Testing Einstein's Theory: Examining Light Deviation by Gravity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the deviation of light by gravity as tested by Eddington during an eclipse, specifically comparing predictions from classical Newtonian physics and Einstein's theory of general relativity. Participants explore the implications of light's behavior under gravitational influence, addressing both theoretical and conceptual aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why classical physics predicts any deviation of light by gravity, asking if light had mass in classical physics and how that was estimated.
  • Another participant explains that Newton's law of gravity, combined with the particle-like nature of light (using Planck's constant), leads to a prediction of light's deviation, but this results in an incorrect factor of two when compared to Einstein's predictions.
  • A different perspective suggests that light does not need to be assigned mass to predict its Newtonian acceleration, positing that light behaves similarly to other objects under gravity.
  • It is noted that Einstein's theory introduces an additional factor affecting the coordinate acceleration, resulting in a doubled deflection for light compared to classical predictions.
  • One participant introduces the idea of separating the classical and relativistic contributions to light's curvature, referencing the historical context of Eddington's experiment and Einstein's evolving understanding of gravity.
  • Another participant reiterates that mass does not need to be assigned to light for Newtonian predictions, discussing the implications of massless particles in gravitational contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of assigning mass to light in classical physics and the implications of Newtonian versus relativistic predictions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best framework for understanding light's behavior under gravity.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made about light's mass and its treatment under gravitational laws, particularly regarding the applicability of Newtonian mechanics to massless particles.

SimonB
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hi

I am reading a popular physics book. It discusses the test of Einsteins theory by Eddington at the eclipse. "The deviation of the light was double that predicted by Newton's physics"

Why does classical physics predict any deviation of light by gravity, did light have a mass in classical physics and if so how was it estimated (to allow for the deviation to be predicted)?

Many thanks in advance

Simon
 
Physics news on Phys.org
He meant Newton's law of gravity combined with the idea that light consists of particles with energy equal to Plancks constant times the frequency, and that you can define a "mass" of such a particle by setting [itex]h\nu=mc^2[/itex]. If you use Newton's law of gravity with this mass, you get the wrong result by a factor of two.
 
Fredrik said:
He meant Newton's law of gravity combined with the idea that light consists of particles with energy equal to Plancks constant times the frequency, and that you can define a "mass" of such a particle by setting [itex]h\nu=mc^2[/itex]. If you use Newton's law of gravity with this mass, you get the wrong result by a factor of two.

You don't have to assign any mass to light to predict its Newtonian acceleration; you just assume that light in a beam accelerates in the same way as anything else.

Einstein's theory introduces an extra factor of (1+v2/c2) into the coordinate acceleration in this case, which means that the deflection is doubled for light and similarly increased for anything else moving at relativistic speeds.
 
Thank you, very clear (now!)
 
Another way to think about curvature of light: half is classical (per Newtons laws) and the other half is relativistic due to the curvature of space and time itself.

Had Eddington's experiment been conducted a few years earlier, Einstein's career might have suffered a major blow since he originally predicted the classical degree of curvature and only later when working general relativity discovered an additional amount. Dr Kaku just mentioned this on a 2 hour TV show now airing "EINSTEIN"...HISTORY CHANNEL I believe.
 
Jonathan Scott said:
You don't have to assign any mass to light to predict its Newtonian acceleration; you just assume that light in a beam accelerates in the same way as anything else.
I actually forgot that that when we're dealing with gravity we can eliminate the mass simply by dividing both sides of F=ma with m. But we can't divide with m when m=0, so we have have to assume either that m>0 or that there's a law of gravity for massless particles that works in this particular way.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
5K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
16K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K