Wormholes with a different gravitational potential at each end

patfada
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hi - I have a question about wormholes, specifically when the two endpoints have a differnt gravitational potential.

If we imagine the technology extisted to create a person sized wormhole between say the Earth and the moon, I think the popular perception would be that one could simply walk through the wormhole on Earth and walk out on the moon.

However there is clearly a big difference in gravitational potential energy between the Earth and the moon. A rocket leaving the Earth has to expend a lot of energy climbing out of the Earth's gravitational well, and not much breaking against the moon's gravity when it lands.

If the wormhole is say one meter long, this difference in potential occurs over the space of meter instead of the 200,000 miles or so of ordinary space. So I would expect their to be massive gradient inside the wormole, which would require a massive force to get something through. Converly if one pushed an object from the Earth to the moon it would experience a huge force pushing it down to the Earth and presumably smash to bits.

Is this roughly correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I tend to dismiss the entire concept of 'wormholes', until and if they are found or created. Just because something appears to be possible mathmatically (with all the assumptions and approximations inherent in the math equations), doesn't make it necessarily physically possible. Therefore, any additional bizarre questions about the nature of these imaginary things seems like a waste of time to me. Just my 2c. I'd prefer you think about Trek like transporters... at least these may be possible to build. (search 'Spooky action at a distance' and teleportation)...
 
@RocketSci5KN: "...any additional bizarre questions about the nature of these imaginary things seems like a waste of time to me..."
You're not thinking like physicists do. It is exceedingly productive to ponder areas of your physical theories that seem to lead to contradictions or make bizarre predictions. This is how Einstein discovered relativity in the first place (by considering the absurd and impossible notion of an observer traveling at the speed of light).

@patfada: As I understand it, you are correct about there being an extreme potential gradient within the wormhole. Here is an excerpt from a Wormhole FAQ that seems to confirm your insight.

Is a wormhole whose mouths are arranged vertically in a gravitational field a source of unlimited energy?
No. The argument in favor of such a wormhole being an energy source is this: An object falls from the upper mouth, gains kinetic energy as it falls, enters the lower mouth, reemerges from the upper mouth with this newly acquired kinetic energy, and repeats the cycle to gain even more kinetic energy ad infinitum. The problem with this is that general relativity does not permit discontinuities in the metric – the descriptor of the geometry of spacetime. This means that the gravitational potential of an object at the lower mouth must continuously rise within the wormhole to match the potential it had at the upper mouth. In other words, this traversal of the wormhole is “uphill” and therefore requires work. This work precisely cancels the gain in kinetic energy.

I believe that the FAQ comes from a book written by a physicist (The Physics of Stargates -- Parallel Universes, Time Travel, and the Enigma of Wormhole Physics by Enrico Rodrigo)
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
RocketSci5KN said:
I tend to dismiss the entire concept of 'wormholes', until and if they are found or created. Just because something appears to be possible mathmatically (with all the assumptions and approximations inherent in the math equations), doesn't make it necessarily physically possible. Therefore, any additional bizarre questions about the nature of these imaginary things seems like a waste of time to me. Just my 2c. I'd prefer you think about Trek like transporters... at least these may be possible to build. (search 'Spooky action at a distance' and teleportation)...

Thank you. Well said.

I would tend to say something less helpful like "Don't the wormhole people have a wormhole site they can go to?"
 
This topic is too speculative for this forum.

Zz.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top