Upper limit of relativistic spin?

In summary, the conversation discusses the maximum speed at which neutron stars can spin. The first article mentions a neutron star spinning at around 700 rotations per second, but the exact size is unknown due to a paywall. The second article discusses a supermassive black hole that is spinning at 84% the speed of light. It is noted that the stress-energy tensor is the source of gravity, not just the rest mass. The conversation also mentions the extremal Kerr black hole, which has a maximum angular momentum per unit mass. Attempts to increase its spin will also increase its mass.
  • #1
BWV
1,465
1,780
Was curious at the upper limit for neutron stars,

found this article stating one was found at around 700 / s

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8576-fast-spinning-neutron-star-smashes-speed-limit/

did not see the size, the article is behind a paywall, but it would have taken a radius of about 7km for the speed to exceed 0.1C, which is far bigger than any neutron star, as far as I have read. So neutron stars cannot spin at relativistic speeds?

Not really sure how the radius of a black hole is measured, as the event horizon extends well beyond that point ( correct?) but did find this

a supermassive black hole at the center of galaxy NGC 1365 has had the radiation emitted from the volume outside of it detected and measured, revealing its speed. Even at these large distances, the material spins at 84% the speed of light.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...at-almost-the-speed-of-light/?sh=1387d657735a

but only the rest mass of the black hole contributes to its gravitation, not the inertial mass, which for an object spinning at 0.84c would have the same gamma correction as an object traveling in a straight line at that speed? So given a big enough black hole (there is no theoretical upper limit correct?) it could spin at any arbitrary speed approaching c ?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
For neutron stars, surely the answer depends on the EOS you assume.

I don't understand your argument about black holes. Certainly not "only the rest mass contributes to gravitation". Huh?
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #3
Vanadium 50 said:
For neutron stars, surely the answer depends on the EOS you assume.

I don't understand your argument about black holes. Certainly not "only the rest mass contributes to gravitation". Huh?
EOS?

I thought, from a prior discussions here, that gravity comes from rest mass, not the frame-dependent mass due to relativistic effects, no?
 
  • #5
BWV said:
EOS?
Equation Of State for neutron star matter. Basically, there'll be a spin rate where a neutron star flies apart, but I don't think we know what it is. Certainly I don't.
BWV said:
I thought, from a prior discussions here, that gravity comes from rest mass, not the frame-dependent mass due to relativistic effects, no?
Gravity comes from the stress-energy tensor, not the rest mass. In many cases the rest mass density is the only non-zero component of the tensor (or the only non-negligible one) so gravity kind of comes from the rest mass in those cases, but the source is always strictly the stress-energy tensor. It's definitely not the relativistic mass, though, as you note.

Rotation has an effect on the gravity of black holes, but it doesn't make it 'stronger' or 'weaker'. Rather, it makes free falling objects start to rotate around the hole. The effect is just detectable around Earth - that's one of the things Gravity Probe B looked at.

There is a maximum angular momentum per unit mass for black holes (the so-called extremal Kerr black hole). Attempting to increase its angular momentum will always increase its mass at least as much. I don't think any known real black holes are anywhere near extremal, but I could be wrong.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes vanhees71 and BWV
  • #6
Ibix said:
Equation Of State for neutron star matter. Basically, there'll be a spin rate where a neutron star flies apart, but I don't think we know what it is. Certainly I don't.

Gravity comes from the stress-energy tensor, not the rest mass. In many cases the rest mass density is the only non-zero component of the tensor (or the only non-negligible one) so gravity kind of comes from the rest mass in those cases, but the source is always strictly the stress-energy tensor. It's definitely not the relativistic mass, though, as you note.

Rotation has an effect on the gravity of black holes, but it doesn't make it 'stronger' or 'weaker'. Rather, it makes free falling objects start to rotate around the hole. The effect is just detectable around Earth - that's one of the things Gravity Probe B looked at.

There is a maximum angular momentum per unit mass for black holes (the so-called extremal Kerr black hole). Attempting to increase its angular momentum will always increase its mass at least as much. I don't think any known real black holes are anywhere near extremal, but I could be wrong.
Thanks, and the stress-energy tensor is invariant in difference reference frames, which is why the spin rate does not impact gravitation?

On the Kerr black hole, you mention attempting to increase its angular momentum will increase the mass - does that refer to relativistic effects, or that increasing angular momentum requires an addition of energy, which is part of the stress-energy tensor?
 
  • #7
BWV said:
Thanks, and the stress-energy tensor is invariant in difference reference frames, which is why the spin rate does not impact gravitation?
Tensors are invariant by definition. But the spin rate definitely affects the gravitational field - the more angular momentum the hole has the larger the frame dragging effect.
BWV said:
On the Kerr black hole, you mention attempting to increase its angular momentum will increase the mass - does that refer to relativistic effects, or that increasing angular momentum requires an addition of energy, which is part of the stress-energy tensor?
You can increase the angular momentum of a Kerr black hole, but not an extremal Kerr black hole.

You can't spin up a hole by getting hold of it and twisting, or strapping rockets to it, because there's nothing you can get hold of. You can only increase its spin by throwing in stuff on spinwise trajectories, but that increases its mass and its angular momentum, and when you reach an extremal hole it turns out that any attempt to do this increases the mass at least as much as the angular momentum.
 
  • Informative
Likes BWV
  • #8
BWV said:
Thanks, and the stress-energy tensor is invariant in difference reference frames, which is why the spin rate does not impact gravitation?
No, the stress-energy tensor transforms as a tensor.

And the angular momentum definitely does affect the gravitation: L2/2I contributes even to the T00 term.
 

1. What is the upper limit of relativistic spin?

The upper limit of relativistic spin is the maximum possible angular momentum that a particle can possess. This limit is determined by the speed of light, which is the fastest possible speed in the universe.

2. How is the upper limit of relativistic spin calculated?

The upper limit of relativistic spin is calculated using the formula J = mc, where J is the angular momentum, m is the mass of the particle, and c is the speed of light. This formula is derived from Einstein's theory of relativity.

3. Is the upper limit of relativistic spin the same for all particles?

No, the upper limit of relativistic spin can vary for different particles depending on their mass. Lighter particles have a higher upper limit of spin compared to heavier particles.

4. What happens if a particle exceeds the upper limit of relativistic spin?

If a particle exceeds the upper limit of relativistic spin, it would require an infinite amount of energy to accelerate it further. This is not possible according to the laws of physics.

5. Can the upper limit of relativistic spin be surpassed?

No, the upper limit of relativistic spin is a fundamental limit in the universe and cannot be surpassed. It is a fundamental property of particles and is consistent with the principles of relativity and quantum mechanics.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
6
Views
388
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
2
Replies
58
Views
7K
Back
Top