Scalar gravity -Feynman lectures on gravitation

In summary, Feynman's lectures on gravitation discuss the effect of heating or cooling two clouds of gas on their mutual gravitational attraction. In scalar gravity, the interaction energy resulting from a scalar field is proportional to \sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}, meaning that the attraction between masses of hot gas would be less than that for cool gas. This is due to the volume contraction that occurs under a Lorentz transformation. In tensor gravity, the source of the gravitational field is the total energy, or "relativistic" mass, which grows with velocity like \gamma. In vector gravity, the source of the gravitational field is independent of internal velocities. The volume contraction affects the density of the source in all three cases,
  • #1
muppet
608
1
"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
  • #2
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 1 person
  • #3
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?
 
  • #4
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.
 
  • #5
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.
 

What is "scalar gravity"?

Scalar gravity is a theory proposed by Richard Feynman in his lectures on gravitation. It suggests that gravity is not a fundamental force, but rather an illusion caused by the curvature of spacetime.

How does scalar gravity differ from other theories of gravity?

Unlike other theories of gravity, which involve the exchange of particles, scalar gravity proposes that gravity is caused by the distortion of space and time itself. This is known as the "geometric theory of gravity."

What evidence supports the concept of scalar gravity?

There is currently no direct evidence for scalar gravity. However, some scientists have suggested that it may help to explain certain phenomena, such as the accelerating expansion of the universe and the rotation curves of galaxies.

Are there any criticisms of scalar gravity?

Yes, there are several criticisms of scalar gravity. Some scientists argue that it is not a complete theory and cannot fully explain all observed phenomena. Others believe that it is too simplistic and does not take into account the complexities of gravity.

Is scalar gravity currently accepted by the scientific community?

No, scalar gravity is still a theoretical concept and has not been widely accepted by the scientific community. It is still being studied and debated, and more evidence is needed to determine its validity as a theory of gravity.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
654
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
505
Replies
33
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
946
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
692
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top