2

So, I'm reading The Hidden Reality by Brian Greene, and on page 31, he does state in a note that time distorsion has a bigger influence than space distorsion? I have trouble understanding that, since after saying that, he only goes on to explain how time distorsion works, nothing special.

Moreover, I only have the book in french, my native language, so it may not help a lot, but I always prefer quoting:

[...] il se trouve que c'est la courbure du temps -et non de l'espace- qui exerce l'influence la plus forte.

To narrow it down, I do not see how time and space could be comparable measures, since their units are non-equivalent, unless we think about it through an anthropological view, and see our international units as universal units, which makes no sense.

Or maybe could it be that those units really have found equivalents? I have no idea.

And secondly, how could we see this? I have never heard of such experiments or studies, but if anyone has any idea or maybe mathematics on this, I would gladly appreciate it.

Qmechanic
  • 220,844

4 Answers4

3

The units of space and time are tightly linked by the speed of light. In the framework of general relativity it makes a lot of sense to associate the differences in time $\Delta t$ with the quantity $c\Delta t$ which has the units of length. These so-called "natural units" place space and time on equal footing in the equations.

The idea about curvature of time being the more important one probably refers to the fact that in the Newtonian limit, that is when general relativity looks almost like Newtonian gravity, the time-time component of the metric tensor is the most important one (while time-space, space-time, and space-space) are less important.

Unfortunately I do not have a simple intuitive explanation of this fact and I hope that someone else could provide it.

3

In the case of propagating light the distribution is about 50/50. Here I mean by 'distribution' how much time effect there is, and how much spatial effect


Around 1907 Einstein explored (and published) a theory that featured gravitational time dilation, but otherwise geometrically straight space.

So that was an early exploration of what came to be the principle of equivalence.

Einstein looked at what will happen to light that just grazes the Sun, and is then observed on Earth. That is, Einstein looked at the case that was later a famous corroboration of General Relativity by Eddington.

With that early exploratory theory Einstein came to a value for the deflection of around 0.8 arc seconds.

According to newtonian gravity there cannot be a deflection of light; electromagnetic radiation isn't matter.

(What can be done in terms of newtonian gravity is to calculate the amount of deflection of a particle-with-mass that moves at the same speed as light propagates. That newtonian calculation also comes out around 0.8 arc seconds.)


As we know, the completed GR theory features both time curvature and spatial curvature, and the time curvature and spatial curvature are in a specific relation to each other. (It is intrinsically a single spacetime curvature.)

One way of conceptualizing deflection of light by curvature of spacetime is to think in terms of Huygens' principle.

If there is a wavefront then the orientation of that wavefront is affected both by the time gradient and by the spatial gradient.

In terms of GR the expected deflection of light is 1.75 arc seconds.


1.75 arc seconds is close to double the deflection compared to the prediction of the 1907 exploratory theory. That doubling is not a coincidence: for light the contributions of time effect and spatial effect are 50/50.


The slower the motion, the more the time effect dominates. At the velocities of planets in their orbits the spatial component of spacetime curvature plays a negligable part. The only planet for which it is just discernible is Mercury. And yes, the anomalous precession of Mercury's orbit correlates with the spatial component of spacetime curvature.


The way I understand it:

Both in terms of newtonian gravity and GR: we have of course: the faster an object moves (as it grazes a celestial body), the smaller the angle of deflection.

In terms of GR:
At fast velocities the time effect has less time to make a difference, that gives opportunity for the spatial effect to play a comparitively larger role. But you have to go all the way to relativistic velocity to get to where the spatial effect makes an appreciable difference. Of course, the velocities of orbits of celestial bodies of a solar system are nowhere near relativistic velocity.

It is only when a propagation is all the way at the speed of light that there is a 50/50 distribution of time effect and spatial effect.


I should emphasize though, that distinguishing between time effect and spatial effect of spacetime curvature is purely for the purpose of dividing the explanation into a sequence of steps.
I emphasize that the way that curvature of spacetime affects motion is a single effect.



APPENDIX

Possible the following question arises: Einstein's 1907 exploratory theory: how can a theory with only gravitational time dilation and no curvature of space produce the same gravitational effect as newtonian theory?

The idea is to take the equivalence of inertial mass and gravitational mass, and take that to the next level.

We know the idea of a wheel-shaped space station that is rotating, so that the space station is pulling G's; the inhabitants of the space station are pulling G's.

Since the space station is rotating: levels that are further away from the axis of rotation are circumnavigating at a faster velocity, so for those levels a smaller amount of proper time elapses.

So: for the rotating space station there is in the radial direction a time gradient.

If the principle of equivalence holds good then time gradient and pulling G's are intrinsically related. If you are pulling G's then there is a time gradient. If there is a time gradient then you are pulling G's.

Cleonis
  • 24,617
1

The already correct answers can be summarized in one statement:

"The speed of light is really fast."

But to be more quantitative, we all know Wheeler's famous: "Matter tells spacetime how to curve, and spacetime tells matter how to move."

The first part of that statement is captured in Einstein's field equations (which I am not going to look up, so):

$$ G_{\mu\nu} \propto T_{\mu\nu} $$

The LHS is a curvature tensor, and the RHS is the stress-energy tensor.

Now for a mass in motion, all we have is four momentum:

$$ p_{\mu} = (E/c, \vec p) = \gamma m(c, \vec v) $$

Note that the time component, $p_0$, is huge: $c$, while the space component is an ordinary velocity, perhaps zero.

From that 4-vector, we can construct two symmetric 4-tensors:

$$ m^2\eta_{\mu\nu}, p_{\mu}p_{nu} $$

The stress energy tensor is related to the latter. So at rest, all that is non-zero is the time-time component

$$p_0^2 = (E/c)^2 = (mc^2)^2/c^2 = (mc)^2 $$

Which says: mass causes gravity. Ofc, relativity says pressure, stress, energy flux etc also cause gravity, but mass dominates under normal conditions.

The second 1/2 of Wheeler's statement is captured in the geodesic eq:

$$\frac{d^2 x^{\mu}}{ds^2} + \Gamma^{\mu}_{\alpha\beta}u^{\alpha}u^{\beta} =0$$

The first term is an acceleration, as in $\vec F = m\vec a$, and the second term I have been a bit lazy and just written a velocity. Roughly:

$$ u_{\mu} = p_{\mu}/c = \gamma(c, \vec v) $$

which is also dominated by the time component, $c$.

At $\vec v = 0 $ in the Schwarzschild metric, this becomes, for $r \gg R_S$:

$$ \ddot r = -\frac{GM}{r^2} $$

which is Newton's law of gravity.

It's a good exercise to work that all out in detail. The result is that all the action is in the time or time-time components of the various 4-vectors and tensors.

Note that the same is true in electromagnetism, where the electric force is much stronger than magnetism. Though it's somewhere unit-system dependent, the force between two 1C charges at 1 m is:

$$ F = \frac 1 {4\pi\epsilon_0} \frac{(1\,{\rm C})^2}{(1\,{\rm m})^2} \approx 9\,{\rm GN} $$

while the force per meter between two wires carrying 1 amp each separated by a meter is $200\,$ nN.

JEB
  • 42,131
0

He could be meaning that time dilation is considered the actual cause of gravity. Nobel Lauriat Kip Thorne referred to "Einstein's Law of Time Warps". He said "Things like to live where they age the most slowly. Gravity pulls them there. And so as an application, the Earth's mass warps time according to Einstein. It slows time near the surface of the Earth. And this time warp produces gravity."

It could be thought that the warping of space causes the time dilation, and subsequently the time dilation causes things to fall. Therefore time dilation would have the more important impact. If time dilation didn't exist, there would be no planets for us to live on. But of course the two are connected.

foolishmuse
  • 5,016