Mass as Curvature in GR: Deriving Inertia as a Force

  • Thread starter Crosson
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Gr
In summary, General Relativity predicts that mass is the curvature of spacetime and can be derived from the field equations as a force that is proportional to acceleration and mass in the Newtonian limit. However, this approach only works under certain conditions, such as when velocities are much lower than the speed of light and the distortions of space and time due to gravity are not too severe. The more general approach of the full theory views gravity as a curvature of space-time rather than a force, taking into account pressure and momentum contributions to the stress-energy tensor.
  • #1
Crosson
1,259
4
I am a student who is studying General Relativity, and I don't know enough tensor analysis to answer the following straightfoward question:

Since the stress energy tensor is just a sophisticated representation of mass, and since einstiens field equations equate this energy to a representation of curved spacetime, is it appropriate to say that mass is the curvature of spacetime?

More precisely, is it possible to derive from the field equations the existence of a "force" (spatial rate of change in energy) that is proportional to acceleration and "mass" (E/c^2) in the Newtonian limit?

Conceptually, I am asking if GR predicts inertia as a force which does work on spacetime.

If true, notice that Newtons Law (sum of F = ma) reduces to the following elegant statement:

Sum F = 0

(a force of -ma occurs when an object with gravitational mass accelerates)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It is possible to approximate gravitation as a "force", yielding the familiar Newtonian laws, only when all velocities are much lower than the speed of light, and when the distortions of space and time due to gravity are not too severe.

This approach is often discusses as the "PPN" approximation to general relativity. It's good enough for usage anywhere in the Solar system, but it will not work under conditions of extreme gravity.

The more general approach of the full theory requires that one view gravity as a curvature of space-time rather than a force. The conditions which allow one to approximate gravity as a force are the conditions where one can ignore the spatial part of the space-time curvature.


The stress energy tensor is really a lot more than a sophisticated representation of mass, as one might guess from the fact that it has 10 components at a point in space-time, while mass is a scalar quantity that has only one component. The conditions that allow one to approximate space as flat also simplify the stress-energy tensor, though - for instance, the pressure terms of the stress energy tensor contribute to gravity in the full theory, but in the PPN approximation one assumes that the contribution of pressure to gravity is negligible. Similarly, momentum contributes to the stress energy tensor, but because all velocities are much lower than 'c', these contributions can be ignored in PPN theory.
 

FAQ: Mass as Curvature in GR: Deriving Inertia as a Force

What is the concept of "Mass as Curvature" in General Relativity (GR)?

The concept of "Mass as Curvature" in GR is based on Einstein's theory of General Relativity, which states that mass and energy can cause curvature in the fabric of space-time. This means that the presence of mass or energy can bend the space around it, creating a gravitational force that affects the motion of other objects.

How does GR explain inertia as a force?

In GR, inertia is not considered as a force itself, but rather as a consequence of the curvature of space-time caused by mass. This means that objects tend to resist changes in their motion due to the curvature of space-time caused by the presence of mass. In other words, inertia is a result of the interaction between mass and space-time.

Can you provide an example to illustrate the concept of "Mass as Curvature" in GR?

One example is the orbit of planets around the sun. According to GR, the mass of the sun causes a curvature in space-time, which in turn affects the motion of the planets, causing them to orbit around the sun. This can be seen as the "mass as curvature" effect, where the presence of mass (the sun) causes a curvature in space-time, which affects the motion of other objects (the planets).

How does GR differ from Newton's theory of gravity in explaining the concept of "Mass as Curvature"?

In Newton's theory of gravity, mass is considered as an inherent property of an object that causes a force of attraction between objects. On the other hand, in GR, mass is seen as a cause of curvature in space-time, which in turn affects the motion of other objects. This means that in GR, the concept of "mass as curvature" is a result of the interaction between mass and space-time, rather than an inherent property of mass.

Is there any evidence to support the concept of "Mass as Curvature" in GR?

Yes, there is strong evidence to support the concept of "Mass as Curvature" in GR. One of the key pieces of evidence is the observation of gravitational lensing, where the curvature of space-time caused by massive objects can bend and distort the light from distant objects. This effect has been observed and studied extensively, providing strong support for the concept of "Mass as Curvature" in GR.

Similar threads

Back
Top