? If the source of the gravitational field were some sort of scalar density to which the putative scalar graviton coupled, wouldn't the lorentz contraction of the volume increase the density?
 
muppet said:
Thanks for your reply. How exactly is the volume contraction affecting the scalar mediated interaction? If the source of the gravitational field were some sort of scalar density to which the putative scalar graviton coupled, wouldn't the lorentz contraction of the volume increase the density?
The same way it does in the other two cases. Did you understand the argument for tensor and vector gravity?

The density is not changing because it is being squeezed! :eek: It is changing due to its own behavior under a Lorentz transformation.
 
Hmm. I think I may have been putting too much emphasis on the word "density" (thinking of it as the amount of some stuff per volume, which by definition would appear to increase to a relatively moving observer) and not enough on the word "scalar" :redface:

Thanks for your help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K