I What if the Earth (and the Universe) were 2d?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter etotheipi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    2d Earth Universe
AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the implications of Newtonian gravitation in a 2+1 dimensional universe, specifically examining the gravitational field around a flat Earth model. It questions whether the assumption of the gravitational field as g = - (GM/r) e_r is valid in this context and considers the modification of Poisson's equation. Participants suggest that while plausibility arguments can be made, there is no definitive way to confirm the model's predictions due to the lack of a true 2D universe for comparison. The conversation also touches on the potential of using general relativity to derive insights before applying Newtonian principles. Overall, the topic raises intriguing questions about the nature of gravity and dimensionality in theoretical physics.
etotheipi
Well, okay, I should say: what does Newtonian gravitation look like in a ##2+1## dimensional Newtonian universe? Consider a flat Earth, i.e. a region ##\mathcal{E} = \{ (x,y): x^2 + y^2 \leq R \}## with mass density ##\rho##, then for ##r > R## a natural guess for the gravitational field seem like it might be$$\begin{align*}

\mathbf{g} &= - \frac{GM}{r} \mathbf{e}_r \\

\implies 2\pi GM&= - 2\pi rg_r = \int_0^{2\pi} -r g_r d\varphi = -\int_0^{2\pi} [r g_r \cos^2{\varphi} + rg_r \sin^2{\varphi}] d\varphi

\end{align*}$$where ##\mathbf{X}(\varphi) = (r\cos{\varphi}, r\sin{\varphi})## is a parameterisation of ##\partial \Omega##; then by Green's theorem$$2\pi G \int_{\Omega} \rho dS = 2\pi GM = - \oint_{\partial \Omega} g_1 dy - g_2 dx = - \int_{\Omega} \partial_i g_i dS= - \int_{\Omega} \nabla \cdot \mathbf{g} dS$$which leads to the identification $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{g} = - 2\pi G\rho \implies \nabla^2 \phi = 2 \pi G \rho$$with a potential ##\phi(r) - \phi(r_0) = GM \ln{(r/r_0)}##. The equations of motion can be derived pretty easily in principle from that.

But I was wondering if this is the correct modification of Poisson's equation? In other words, is the assumption that ##\mathbf{g} = - (GM/r) \mathbf{e}_r## correct for a flat Earth in a 2d universe?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Physics news on Phys.org
etotheipi said:
But I was wondering if this is the correct modification of Poisson's equation? In other words, is the assumption that g=−(GM/r)er correct for a flat Earth in a 2d universe?
It is a reasonable approach. I don’t know that there is any criteria you could use to identify any reasonable criteria as “correct” or “incorrect”
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and etotheipi
Dale said:
I don’t know that there is any criteria you could use to identify any reasonable criteria as “correct” or “incorrect”

That's a really good point! I was thinking that maybe it's possible in principle to work it out in a 2+1 dimensional universe with GR theory, and then take the Newtonian limit; but I don't know nearly enough about GR to know if that's possible, or just nonsense.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
There should be more flattery in a 2D universe...(I couldn't help myself)
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes diogenesNY, berkeman, Nugatory and 3 others
hutchphd said:
There should be more flattery in a 2D universe...(I couldn't help myself)
But then the conclusion is that flattery will get you nowhere. :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and hutchphd
etotheipi said:
That's a really good point! I was thinking that maybe it's possible in principle to work it out in a 2+1 dimensional universe with GR theory, and then take the Newtonian limit; but I don't know nearly enough about GR to know if that's possible, or just nonsense.
I'm not sure if it's possible or not, but I think that doesn't fix the underlying problem - you don't have a 2d universe to which you can compare your model's predictions. So I think that you can come up with plausibility arguments why physics "ought to be" this way or that way, but that's it.

A possible approach would be to consider a 3d universe containing only parallel cylinders (or whatever cross-section). Physics would have to be independent of the direction parallel to the cylinders by symmetry. See what that yields?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
Maybe the book Flatland by Abbott gives a hint?
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes diogenesNY and etotheipi
etotheipi said:
What if the Earth (and the universe) were 2d?
Then the flat Earth society people would be insufferably smug. There'd be no living with them.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes nasu, etotheipi, anorlunda and 2 others
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #10
Movies would be shown on a 1D screen.
 
  • Haha
Likes anorlunda

Similar threads

Back
Top