arXiv blog

Gravity, Quantum Objects, and Violations of the Equivalence Principle

Electrons in a conductor seem to behave differently under gravitational and inertial accelerations, threatening to tear down one of the cornerstones of modern physics.

kfc 08/28/2009

  • 5 Comments

How do quantum objects respond to gravity? It seems a simple enough question and yet one that leaves theorists scratching their heads. And so it should. The analysis to date implies that quantum objects violate the fundamental idea that gravitational and inertial mass are the same thing, an idea known as the equivalence principle.

Here's the thinking as laid out today by Timir Datta at the University of South Carolina and buddy Ming Yin: In the second decade of the 20th century, a group at Caltech began to puzzle over the inertial properties of electrons in conductors. They argued that the trailing end of an accelerating metal rod would be negatively charged because the electrons would lag behind the conducting lattice as it sped up. Likewise, they surmised that the circumference of a rotating disk would also be negatively charged with electrons flung into the periphery.

By this analysis, the effect of a linear or radial acceleration on a quantum fluid is the same as it is on a Newtonian fluid, like water in a spinning bucket. Richard Tolman and others even claimed to have measured this buildup of charge.

But according to the equivalence principle, if an acceleration can have this effect on electrons, so too can a gravitational field.

Here things get a little more complex. Calculating the equilibrium that occurs when gravity acts on a solid crystal filled with conducting electrons is no easy task.

It turns out that if the crystal is rigid, then gravity pulls the electrons downward, creating a tiny buildup of negative charge at the bottom of the crystal and a small electric field that points down. That's exactly as the equivalence principle implies.

If the crystal is deformable, however, gravity has a larger effect on the lattice than it does on the electrons. In this case, gravity compresses the lattice, creating a positive charge density toward the bottom of the conductor. Now the electric field is several orders of magnitude bigger and points in the opposite direction.

That's a troubling result because it means that it ought to be possible to tell the difference between an inertial acceleration and a gravitational one by measuring the direction of the electric field that builds up. And according to general relativity, that ain't possible. Surely general relativity, one of the cornerstones of modern physics cannot be wrong on this point. So what's gone wrong?

One obvious question that is unanswered (at least by Datta and Yin) is why an inertial acceleration does not compress the crystal lattice in the same way as a gravitational field, creating the same kind of positive charge density.

The measurements made by Tolman and others suggest that this kind of compression does not occur.

Unless the measurements are wrong. Could it be that this conundrum arises only because of a few erroneous measurements?

If so, perhaps it's time for somebody to try them again.

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0908.3885: Do Quantum Systems Break The Equivalence Principle?


TRSF: Read the Best New Science Fiction inspired by today’s emerging technologies.

Print

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

ZephirAWT

299 Comments

  • 899 Days Ago
  • 08/28/2009

Equivalence Principle

is violated by every massive body of finite size, where gravity force exhibits a center of mass (pair of plumblines would include angle), whereas acceleration force not. This renders equivalence principle a strictly local law, which effectivelly means, in real world Equivalence Principle is always violated at finite distance. Practical consequence of this violation is "dark matter" phenomena, which manifests by weak decelaration proportional to surface (Pioneer anomaly) - not volume/mass of object, being dual to Casimir force at short distance.

Reply

alextorex

1 Comment

  • 899 Days Ago
  • 08/28/2009

flawed experiment setup?

my guess is that accelerating electrons inside a conductor cannot be done exactly in the way gravitation does it.

When you are accelerating the conductor you push the lattice which holds the electrons. As a result electrons push each other. Now it depends how do you apply pressure on the lattice. Do you apply it on all points of the lattice like gravity does at once?

Gravity acts on all points in space on both the lattice and the electrons.

The inertial acceleration applied by some mechanical force does not.

On quantum scales this difference may become important. 

I am hobbyist in physics but tell if I am wrong.

Reply

ZephirAWT

299 Comments

  • 899 Days Ago
  • 08/28/2009

Re: flawed experiment setup?

Yep, whole thing appears flawed for me, too.

Reply

raamster

1 Comment

  • 898 Days Ago
  • 08/29/2009

Gravitation/acceleration equivalence

The notion that one could accelerate a solid quickly enough to note a change in charge distribution seems flawed in itself, as most solids consist of interacting electron shells between atoms.  The forces required would make measuring any such change problematic at best.  Perhaps they might be relevant in a neutron star, if electrons weren't already excluded.  But a great natural laboratory is available for effects of gravitational charges: the rings of Saturn.  There the evidence of such effects would have had geologic timescales to manifest themselves.

Reply

pbfred

2 Comments

  • 884 Days Ago
  • 09/12/2009

an easy violation of equivalance principle

Why bother with complicated experiments? I have for general viewing five inexpensive experiments than show that the equivalency principle can easily be violated. See
http://vixra.org/abs/0907.0018

In one of my experiments, I heat a 210 gm test mass to 400 degrees Celsius which rest under three copper containers filled with ice. When the test mass reaches 400 degrees, a thermally isolated force sensor indicates that the 210 gm gravitational mass has increased by 22% or 46 gm. The other experiment get similar results. Along with these experiments is a gravity theory that is based on these experimental results.

If you think about it, this 300-year-old idea that mass mediates the gravitational force is really a questionable idea that cries out for reconsideration. As Newton says,

"You sometimes speak of gravity as essential and inherent in matter. Pray to not ascribe that notion to me, for the cause of gravity is what I do not pretend to know and therefore would take more time to consider it"

With 95 % of the stuff of the universe missing, its time we think about dropping this superstitious inscrutable belief in mysterious powers of mass and consider the possibility that it is not mass but "spreading infrared radiation" that what mediates the gravitational force.

Reply

Bio

The Physics arXiv Blog produces daily coverage of the best new ideas from an online forum called the Physics arXiv on which scientists post early versions of their latest ideas. Contact me at KentuckyFC @ arxivblog.com

Follow The Physics arXiv Blog on Twitter

Subscribe to the arXiv blog RSS Feed

Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement