Speed of an electromagnetic wave and gravity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the propagation of gravitational influences compared to electromagnetic forces, particularly in the context of General Relativity (GR) and gravitational waves. Participants explore the implications of turning off these forces and the expected delays in their influence on objects, as well as the status and expectations surrounding gravitational wave detection and related experiments like LIGO and the LHC.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that when an electromagnet's power is cut, the influenced object continues to accelerate briefly due to the finite speed of electromagnetic wave propagation.
  • Another participant states that GR predicts gravitational disturbances also propagate at the speed of light, but notes that this prediction lacks empirical testing.
  • Concerns are raised about the effectiveness of LIGO in detecting gravitational waves, with one participant expressing disappointment over delays and the lack of direct results.
  • Participants discuss the indirect evidence for gravitational waves while acknowledging that direct tests of their propagation speed remain unverified.
  • There are inquiries about the status of the LHC and its ability to detect smaller particles, with some expressing skepticism about the timeline for significant discoveries.
  • Speculation arises regarding the potential for LIGO to produce real data from significant gravitational wave events in the future.
  • Philosophical reflections on the nature of existence and knowledge are interspersed throughout the technical discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of skepticism and hope regarding the detection of gravitational waves and the capabilities of LIGO and the LHC. There is no consensus on the effectiveness or timeline of these experiments, and multiple competing views on the implications of gravitational wave propagation remain evident.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in empirical testing of gravitational wave propagation and the challenges faced by experimental setups like LIGO and the LHC, but do not resolve these issues.

PhanthomJay
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
7,201
Reaction score
527
Suppose a strong electromagnet is attracting a metal object and accelerating it towards the magnet. Suddenly, the power to the magnet is shut off. I presume that the object continues to accelerate for a very very brief period before moving at constant speed, because the electromagnetic wave can only travel at light speed, and thus, the influence of the magnet on the object cannot be instantaneous. Now maybe the definition of simultaneity makes this assumption invalid, but my real question is, supposing I reword the question to read 'a strong gravity field is attracting the object, and suddenly, the gravity field is shut off...". Are the results of its influence on the object the same as the electromagnetic force, in terms of the time delay of its influence on the object?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
PhanthomJay said:
Are the results of its influence on the object the same as the electromagnetic force, in terms of the time delay of its influence on the object?

Yes, GR predicts that small-amplitude disturbances in the gravitational field propagate at c, although this century-old prediction has never been successfully subjected to an empirical test. More info here: http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/genrel/ch09/ch09.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bcrowell said:
Yes, GR predicts that small-amplitude disturbances in the gravitational field propagate at c, although this century-old prediction has never been successfully subjected to an empirical test.
Thanks for the response, makes sense. But whatever happened to that LIGO unit that was supposed to detect gravity waves? I thought we'd have some answers by now, wasn't it several years ago when it went on-line? Also, what if there is no such thing as a gravity wave...then how can it propagate at any speed? And then , how could you turn off a gravity field anyway, since that would require the destruction of mass, which is impossible? And while I'm on a roll with questions, what about that Hadron collider that was supposed to detect particles smaller than quarks, gravitons, maybe even create mini black holes (?)..what's that thing doing for my money??
 
LIGO wasn't really expected to get a positive result. The next generation might. There is lots of indirect evidence for gravitational waves, as described at the link in #2. There just hasn't been a direct test of propagation at c.
 
bcrowell said:
LIGO wasn't really expected to get a positive result. The next generation might.
So I've waited for what is it 10 years now,for it to tell me something, with all its hype, and now I'll probably be long gone before it does. What a pity.
There is lots of indirect evidence for gravitational waves, as described at the link in #2. There just hasn't been a direct test of propagation at c.
Thanks. Now what about that LHC collider. What's it doing these days??
 
PhanthomJay said:
Thanks. Now what about that LHC collider. What's it doing these days??

Wiki says the following happened on 28 Feb 2010:

The LHC continues operations ramping energies to run at 3.5 TeV for 18 months to two years, after which it will be shut down to prepare for the 14 TeV collisions (7 TeV per beam).

Unfortunately the glitch in the system has been a great disappointment to all the physics community because it's postponed everything to almost one and a half year later so the operations are still behind the schedule!

AB
 
Altabeh said:
Wiki says the following happened on 28 Feb 2010:

The LHC continues operations ramping energies to run at 3.5 TeV for 18 months to two years, after which it will be shut down to prepare for the 14 TeV collisions (7 TeV per beam).

Unfortunately the glitch in the system has been a great disappointment to all the physics community because it's postponed everything to almost one and a half year later so the operations are still behind the schedule!

AB
Thanks, nothing happens overnight, that's for sure. See you in 2012..2013...2014...2xxx?. I guess we should have expected that something would go wrong; it's not easy unlocking the Secret of the Nothingness, within which all answers lie. Pure conjecture upon my part, but until something or someone tells me differently, I firmly believe that all that is, and all that is not, are one and the same...
 
PhanthomJay said:
So I've waited for what is it 10 years now,for it to tell me something, with all its hype, and now I'll probably be long gone before it does. What a pity.

Why so soon? :confused:

Read the abstract of

https://dcc.ligo.org/public/0001/P080127/001/P080127-02.pdf.

From the abstract: "Advanced LIGO is expected to make several gravitational wave detections per year."

From the body of the article: "Construction of Advanced LIGO subsystems has already begun and installation and commissioning will commence at the LIGO sites after S6, in 2011, with the goal of having first data collection as soon as 2014."

These dates are probably somewhat optimistic, but, even allowing for delays, it seems the next decade will be an interesting time.
 
George Jones said:
Why so soon? :confused:

..From the abstract: "Advanced LIGO is expected to make several gravitational wave detections per year."

From the body of the article: "Construction of Advanced LIGO subsystems has already begun and installation and commissioning will commence at the LIGO sites after S6, in 2011, with the goal of having first data collection as soon as 2014."

These dates are probably somewhat optimistic, but, even allowing for delays, it seems the next decade will be an interesting time.
Well that's good news, thanks, I hope I have 10 good years left...don't we all... and thanks for the article.
 
  • #10
PhanthomJay said:
Well that's good news, thanks, I hope I have 10 good years left...don't we all... and thanks for the article.

Well, if you believe in an afterlife, you can still learn. If you believe in no afterlife, then you won't care. Either way you're not losing.
 
  • #11
Frame Dragger said:
Well, if you believe in an afterlife, you can still learn. If you believe in no afterlife, then you won't care. Either way you're not losing.
Ahh, the 'win-win" scenario...I feel better already,thanks!
 
  • #12
PhanthomJay said:
Ahh, the 'win-win" scenario...I feel better already,thanks!

Yeah, that's how my father tried to comfort me when I first confronted a fear of death as a kid. As I remember I simply became more hysterical. :wink: It's good to see the magic still endures.

All kidding aside, I think LIGO stands to produce real data, and if an 'event' occurs which produces LARGE g-waves... who knows? Maybe we'll turn on LISA and *BAM*, lousy with gravitational waves. :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K