- •Contents
- •Preface to the second edition
- •Preface to the first edition
- •1 Special relativity
- •1.2 Definition of an inertial observer in SR
- •1.4 Spacetime diagrams
- •1.6 Invariance of the interval
- •1.8 Particularly important results
- •Time dilation
- •Lorentz contraction
- •Conventions
- •Failure of relativity?
- •1.9 The Lorentz transformation
- •1.11 Paradoxes and physical intuition
- •The problem
- •Brief solution
- •2 Vector analysis in special relativity
- •Transformation of basis vectors
- •Inverse transformations
- •2.3 The four-velocity
- •2.4 The four-momentum
- •Conservation of four-momentum
- •Scalar product of two vectors
- •Four-velocity and acceleration as derivatives
- •Energy and momentum
- •2.7 Photons
- •No four-velocity
- •Four-momentum
- •Zero rest-mass particles
- •3 Tensor analysis in special relativity
- •Components of a tensor
- •General properties
- •Notation for derivatives
- •Components
- •Symmetries
- •Circular reasoning?
- •Mixed components of metric
- •Metric and nonmetric vector algebras
- •3.10 Exercises
- •4 Perfect fluids in special relativity
- •The number density n
- •The flux across a surface
- •Number density as a timelike flux
- •The flux across the surface
- •4.4 Dust again: the stress–energy tensor
- •Energy density
- •4.5 General fluids
- •Definition of macroscopic quantities
- •First law of thermodynamics
- •The general stress–energy tensor
- •The spatial components of T, T ij
- •Conservation of energy–momentum
- •Conservation of particles
- •No heat conduction
- •No viscosity
- •Form of T
- •The conservation laws
- •4.8 Gauss’ law
- •4.10 Exercises
- •5 Preface to curvature
- •The gravitational redshift experiment
- •Nonexistence of a Lorentz frame at rest on Earth
- •The principle of equivalence
- •The redshift experiment again
- •Local inertial frames
- •Tidal forces
- •The role of curvature
- •Metric tensor
- •5.3 Tensor calculus in polar coordinates
- •Derivatives of basis vectors
- •Derivatives of general vectors
- •The covariant derivative
- •Divergence and Laplacian
- •5.4 Christoffel symbols and the metric
- •Calculating the Christoffel symbols from the metric
- •5.5 Noncoordinate bases
- •Polar coordinate basis
- •Polar unit basis
- •General remarks on noncoordinate bases
- •Noncoordinate bases in this book
- •5.8 Exercises
- •6 Curved manifolds
- •Differential structure
- •Proof of the local-flatness theorem
- •Geodesics
- •6.5 The curvature tensor
- •Geodesic deviation
- •The Ricci tensor
- •The Einstein tensor
- •6.7 Curvature in perspective
- •7 Physics in a curved spacetime
- •7.2 Physics in slightly curved spacetimes
- •7.3 Curved intuition
- •7.6 Exercises
- •8 The Einstein field equations
- •Geometrized units
- •8.2 Einstein’s equations
- •8.3 Einstein’s equations for weak gravitational fields
- •Nearly Lorentz coordinate systems
- •Gauge transformations
- •Riemann tensor
- •Weak-field Einstein equations
- •Newtonian limit
- •The far field of stationary relativistic sources
- •Definition of the mass of a relativistic body
- •8.5 Further reading
- •9 Gravitational radiation
- •The effect of waves on free particles
- •Measuring the stretching of space
- •Polarization of gravitational waves
- •An exact plane wave
- •9.2 The detection of gravitational waves
- •General considerations
- •Measuring distances with light
- •Beam detectors
- •Interferometer observations
- •9.3 The generation of gravitational waves
- •Simple estimates
- •Slow motion wave generation
- •Exact solution of the wave equation
- •Preview
- •Energy lost by a radiating system
- •Overview
- •Binary systems
- •Spinning neutron stars
- •9.6 Further reading
- •10 Spherical solutions for stars
- •The metric
- •Physical interpretation of metric terms
- •The Einstein tensor
- •Equation of state
- •Equations of motion
- •Einstein equations
- •Schwarzschild metric
- •Generality of the metric
- •10.5 The interior structure of the star
- •The structure of Newtonian stars
- •Buchdahl’s interior solution
- •10.7 Realistic stars and gravitational collapse
- •Buchdahl’s theorem
- •Quantum mechanical pressure
- •White dwarfs
- •Neutron stars
- •10.9 Exercises
- •11 Schwarzschild geometry and black holes
- •Black holes in Newtonian gravity
- •Conserved quantities
- •Perihelion shift
- •Post-Newtonian gravity
- •Gravitational deflection of light
- •Gravitational lensing
- •Coordinate singularities
- •Inside r = 2M
- •Coordinate systems
- •Kruskal–Szekeres coordinates
- •Formation of black holes in general
- •General properties of black holes
- •Kerr black hole
- •Dragging of inertial frames
- •Ergoregion
- •The Kerr horizon
- •Equatorial photon motion in the Kerr metric
- •The Penrose process
- •Supermassive black holes
- •Dynamical black holes
- •11.6 Further reading
- •12 Cosmology
- •The universe in the large
- •The cosmological arena
- •12.2 Cosmological kinematics: observing the expanding universe
- •Homogeneity and isotropy of the universe
- •Models of the universe: the cosmological principle
- •Cosmological metrics
- •Cosmological redshift as a distance measure
- •The universe is accelerating!
- •12.3 Cosmological dynamics: understanding the expanding universe
- •Critical density and the parameters of our universe
- •12.4 Physical cosmology: the evolution of the universe we observe
- •Dark matter and galaxy formation: the universe after decoupling
- •The early universe: fundamental physics meets cosmology
- •12.5 Further reading
- •Appendix A Summary of linear algebra
- •Vector space
- •References
- •Index
291 |
11.1 Trajectories in the Schwarzschild spacetime |
Binary puls ars
Another system in which the pericenter shift is observable is the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar system PSR B1913+16 that we introduced in § 9.3. While this is not a “test particle” orbiting a spherical star, but is rather two roughly equal-mass stars orbiting their common center of mass, the pericenter shift (in this case, the periastron shift) still happens in the same way. The two neutron stars of the Hulse-Taylor system have mean separation 1.2 × 109 m, so using Eq. (11.40) with M = 1.4 M+ = 2.07 km gives a crude estimate of φ = 3.3 × 10−5 radians per orbit = 2◦.1 per year. This is much easier to measure than Mercury’s shift! In fact, a more careful calculation, taking into account the high eccentricity of the orbit and the fact that the two stars are of comparable mass, predict 4◦.2 per year.
For our purposes here we have calculated the periastron shift from the known masses of the star. But in fact the observed shift of 4.2261◦ ± 0.0007 per year is one of the data which enable us to calculate the masses of the neutron stars in the PSR B1913+16 system. The other datum is another relativistic effect: a redshift of the signal which results from two effects. One is the special-relativistic ‘transverse-Doppler’ term: the 0(v)2 term in Eq. (2.39). The other is the changing gravitational redshift as the pulsar’s eccentric orbit brings it in and out of its companion’s gravitational potential. These two effects are observationally indistinguishable from one another, but their combined resultant redshift gives one more number which depends on the masses of the stars. Using it and the periastron shift and the Newtonian mass function for the orbit allows us to determine the stars’ masses and the orbit’s inclination (see Stairs 2003).
While PSR B1913+16 was the first binary pulsar to be discovered, astronomers now know of many more (Lorimer 2008, Stairs 2003). The most dramatic system is the so-called double pulsar system PSR J0737-3039, the first binary discovered in which both members are seen as radio pulsars (Kramer et al. 2006). In this system the pericenter shift is around 17◦ per year! Because both pulsars can be tracked, this system promises to become the best testing ground so far for the deviations of general relativity from simple Newtonian behavior. We discuss some of these now.
Post-Newtonian gravity
The pericenter shift is an example of corrections that general relativity makes to Newtonian orbital dynamics. In going from Eq. (11.37) to Eq. (11.38), we made an approximation that the orbit was ‘nearly Newtonian’, and we did a Taylor expansion in the small quantity
2 ˜ 2 −
M /L , which by Eq. (11.20) is (M/r)(1 3M/r). This is indeed small if the particle’s orbit is far from the black hole, r M. So orbits far from the hole are very nearly like Newtonian orbits, with small corrections like the pericenter shift. These are orbits where, in Newtonian language, the gravitational potential M/r is small, as is the particle’s orbital velocity, which for a circular orbit is related to the potential by v2 = M/r. Far from even an extremely relativistic source, gravity is close to being Newtonian. We say that the pericenter shift is a post-Newtonian effect, a correction to Newtonian motion in the limit of weak fields and slow motion.
292 |
Schwarzschild geometry and black holes |
We showed in § (8.4) that Newton’s field equations emerge from the full equations of general relativity in this same limit, where the field (we called it h in that calculation) is weak and the velocities small. It is possible to follow that approximation to higher order, to keep the first post-Newtonian corrections to the Einstein field equations in this same limit. If we did this, we would be able to show the result we have asserted, that the pericenter shift is a general feature of orbital motion. We showed in that section that the metric of spacetime that describes a Newtonian system with gravitational potential φ is, to first order in φ, given by the metric
ds2 = −(1 + 2φ)dt2 + (1 − 2φ)(dx2 + dy2 + dz2). |
(11.43) |
For comparison, let us take the limit for weak fields of the Schwarzschild metric given in Eq. (11.1:
ds2 ≈ − 1 − |
r |
dt2 + 1 + |
2r |
dr2 + r2 |
d 2, |
(11.44) |
|
2M |
|
M |
|
|
|
where we have expanded grr and kept only the lowest order term in M/r. These two metrics look similar – their g00 terms are identical – but they appear not to be identical, because if we transform the spatial line element of Eq. (11.43) to polar coordinates in the usual way, we would expect to see in Eq. (11.44) the spatial line element
d 2 = |
M |
-dr2 + r2 d 2. . |
|
1 + 2r |
(11.45) |
(Readers who want to be reminded about the transformation from Cartesian to spherical coordinates in flat space should see Eq. (6.19) and Exer. 28, § 6.9.) Is this difference from the spatial part of Eq. (11.44) an indication that the Schwarzschild metric does not obey the Newtonian limit? The answer is no – we are dealing with a coordinate effect.
Coordinates in which the line element has the form of Eq. (11.45) are called isotropic coordinates because there is no distinction in the metric among the directions x, y, and z. Isotropic coordinates are related to Schwarzschild coordinates by a change in the definition of the radial coordinate. If we call the isotropic coordinates (t, r¯, θ , φ), where (t, θ , φ) are the same as in Schwarzschild, then we make the simple transformation for large r given by
r¯ = r − M. |
(11.46) |
Then to lowest order in M/r or M/r¯, the expression 1 + 2M/r in Eq. (11.44) equals 1 − 2M/r¯. But the factor in front of d 2 is r2, which becomes (again to first order) r¯2(1 + 2M/r). It follows that this simple transformation changes the spatial part of the line element of Eq. (11.44) to Eq. (11.45) in terms of the radial coordinate r¯. This demonstrates that the far field of the Schwarzschild solution does indeed conform to the form in Eq. (8.50).
There are of course many other post-Newtonian effects in general relativity besides the pericenter shift. In the next paragraph we will explore the deflection of light. Later in this chapter we will meet the dragging of inertial frames due to the rotation of the source of gravity (also called gravitomagnetism). It is possible to expand the Einstein equations beyond the first post-Newtonian equations and find second and higher post-Newtonian effects. Physicists have put considerable work into doing such expansions, because they
293 |
11.1 Trajectories in the Schwarzschild spacetime |
provide highly accurate predictions of the orbits of inspiralling neutron stars and black holes, which are needed for the detection of the gravitational waves they emit (recall Ch. 9).
The post-Newtonian expansion assumes not just weak gravitational fields but also slow velocities. The effect of this is that the Newtonian (Keplerian) motion of a planet depends only on the g00 part of the metric. The reason is that, in computing the total elapsed proper time along the world line of the particle, the spatial distance increments the particle makes (for example dr) are much smaller than the time increments dt, since dr/dt 1. Recall that g00 is also responsible for the gravitational redshift. It follows, therefore, that Newtonian gravity can be identified with the gravitational redshift: knowing one determines the other fully. Newtonian gravity is produced exclusively by the curvature of time in spacetime.
Spatial curvature comes in only at the level of post-Newtonian corrections.
Gravitational deflection of light
In our discussion of orbits we treated only particles, not photons, because photons do not have bound orbits in Newtonian gravity. In this section we treat the analogous effect for photons, their deflection from straight-line motion as they pass through a gravitational field. Historically, this was the first general-relativistic effect to have been predicted before it was observed, and its confirmation in the eclipse of 1919 (see McCrae 1979) made Einstein an international celebrity. The fact that it was a British team (led by Eddington) who made the observations to confirm the theories of a German physicist incidentally helped to alleviate post-war tension between the scientific communities of the two countries. In modern times, the light-deflection phenomenon has become a key tool of astronomy, as we describe in a separate paragraph on gravitational lensing below. But first we need to understand how and why gravity deflects light.
We begin by calculating the trajectory of a photon in the Schwarzschild metric under the assumption that M/r is everywhere small along the trajectory. The equation of the orbit is the ratio of Eq. (11.8) to the square root of Eq. (11.12):
dr |
= ± r2 |
$b2 − r2 |
1 − |
r |
!− |
, |
(11.47) |
dφ |
1 |
1 1 |
|
2M |
|
1/2 |
|
where we have defined the impact parameter,
b := L/E. |
(11.48) |
In Exer. 1, § 11.7, it is shown that b would be the minimum value of r in Newtonian theory, where there is no deflection. It therefore represents the ‘offset’ of the photon’s initial trajectory from a parallel one moving purely radially. An incoming photon with L > 0 obeys the equation
|
dφ |
|
1 |
|
− |
1/2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
= |
|
|
− u2 + 2Mu3 |
, |
(11.49) |
|
|
du |
b2 |
||||||
with the same definition as before, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
u = 1/r. |
|
|
(11.50) |
294 |
|
Schwarzschild geometry and black holes |
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If we neglect the u3 term in Eq. (11.49), all effects of M disappear, and the solution is |
||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
r sin(φ − φ0) = b, |
|
|
(11.51) |
||||||||
|
a straight line. This is, of course, the Newtonian result. |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
Suppose now we assume Mu 1 but not entirely negligible. Then if we define |
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
y := u(1 − Mu), |
|
u = y(1 + My) + 0(M2u2), |
(11.52) |
||||||||||||
|
Eq. (11.49) becomes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
dφ |
= |
(1 + 2My) |
+ |
0(M2u2). |
|
|
(11.53) |
||||||||
|
|
|
dy |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
b− |
2 |
− y |
2 |
|
1/2 |
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
This can be integrated to give |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
φ = φ0 + |
|
b |
+ arcsin(by) − 2M b2 − y2 |
. |
(11.54) |
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
2M |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
1/2 |
|
The initial trajectory has y → 0, so φ → φ0: φ0 is the incoming direction. The photon reaches its smallest r when y = 1/b, as we can see from setting dr/dλ = 0 in Eq. (11.22) and using our approximation Mu 1. This occurs at the angle φ = φ0 + 2M/b + π/2. It has thus passed through an angle π/2 + 2M/b as it travels to its point of closest approach. By symmetry, it passes through a further angle of the same size as it moves outwards from its point of closest approach (see Fig. 11.5). It thus passes through a total angle of π + 4M/b. If it were going on a straight line, this angle would be π , so the net deflection is
φ = 4M/b. |
(11.55) |
To the accuracy of our approximations, we may use for b the radius of closest approach rather than the impact parameter L/E. For the sum, the maximum effect is for trajectories for which b = R+, the radius of the Sun. Given M = 1 M+ = 1.47 km and R+ = 6.96 × 105 km, we find
( φ)+,max = 8.45 × 10−6 rad = 1 .74. |
(11.56) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
φ = φ0 + |
π |
+ |
2M |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
b |
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
φ = φ0 + π + |
4M |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
b |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
y = |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
b |
|
|
φ = φ0 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Figure 11.5 |
Deflection of a photon. |
|
|
|
|
295 |
11.1 Trajectories in the Schwarzschild spacetime |
Figure 11.6
star To
→
a
→
s
Satellite
φ0
→
n Sun
An observation from Earth of a star not at the limb of the Sun does not need to correct for the full deflection of Fig. 11.5.
For Jupiter, with M = 1.12 × 10−3 km and R = 6.98 × 104 km, we have
(φ) ,max = 6.42 × 10−8 rad = 0 .013. |
(11.57) |
This deflection has been measured by the Hipparcos astrometry satellite.
Of course, satellite observations of stellar positions are made from a position near Earth, and for stars that are not near the Sun in the sky the satellite will receive their light before the total deflection, given by Eq. (11.55), has taken place. This situation is illustrated in Fig. 11.6. An observer at rest at the position of the satellite observes an apparent position in the direction of the vector a, tangent to the path of the light ray, and if he knows his distance r from the Sun, he can calculate the true direction to the star, s. Exer. 16, § 11.7, derives the general result.
Although the deflection of light was a key to establishing the correctness of general relativity, it is interesting that there is a purely Newtonian argument for light deflection. This was first predicted by Cavendish in 1784 and independently by the German astronomer J. G. von Söldner (1776–1833) in 1801. The argument relies on light behaving like a particle moving at speed c. Since the motion of a particle in a gravitational field depends only on its velocity, Cavendish and von Söldner were able to compute the simple result that the deflection would be 2M/b, exactly half of the prediction of general relativity in Eq. (11.55). Einstein himself, unaware of this previous work, derived the same result in 1908, just at the beginning of his quest for a relativistic theory of gravity. So the triumph of general relativity was not that it predicted a deflection, but that it predicted the right amount of deflection.
The reason that this Newtonian result is half of the fully relativistic one is not hard to understand. Recall the remark at the end of the paragraph on post-Newtonian effects, that the orbits of planets depend only on g00 because their velocities are small. Now, light is not slow: the spatial increments dr are comparable to the time increments dt. This means that the spatial part of the metric, say grr, are of equal weight with g00 in determining the motion of a photon. Looking at Eq. (11.44), we see that the deviations from flatness in both g00 and grr are the same. Whatever deflection is produced by g00 (the only part of the metric that the Newtonian computations were sensitive to) is doubled by grr. The extralarge deflection of light in general relativity compared with Newtonian gravity is direct evidence for the curvature of space as well as time.