您的位置:站长主页 -> 繁星客栈 -> 观星楼 (自然科学论坛) -> 广义相对论是否严格成立? | November 24, 2024 |
广义相对论是否严格成立?
用户登陆 | 刷新 | 本版嘉宾: sage yinhow |
追忆 发表文章数: 693 |
广义相对论是否严格成立? 请问一个比较低级的问题,GR是否严格成立? 众所周知,GR的两个基础是等效原理与广义协变性原理,但看到书上是写:等效原理是不严格成立的,时空弯曲对物理学规律的影响还是不能断然排除的。 也就是说,其实广义相对论本身都是一中近似的理论,对么? 例外,在料想一下,在量子化引力理论时总是出现,时空弯曲不自怡的情况,是否和我提得这个问题同出一辙呢? 由于我不是学广义相对论专业的,只是看过他的几本肤浅的书,很多东西都不懂,还请各位老师不吝赐教!! 非关癖爱轻模样,冷处偏佳,别有根芽,不是人间富贵花; 谢娘别后谁能惜,漂泊天涯,寒月悲笳,万里西风瀚海沙.
|
||
semi 发表文章数: 121 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 我说一种情况: 假如考虑自旋,则会出现绕率,这样惯性系无法建立,等效原理也将不成立,此时广义相对论须修正。 物理方程之美,是一种无法言说之美。
|
||
sage 发表文章数: 1125 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? GR是否严格成立? So far, it is. 看到书上是写:等效原理是不严格成立的, which book? There are a lot of wrong books about GR. If you have change, read the first couple chapters of Weinberg's GR book. 也就是说,其实广义相对论本身都是一中近似的理论,对么? So far, we have not found evidence that GR is approximate. On the other hand, it is always possible that it will break down at some scale. We do expect it to break down near the planck scale due to quantum gravity effects. however, this is just our expectation. 例外,在料想一下,在量子化引力理论时总是出现,时空弯曲不自怡的情况, why? 由于我不是学广义相对论专业的,只是看过他的几本肤浅的书,很多东西都不懂,还请各位老师不吝赐教!!
|
||
sage 发表文章数: 1125 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 假如考虑自旋,则会出现绕率,这样惯性系无法建立,等效原理也将不成立,此时广义相对论须修正。 Are you talking about torsion? There is no problem for introducing spin into general relatibvity. I am not sure I understand your statement.
|
||
追忆 发表文章数: 693 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? which book? There are a lot of wrong books about GR. If you have change, read the first couple chapters of Weinberg's GR book. Sage老师,在刘辽与赵睁写的书上就是这么描述的,等效原理是不能严格成立的,时空弯曲对物理学规律的影响而显然不能断然排除。不知可否读过。 我之所以联想到量子引力的情况,是因为在料想到时空弯曲总是不能使理论自洽的情况。或许在一个时空弯曲不再是必须条件的情况下,能够成功的将引力量子化。 非关癖爱轻模样,冷处偏佳,别有根芽,不是人间富贵花; 谢娘别后谁能惜,漂泊天涯,寒月悲笳,万里西风瀚海沙.
|
||
kanex 发表文章数: 860 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? Actually it seems that GR guys and Particle guys have different things in their mind when they say something like 等效原理, 背景无关, etc. I heard that GR guys don't like Weinberg's book. 等效原理是不能严格成立的,时空弯曲对物理学规律的影响而显然不能断然排除。 =================================================== What do you mean?... Récoltes et semailles
|
||
sage 发表文章数: 1125 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? Sage老师,在刘辽与赵睁写的书上就是这么描述的,等效原理是不能严格成立的,时空弯曲对物理学规律的影响而显然不能断然排除。 Well, they are wrong.. you should treat there book as one of the wrong books. Again, if possible, please read the first several chapters of Weinberg's book. 是因为在料想到时空弯曲总是不能使理论自洽的情况。 Why not? 或许在一个时空弯曲不再是必须条件的情况下,能够成功的将引力量子化。 Without space-time curvature, there is no meaning to general relativity, ie., classical gravity.. without classical gravity, what is the meaning of quantizing it?
|
||
卢昌海 发表文章数: 1617 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 刘辽对等效原理的叙述是基本准确的。追忆网友所引的话太简短,容易让人误以为他只是泛泛谈论。 等效原理是局域的。在一个有限大小的参照系(比如有限大小的自由下落参照系)中,我们可以通过观测测地偏离效应来区分引力场与加速场,因为这种观测涉及到联络系数的导数,或者说曲率分量,这是不能通过等效原理消去的。不过由于测地偏离效应不能在严格局域的参照系中被观测,因此它与等效原理并不矛盾。一般教材的讨论都到此为止。但是,如果有某种局域的物理效应与曲率有关,我们就可以在局域参照系中对引力场与加速场做出区分。有自旋粒子的运动就是这样的效应。虽然迄今没有什么实验足以检验这类效应,但一般认为有自旋粒子在引力场中的运动会与曲率耦合,从而偏离测地线。因此通过观测有自旋粒子的运动,原则上可以在局域参照系中区分引力场与加速场。从某种意义上讲,这意味着等效原理的失效。这也正是刘辽所指的。 不过,这并不等于广义相对论失效。对于广义相对论来说,等效原理的作用主要是确立时空的pseudo-Riemannian结构,为此只要在每一点上存在局域参照系,使度规张量为Minkowski,以及联络系数为零(如果把这作为等效原理的定义,则上面所举的例子不会使等效原理失效)。至于是否有物理现象与曲率耦合,并不妨碍广义相对论的建立。有自旋粒子的运动在广义相对论框架中是完全可以处理的。 宠辱不惊,看庭前花开花落 去留无意,望天空云卷云舒
|
||
星空浩淼 发表文章数: 1743 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 有自旋粒子的运动在广义相对论框架中是完全可以处理的。 -------------------------------- 有时候感觉怪怪的:在目前的物理水平上,广义相对论拒绝跟量子力学合作。另一方面,自旋却是纯粹的量子力学效应,它在广义相对论框架中的处理,广义相对论仍然是经典的。这种半经典的成功处理(包括Hawking辐射),也许进一步证明了广义相对论的正确性? 跟电磁的AB效应对应的,引力的AC效应也得到证实,这也是一个以引力为背景的量子力学案例(跟引力自身的量子理论无关)。 One may view the world with the p-eye and one may view it with the q-eye but if one opens both eyes simultaneously then one gets crazy
|
||
卢昌海 发表文章数: 1617 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 这些东西有点象旧量子论。经典力学与量子观念并不相容,但在经典力学中加上几个量子条件也能得到一些有用的结果。 宠辱不惊,看庭前花开花落 去留无意,望天空云卷云舒
|
||
弱力三千 发表文章数: 143 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? ::但看到书上是写:等效原理是不严格成立的,时空弯曲对物理学规律的影响还是不能断然排除的。 ==================================== 那是因为现实中不存在真正的质点,引潮力就无法通过广义坐标变换消除 如果研究质点,是完全可以消除引力效应的。 在时空流形的无穷小领域内,我们总可以将联络系数变为零,但是无论如何无法将曲率张量变化掉。 所以从理想状况说,广义相对论是严格成立的。当然是在经典场论而不是量子场论意义上。 当华美的叶片落尽,生命的脉络才历历可见 弱水三千,只取一瓢饮 娇玫万朵,独摘一枝怜
|
||
kanex 发表文章数: 860 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 有自旋粒子在引力场中的运动会与曲率耦合 =========================== 请昌海兄具体说说吧。 Récoltes et semailles
|
||
卢昌海 发表文章数: 1617 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? :: 请昌海兄具体说说吧 Search for Mathisson-Papapetrou-Dixon equation. 宠辱不惊,看庭前花开花落 去留无意,望天空云卷云舒
|
||
追忆 发表文章数: 693 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 啊!两天没上来,居然这么多朋友进来了。 谢谢昌海大哥的回答。 ::等效原理是不能严格成立的,时空弯曲对物理学规律的影响而显然不能断然排除。 =================================================== ::What do you mean?... Kanex兄,我指的是有自旋粒子存在的情况下。 非关癖爱轻模样,冷处偏佳,别有根芽,不是人间富贵花; 谢娘别后谁能惜,漂泊天涯,寒月悲笳,万里西风瀚海沙.
|
||
semi 发表文章数: 121 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 如何将自旋效应加入能动量张量T_uv,但是我记得有自旋情况下,能动量张量T_uv是不对称的,但Einstein方程中T_uv是对称的,则有自旋情况下,只有部分能动量张量(对称部分)加入到了Einstein方程中,能动量张量反对称部分没有体现在Einstein方程中,但这部分影响到哪里去了呢? 物理方程之美,是一种无法言说之美。
|
||
追忆 发表文章数: 693 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 对我来说,这是个难点。 有时间的话,真希望昌海大哥和Sage老师写写这方面的文章。其他朋友写写也一样了。 目前为止,我只知道轩轩是学相对论专业的,其他朋友还不曾得知。 非关癖爱轻模样,冷处偏佳,别有根芽,不是人间富贵花; 谢娘别后谁能惜,漂泊天涯,寒月悲笳,万里西风瀚海沙.
|
||
卢昌海 发表文章数: 1617 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 在引力理论中引进挠率来描述自旋的方案一直有人在讨论。感兴趣的网友可以找一些有关Einstein-Cartan理论的资料,这是与挠率有关的方案中最简单的一个。不过,目前还没有任何实验可以检验挠率效应是否存在。 宠辱不惊,看庭前花开花落 去留无意,望天空云卷云舒
|
||
sage 发表文章数: 1125 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? 在引力理论中引进挠率来描述自旋的方案一直有人在讨论。感兴趣的网友可以找一些有关Einstein-Cartan理论的资料,这是与挠率有关的方案中最简单的一个。不过,目前还没有任何实验可以检验挠率效应是否存在。 =============================================================== I think I have completely missed the point of such an extension of GR. There is nothing wrong with GR describing some classical spinning system, such as a falling/orbiting spinning top. There is nothing wrong to include dirac spinor or vector particle in a GR background. stress-energy tensor is nice and symmetric. The effect of the spin is in the property of the wave-function (in some mathematical jargon, section on the local spin bundle). Is this just to give some "geometrical' description of spin by introducing torsion?
|
||
卢昌海 发表文章数: 1617 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? I didn't dig too much into that type of theory either. From what I know, the logic goes as follows: the conservation of orbital angular momentum tensor (which describes angular momentum of macroscopic objects - including classical spin) is garanteed, if energy momentum tensor is symmetric. On the other hand, if there exists an intrinsic part of augular momentum (sometimes called a spin tensor), the conservation of angular momentum will require an equality between the divergence of the intrinsic angular momentum tensor and the antisymmetricity of the energy momentum tensor. This will require a modification of the Einstein theory, because Ricci tensor can't be nonsymmetric unless the connection is not symmetric, which means a non-vanishing torsion. 宠辱不惊,看庭前花开花落 去留无意,望天空云卷云舒
|
||
sage 发表文章数: 1125 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? On the other hand, if there exists an intrinsic part of augular momentum (sometimes called a spin tensor), the conservation of angular momentum will require an equality between the divergence of the intrinsic angular momentum tensor and the antisymmetricity of the energy momentum tensor. ============================================================== This is what I have heard as well. On the other hand, I do not know what is the purpose intrinsic part is supposed to be. We apparently do not need it to do anything. So, it seems to me just a why-not extension of minimal Einstein gravity.
|
||
卢昌海 发表文章数: 1617 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? :: On the other hand, I do not know what is the purpose :: intrinsic part is supposed to be. The intrinsic part of the angular momentum - which corresponds to the spin of the field - arises naturally in Noether's theorem. Although one can still define energy-momentum tensor to be symmetric (therefore keep the structure of Einstein's theory) even in presence of intrinsic angular momentum, but whether such a definition is more natural than introducing a torsion tensor is debatable, because it forces a connection between spin and energy-momentum, which doesn't seem to have any physical foundation. 宠辱不惊,看庭前花开花落 去留无意,望天空云卷云舒
|
||
sage 发表文章数: 1125 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? suppose I write the action of a dirac spinor in the GR backrgound. Its stress-energy tensor is symmetric. the angular momentum must also include the fact the field is spin 1/2. I am not sure what I am missing by doing just this. where is that part of angular momentum that i am missing?
|
||
卢昌海 发表文章数: 1617 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? :: suppose I write the action of a dirac spinor in the GR backrgound. Its :: stress-energy tensor is symmetric. the angular momentum must also include :: the fact the field is spin 1/2. That is the case of using the symmetric energy-momentum tensor I mentioned in the previous post. While this does keep the structure of GR intact, there are something that doesn't seem too natural. Besides the lack of physical reason for the energy-flow type of picture (J~xT) for spin, there are some other (non-strict for sure) arguments. For instance, if one treats a particle such as an electron as an object that carries regular angular momentum, a singular ring at its Compton lengh will arise, which is in strong conflict with experiments. Of course, this is a classical treatment using Kerr metric and is suspicious by itself, but classical theory breaks so badly right at the edge of the quantum scale is still very strange (BTW, this doesn't mean Einstein-Cartan theory is the solution to it). Nothing is conclusive (not even theoretically) about whether GR requires an extension as a classical theory, but there are certain conceptual naturalness in some of the extensions (for instance, the idea of treating spin as independent of energy-momentum seems to me more natural than the opposite). One of the major problem of considering Einstein-Cartan theory, however, is: any difference between it and GR seems to be necessarily in the area when gravity is far too weak to measure, and that same area may require a more radical change of treatment (since quantum effects kick in) than merely go from GR to any of its classical extensions. Some other arguments are covered in a recent encyclopedia article about Einstein-Cartan theory at gr-qc/0606062 (again, nothing is conclusive). 宠辱不惊,看庭前花开花落 去留无意,望天空云卷云舒
|
||
萍踪浪迹 发表文章数: 1983 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? ::在引力理论中引进挠率来描述自旋的方案一直有人在讨论。感兴趣的网友可以找一些有关Einstein-Cartan理论的资料,这是与挠率有关的方案中最简单的一个。不过,目前还没有任何实验可以检验挠率效应是否存在。 ================================== 带挠率的Riemann空间被成为Riemann-Cartan空间,好象一直以来只是数学上的研究对象,时空的大范围结构基本上可以让我们不考虑psuedo-Riemannian manifold的挠率影响,因此在物理上也就一直当作挠率为零。 漫漫长夜不知晓 日落云寒苦终宵 痴心未悟拈花笑 梦魂飞度同心桥
|
||
萍踪浪迹 发表文章数: 1983 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Einstein-Cartan_theory http://www.aias.us/Members/ECE-Article_EN.pdf Einstein, Cartan and Evans – Start of a New Age in Physics? http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306029 Einstein-Cartan theory as a theory of defects in space-time http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0008064 On the stability of cosmological metrics in Einstein-Cartan cosmologies http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0201082 Gravitational stability of inflatons and torsion in Einstein-Cartan-Klein-Gordon Cosmology http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0211009 Totally Asymmetric Torsion on Riemann-Cartan Manifold http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0209083 Massless DKP fields in Riemann-Cartan space-times http://www.ime.unicamp.br/rel_pesq/1996/rp30-96.pdf Dirac-Hestenes Spinor Fields on Riemann-Cartan Manifolds 漫漫长夜不知晓 日落云寒苦终宵 痴心未悟拈花笑 梦魂飞度同心桥
|
||
duality 发表文章数: 29 |
Re: 广义相对论是否严格成立? After reading these topics, I am sure maybe this forum is really the best one I have ever seen, It 's due to Changhai Lu and Sage...and so on .....hehe
|