Trying to understand linear frame dragging

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of linear frame dragging in the context of gravitational interactions, particularly how it affects small masses in proximity to a large mass. Participants explore theoretical implications, analogies with electromagnetism, and the conditions under which linear frame dragging might be observable.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that linear frame dragging is associated with an accelerating source mass and produces a small component of acceleration in the same direction as the source mass.
  • Others suggest that while linear frame dragging is theoretically interesting, it may be difficult to detect due to the dominance of static gravitational fields.
  • A participant notes that rotational frame dragging is more commonly discussed, while linear frame dragging might be modeled using hypothetical scenarios like cosmic strings.
  • One participant introduces a comparison to electromagnetism, suggesting that linear frame dragging has an analogy in the dA/dt component of the electric field.
  • Another participant questions the interpretation of linear frame dragging and seeks agreement on its effects on small masses.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between linear frame dragging and inertia, referencing Dennis Sciama's paper on the origin of inertia and Mach's Principle.
  • Some participants clarify that linear frame dragging would accelerate small-mass objects in the direction of the large mass's acceleration, not necessarily its direction of travel.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications and detectability of linear frame dragging, with no consensus reached on its effects or the validity of the interpretations presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge that the gravitational constant G is fixed in General Relativity, which complicates the relationship between the effects of individual accelerations and the overall behavior of objects in a gravitational field.

jaketodd
Gold Member
Messages
507
Reaction score
21
See "linear frame dragging" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame-dragging
Two small masses, initially the same distance from a large mass. One of the small masses has a propulsion system that keeps it at a constant distance from the large mass. The other small mass has no propulsion system and falls toward the oncoming large mass. Do both objects experience linear frame dragging? If not, which one does? What effect does the linear frame dragging have on the small mass(es)?

Thanks,

Jake
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jaketodd said:
See "linear frame dragging" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame-dragging
Two small masses, initially the same distance from a large mass. One of the small masses has a propulsion system that keeps it at a constant distance from the large mass. The other small mass has no propulsion system and falls toward the oncoming large mass. Do both objects experience linear frame dragging? If not, which one does? What effect does the linear frame dragging have on the small mass(es)?

Thanks,

Jake

As far as I know, linear frame dragging is related to an accelerating source mass (with changing momentum), and produces a tiny component of acceleration in the same direction. As any gravitational source will produce a much larger acceleration due to the static field, it is very difficult to construct a set-up in which this component might be detectable.

If you look at the approximate analogy with electromagnetism, the usual gravitational field corresponds to the grad phi component of the E field, the linear frame dragging corresponds to the dA/dt component of the E field and the rotational frame dragging corresponds to the curl A = B field. In this (somewhat misleadingly simplified) model the gravitational equivalent of the vector potential A is effectively Gmv/r where v is the velocity, so it is like the potential due to the momentum.
 
Rotational frame dragging is the one that is commonly worked with, although I'd guess that two hypothetical cosmic strings racing past one another would cause linear frame dragging. The thing is, you can model RFD using Kerr black holes and their ergosphere, modeling or observing the linear version in a measurable fashion seems unlikely.
 
Jonathan Scott said:
As far as I know, linear frame dragging is related to an accelerating source mass (with changing momentum), and produces a tiny component of acceleration in the same direction.

He said "as far as I know" so I'm wondering if anyone else agrees with this interpretation.

Thanks all,

Jake
 
Note that linear frame-dragging works like inertia, in that a test object experiences a force proportional to its mass m if nearby objects are accelerating relative to it. It would be very neat if this could be extended so that when everything in the universe is accelerating relative to it with average acceleration a, it experiences a force exactly equal to ma. From the point of view of the rest of the universe, that force would then appear to be due to the inertia of the test object opposing its acceleration (in the opposite direction), and requires an equal and opposite force to maintain the acceleration. This is pointed out in Dennis Sciama's 1953 paper "On the Origin of Inertia". This idea is one of the possible simplifications that would arise from a gravity theory that satisfies Mach's Principle.

Unfortunately, it can be shown that in GR this "Sum for inertia" of the effects of the individual accelerations cannot exactly duplicate this effect, mainly because in GR the gravitational constant G is fixed, but the sum depends on the distribution of the masses of the universe and therefore cannot be fixed. This means that either this neat Mach's Principle model is wrong or GR is wrong. (I personally suspect that GR is an approximation which is very accurate at the solar system scale but very inaccurate at larger scales).
 
So it's an effect that moves small-mass objects in the direction a large-mass object is traveling?
 
jaketodd said:
So it's an effect that moves small-mass objects in the direction a large-mass object is traveling?

It accelerates small-mass objects in the direction a large-mass object is accelerating (which is not necessarily the same as the direction in which it is travelling).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
890
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
2K