A Units of Kerr Understanding Mass & Angular Momentum

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter swampwiz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kerr Units
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 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 malawi_glenn
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
Thread 'Relativity of simultaneity in actuality'
I’m attaching two figures from the book, Basic concepts in relativity and QT, by Resnick and Halliday. They are describing the relativity of simultaneity from a theoretical pov, which I understand. Basically, the lightning strikes at AA’ and BB’ can be deemed simultaneous either in frame S, in which case they will not be simultaneous in frame S’, and vice versa. Only in one of the frames are the two events simultaneous, but not in both, and this claim of simultaneity can be done by either of...
Back
Top