Units of Kerr Understanding Mass & Angular Momentum

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter swampwiz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kerr Units
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the units of mass and angular momentum in the context of the Kerr solution in general relativity, specifically addressing the relationship between these quantities when using different unit systems, such as natural and geometric units.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the units of mass (M) and angular momentum (J) as discussed in a paper on the Kerr solution, questioning the equivalence of units.
  • Another participant suggests that the paper may be using natural units, where mass, length, and time share the same dimension of length.
  • A later reply indicates that in geometric units commonly used in general relativity, mass has units of length, which affects the interpretation of angular momentum's units.
  • It is noted that in these units, angular momentum's units can be simplified to show a relationship between mass and length, leading to further clarification of the conversion factors involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to agree on the use of natural and geometric units but have not reached a consensus on the implications of these units for the relationship between mass and angular momentum.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of units in different systems and how they relate to each other, particularly in the context of general relativity.

swampwiz
Messages
567
Reaction score
83
I was reading this paper, and I got confused:

https://projecteuclid.org/journals/...ws-of-black-hole-mechanics/cmp/1103858973.pdf

It discusses the Kerr solution for the case of { M4 > J2 } where M is mass & J is angular momentum. However it seems that angular momentum should have the units { M L2 T-1 }, which would means that M is equivalent to { L2 T-1 }. I could see how M is equivalent to { L2 T-2 }.

What am I missing here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
swampwiz said:
I was reading this paper, and I got confused:

https://projecteuclid.org/journals/...ws-of-black-hole-mechanics/cmp/1103858973.pdf

It discusses the Kerr solution for the case of { M4 > J2 } where M is mass & J is angular momentum. However it seems that angular momentum should have the units { M L2 T-1 }, which would means that M is equivalent to { L2 T-1 }. I could see how M is equivalent to { L2 T-2 }.

What am I missing here?
I assume the paper is using natural units, where mass length and time all have the same dimension of length.
 
PeroK said:
I assume the paper is using natural units, where mass length and time all have the same dimension of length.
OK, so it seems that you are saying that the constants c & G are to be used in order to get the units to match up?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: malawi_glenn
swampwiz said:
it seems that angular momentum should have the units { M L2 T-1 }, which would means that M is equivalent to { L2 T-1 }.
In the "geometric units" commonly used in GR, where ##G = c = 1##, this is true, because mass ##M## has units of length (the conversion factor is ##G / c^2## in conventional units) and so does time ##T## (the conversion factor is just ##c## in conventional units). So angular momentum ##J## has units of ##M L^2 T^{-1} = L L^2 L^{-1} = L^2##, i.e., the square of the unit of mass.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: malawi_glenn

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
817
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K