10
$\begingroup$

Using classical mechanics, the formula for gravitational attraction is

$$F = G\frac{m_1m_2}{r^2}.$$

This formula does not work for photons, and we need to use Einstein's theory of gravity to account for that, as the photon is massless. What if, instead of using the mass of the photon, we rather used the inertia of it?

The momentum of a photon is

$$p=\frac{h}{\lambda}.$$

Thus, using that, we can calculate its supposed 'mass' (inertia) as momentum is also equal to mass times velocity. So 'mass' of a photon is

$$m=\frac{p}{v}=\frac{h}{\lambda c}.$$

If we use this mass as the mass of a photon, can we use Newton's equation for gravitational attraction?

$\endgroup$
2

2 Answers 2

9
$\begingroup$

In Newtonian gravity the acceleration due to gravity is independant of the mass of the object - a falling elephant accelerates downwards at the same speed as an accelerating gnat (ignoring air resistance). That means the orbit of an object does not depend on the object's mass (provided the object is much lighter than the star).

The deflection of an object by a massive body is just a hyperbolic orbit, and like any other orbit the trajectory doesn't depend on the mass of the orbiting object, just its velocity and initial position. This means that if we calculate the angular deflection of an object travelling at $c$ in a hyperbolic orbit the result turns out to be independant of the mass of the object:

$$ \theta \approx \frac{2GM}{r_0 c^2} $$

where $M$ is the mass of the star/planet/whatever and $r_0$ is the distance of closest approach.

The point is that assuming some hypothetical value for the photon mass doesn't affect the Newtonian prediction because the Newtonian prediction doesn't depend on mass. So the answer to your question is that no, using an effective photon mass of $m = h/\lambda c$ does not give the correct result.

The GR calculation gives the deflection of light as:

$$ \theta \approx \frac{4GM}{r_0 c^2} $$

which is twice the Newtonian result. But this isn't some special case that applies only to light because GR gives different results to Newtonian gravity for all objects regardless of mass - the deflection of light is just a limiting case.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Doesn't the Newtonian prediction depend on the photon having mass though? Otherwise it violates Newton's first law. $\endgroup$
    – JLA
    Commented May 18, 2022 at 1:54
  • $\begingroup$ @JLA no this applies to massless particles as well. The acceleration of an object in a gravitational field is independent of the mass even when the mass is zero. $\endgroup$ Commented May 18, 2022 at 4:23
  • $\begingroup$ You can't show this within the framework of classical mechanics though, as far as I see. You can compute the acceleration due to gravity with nonzero mass and take the limit as $m\to 0\,,$ however in doing this you seem to get a contradiction with Newton's first law which states that an object can't change directions unless a nonzero force acts on it. $\endgroup$
    – JLA
    Commented May 18, 2022 at 5:12
  • $\begingroup$ @JLA Photons have a momentum so a force can act on them given by $F =dp/dt$. $\endgroup$ Commented May 18, 2022 at 5:14
  • $\begingroup$ Comment seems to relate to "Newtonian prediction doesn't depend on mass." The formula that doesn't feature mass of the attracted/bended object you marked as "GR". - This answer made me realize that bending does, in fact, not depend of the mass, thus not on the wavelength of the photon. That is impressive. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 24, 2022 at 18:56
3
$\begingroup$
  1. Since gravity couples to energy rather than rest mass it is natural to speculate that the two masses in Newton's law of gravitation should be replaced with the relativistic masses in a post-Newtonian approximation?

  2. The above proposal fails already for the bending/deflection of a massless or massive point particle of rest mass $m$ around a mass $M$. In a coordinate system where $M$ is at rest, a naive relativistic Newton's law would then read $$\frac{d(\gamma m {\bf v})}{dt}~ \stackrel{?}{=}~-G\gamma mM\frac{\bf r}{r^3}.\tag{1}$$ Since the velocity $|{\bf v}|$ is approximately constant, we can effectively remove the $\gamma$ factors on both sides, and we are back where we started, cf. the equivalence principle :(

  3. On the other hand, we know from the correct general relativistic formula that we are missing a factor $$\color{red}{1+\frac{v_0^2}{c^2}~=~ 2-\gamma_0^{-2}}\tag{2}$$ on the rhs. of eq. (1). The general relativistic bending/deflection formula is a factor $\color{red}{2-\gamma_0^{-2}}$ times the Newtonian result.

  4. The factor $\color{red}{2-\gamma_0^{-2}}$ can be understood via the ray equation $$ \frac{d}{ds}\left(n\sqrt{\frac{E^2}{c^2}-\frac{(mc)^2}{n}}\frac{dr_i}{ds} \right)~=~\frac{\frac{E^2}{c^2}-\frac{(mc)^2}{2n}}{\sqrt{\frac{E^2}{c^2}-\frac{(mc)^2}{n}}}\frac{\partial n}{\partial r^i} , \tag{3} $$ with effective index of refraction $$n({\bf r})~=~1-\frac{2\phi({\bf r})}{c^2} ,\tag{4}$$ and specific gravitational potential $$\phi({\bf r})~=~-GM/|{\bf r}|.\tag{5}$$ Here the COM $$ E~=~\gamma_0 mc^2,\qquad \gamma_0~=~\gamma(v_0), \tag{6}$$ is determined asymptotically at spatial infinity $|{\bf r}|=\infty$.

    The leading approximation of the ray equation (3) yields a specific Newton's 2nd law $$\frac{d^2r_i}{dt^2}~\approx~v_0^2\frac{d^2r_i}{ds^2}~~\stackrel{(3)+(6)}{\approx}~ v_0^2\frac{\gamma_0^2-\frac{1}{2}}{\gamma_0^2-1}\frac{\partial n}{\partial r^i}~\stackrel{(4)}{=}~-(\color{red}{2-\gamma_0^{-2}})\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial r^i} \tag{7}$$ up to the sought-for factor $\color{red}{2-\gamma_0^{-2}}$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Can you say if or where the mass of the photon comes in? See answer above: bending not dependent on mass of the object. "m" is for relativistic mass of the photon? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 24, 2022 at 18:58

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.