15

I know that under general relativity energy and mass are equivalent under $E=mc^2$. But has it been experimentally proven that energy alone causes gravity, for example, does a nuclear reaction generate gravity independent of the mass of the reactor alone? Is a kugelblitz possible?

Qmechanic
  • 201,751
foolishmuse
  • 4,551
  • 4
  • There is no such thing as "energy alone" - a "box of light" isn't "energy", it's a bunch of photons/coherent photon states. 2. Related/possible duplicate: https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/209919/50583
  • – ACuriousMind Apr 14 '22 at 18:03
  • @ACuriousMind from what I can see, that possible duplicate looks at e=mc^2 in general terms, but does not specifically address gravity. – foolishmuse Apr 14 '22 at 18:26
  • 8
    A nuclear reaction wouldn't "generate" gravity... the energy liberated by a nuclear reactor was always in the nuclei beforehand (i.e. in the mass of the fuel). The prediction is not that the reaction causes "more" gravity but that the reaction doesn't reduce gravity (since all the mass-energy is still there). Good luck keeping the energy output in a box long enough to weigh it, though. (Though doesn't weighing the reactants and products of a nuclear reaction as in one of the linked answers count as addressing gravity?) – HTNW Apr 14 '22 at 18:33
  • 3
    If you're not asking about $E=mc^2$, I'm not sure what you're asking about. General relativity doesn't claim that "energy causes gravity", it claims that the Einstein field equations tell us how the stress-energy tensor determines the geometry/metric of spacetime. Are you asking about that? – ACuriousMind Apr 14 '22 at 18:39
  • @HTNW correct, what I asked was does the nuclear reaction generate gravity INDEPENDENT of the mass. So as the mass decreases, does the overall gravity stay the same? And I am not looking for a theoretical answer, but has it been experimentally tested? After all, if they few an airplane to test kinetic time dilation, wouldn't they have done some test on this as well? – foolishmuse Apr 14 '22 at 18:43
  • @ACuriousMind I am asking about E=mc^2, but I am asking about an experimental test of one particular aspect of it. – foolishmuse Apr 14 '22 at 18:44
  • "what I asked was does the nuclear reaction generate gravity INDEPENDENT of the mass." If the fuel weighs less after the reaction, Earth's gravitational force on it is reduced, so by Newton's third law its gravitational force on Earth is reduced too. This happened due to a loss of mass, in turn due to a loss of energy. – J.G. Apr 14 '22 at 21:20
  • 2
    Does this answer your question? Does a photon exert a gravitational pull? –  Apr 14 '22 at 21:32
  • The confusion arises from the concept of mass. You can only measure mass through measuring it's gravitational force, and gravity is the effect of energy on spacetime 'fabric'. So what you are really measuring is the energy content, not mass. Mass is just a conceptual construct in order to create correlations between things like force and energy. But it is somewhat illusory and this creates problems like the paradox of relativistic and inertial mass and also the wave-particle duality. Think of mass like a parameter that is derived from energy, that should clear the confusion – Nk07 Apr 15 '22 at 02:54
  • @Nk07 You can only measure mass through measuring it's gravitational force Huh? You can measure mass from inertia. – PM 2Ring Apr 15 '22 at 02:59
  • Oh right. Forgot to mention that lol. But regardless, my main point still stands that mass is a parameter that is derived from energy, not the other way round. If you measure mass using inertia, you are calculating it based on force and the rate of change of velocity, both of which are determined by energy – Nk07 Apr 15 '22 at 03:26
  • @Nk07 No, you can have massless particles that do have energy. –  Apr 15 '22 at 08:59
  • @DvijD.C. I don’t think I’ve said anything that contradicts that statement – Nk07 Apr 15 '22 at 09:56
  • Unbound energy tends to move at the speed of light, and thus is hard to test for gravity. OTOH, bound energy is what gives "matter" most of it's mass, so we've already tested that extensively. – RBarryYoung Apr 15 '22 at 12:51
  • @Nk07 "my main point still stands that mass is a parameter that is derived from energy" this contradicts the fact that mass can be either zero or non-zero for a particle that has the same amount of energy. –  Apr 15 '22 at 13:56
  • 1
    I don't think this is a duplicate of the proposed question. The OP here wants to know whether there has been experimental proof of the gravitational effects of photons (and other energy), not what the theory predicts. – Michael Seifert Apr 15 '22 at 17:54
  • You're asking a question about the fundamental nature of reality. With most such questions, you're bumping against the limits of human knowledge; the path towards experimental confirmation is not going to be just a single straightforward experiment that nicely aligns with our everyday intuition and 100% satisfies your (or scientists') skepticism, it's going to be multiple lines of experimental evidence that, taken with what else is known, together build up to a high level of confidence that what you're asking about is the case. So it's not going to be a straightforward/quick answer. – Filip Milovanović Apr 16 '22 at 13:05
  • Also note that "Does energy cause gravity?" and "Is a kugelblitz possible?" aren't exactly the same question; the latter might not be impossible in the mathematical sense, but would require extremely special circumstances, so we might never see such a thing in practice. The practical feasibility of a kugelblitz is entirely separate from the first question. – Filip Milovanović Apr 16 '22 at 13:23