C20 Maxforce PDF

CHAPTER III
GRAVITATION AND RELATIVITY

G
eneral relativity can be explored and understood as easily as universal
ravitation and its inverse square law. We present an unconventional approach that
makes the main lines of general relativity, like those of special relativity, accessible to sec-
ondary school students. In the same way that special relativity is based on a maximum
speed in nature, general relativity is based on a maximum force in nature. We explore the
conditions for the validity of the limit and nd that it is impossible to exceed it in any
realistic physical system. In fact, the maximum force is achieved only on insurmountable
limit surfaces horizons. This connection implies the eld equations of general relativity;
in addition, it suggests some (new) experimental tests of the theory. Ref. 251
7. Maximum force: a simple principle encompassing general relativity
General relativity has the fame to be difcult and complex. However, general relativity can
be derived and explored in a simple way. We just saw that the theory of special relativity
appears when we recognize the speed limit in nature, take it as a basic principle and deduce
from it the full range of its consequences. In the year 2000, in this text, it was argued
by the present author an approach also developed later by Gary Gibbons that general Ref. 252, 253, 254
relativity can be approached in a similar way, by using the following basic principle: There
is a maximum force in nature:
F
c
4
4G
= 3.0 10
43
N . (188)
In nature, no muscle and no machine can beat this value; forces in nature are bound from
above. In order to prove the correctness and usefulness of this approach, a sequence of
arguments is required. The sequence is the same as for the discussion of the speed limit in
special relativity. First of all, we have to gather all observational evidence for the claimed
limit. Secondly, we have to specify the exact conditions for which the limit is valid. Thirdly,
we have to show that the limit value applies for all possible and imaginable situations, thus
showing that the claim is consistent. All possible paradoxes need to be resolved. Then, in
order to elevate the limit to a principle of nature, we have to show the main result: in the
same way that special relativity follows from the maximum speed, also general relativity
follows from the maximum force. Finally, we have to show that the limit allows a simple
deduction of difcult results. But before we start with the arguments, we explain the origin
of the limit value.
275
276 III Gravitation and Relativity
The maximum force limit
Avoiding the concept of force has a long tradition in physics. Heinrich Hertz made this
a central issue and purposely wrote an inuential textbook on classical mechanics without
using the concept. The fathers of quantum theory, who all knew the text, then dropped the
term force completely from the vocabulary. Parallel to this development, general relativity
eliminated the concept of gravitational force by reducing it to a pseudo-force.
Despite the history of the term force, the maximum force principle does make sense,
provided that we visualise it with the most useful denition: force is the ow of momentum
per time. The term ow reminds us that momentum always ows through some given
surface, a fact which will be of central importance later on.
A force limit has also an appealing aspect. In nature, forces can be measured. Every
measurement is a comparison with a standard. The force bound provides a natural unit of
force in the sense that Max Planck devised the system of natural units
derived from c, G
and h (though nowadays h is more popular). The maximum force thus provides a standard
of force valid in every place and at every instant of time.
The value of c
4
,4G differs from Plancks proposal in two ways: rst, the numerical factor
is new (Planck had in mind the value c
4
,G); second, the force unit is also a limit value. In
the last aspect, the maximum force plays the same role as the maximum speed. As we will
see later on, this connection is valid for all other Planck units as well, as soon as some Ref. 253
numerical factors are properly corrected. The maximum force can thus also be called the
corrected Planck force.
The expression for the maximum force is composed of the speed of light c and the con-
stant of gravitation G; it thus qualies as a statement on relativistic gravitation. The value
of the force limit is the energy of a Schwarzschild black hole divided by its diameter. For
Schwarzschild black holes, i.e., black holes that are neither charged nor rotating, the naive
diameter is related to the mass by Ref. 255
L = 4GM,c
2
. (189)
Due to the curvature of space, L is not a proper diameter, but twice the radius deduced
from the black hole circumference; in order to make the following discussion as intuitive as
possible we call the quantity L =2R diameter or size. The observers using this somewhat
sloppy vocabulary are all assumed to watch the black hole from outside. The size L of a
general object in nature obeys
L 4GM,c
2
. (190)
This relation can straightforwardly be transformed into the force bound (188). The factor
4 in the limit or equivalently, the use of diameter instead of any other multiple of the
radius is required to recover the inverse square law of universal gravity at low speeds and
curvatures.
When Planck discovered the quantum of action he had directly noticed the possibility to dene natural units. P. 571
On a walk with his seven-year-old son in the forest around Berlin, he told him that he had made a discovery as
important as universal gravity.
Motion Mountain www.motionmountain.net Copyright c Christoph Schiller November 1997 March 2004
7. Maximum force: a simple principle encompassing general relativity 277
The size limit (190) plays an important role in general relativity. The opposite inequality,
taken as a limit for the formation of black holes, is called the Penrose inequality and has
been proven for many physically realistic situations. The Penrose inequality can thus be Ref. 256, 257, 258
seen to imply the maximum force limit (and vice versa, as we will nd out below).
Alternatively, the maximum force is the energy required to create a given curvature of
space-time, divided by the curvature radius (and a numerical factor). In this sense, the value
of the maximum force measures the elasticity of space-time. This is the reason that the value
of the maximum force (divided by 2) appears in the eld equations of general relativity.
The role of the maximum force, like that of the maximum speed, is double. Each quantity
is a proportionality factors relating the two central quantities of the theory, and in addition,
each quantity is a limit value. In special relativity, the speed of light relates space and time;
in addition, it is the highest possible speed. In general relativity, the maximum force or
corrected Planck force relates curvature and energy density; in addition, it is the highest
possible force.
The value of the force limit also appears when the so-called surface gravity of a black hole
is multiplied by its mass. The surface gravity is the gravitational acceleration of a falling test
object at the surface of a black hole, divided by the red-shift factor. Both quantities diverge
when approaching the horizon (for static and uncharged black holes), but their ratio remains
nite. Actually, the force limit is not only realized by matter moving on the surface of black
holes; it describes matter or energy moving on every type of horizon.
In short, stating a maximum force bound is equivalent to stating that black holes are the
most concentrated formof matter or energy, and that in this most concentrated form the mass
is proportional to the diameter. Speaking more precisely, mass in its most concentrated
form is proportional to the square root of the surface area. No other system of matter or
radiation approaches this limit density. Even other types of black holes rotating, charged
or both do not exceed the size limit. In the same way, the size limit applies to observers Ref. 255
themselves. This connection is of central importance in the following.
In special relativity, the fundamental principle can be phrased, depending on personal
taste, either as v c or as v
max
= c = const; both are valid for all observers. Analogously, it
will be found that the basic principle of general relativitycan be phrased either as F c
4
,4G
or as F
max
= c
4
,4G = const for all realistic observers. It does not play a role whether this
observer is moving with high velocity relative to the system under observation, is freely
falling, or is strongly accelerated. However, we will see that it is essential that the observer
is realistic, i.e., not himself a black hole.
Since physical power is force times speed, and since nature provides a speed limit, multi-
plication of the force bound with c yields an equivalent principle: there is a maximumpower
in nature. The limit is given by
P
c
5
4G
= 9.1 10
51
W . (191)
This power or luminosity bound limits the output of car engines, lamps, lasers, stars and
galaxies. It is equivalent to 1.2 10
49
horse powers. In fact, the maximum power is emitted
when the full mass of a black hole is radiated away in the short time that light takes to
cross a length corresponding to its diameter. It is claimed that there is no way to get rid of
energy more quickly than that.
The power limit can be understood intuitively by noting that every engine produces ex-
hausts, i.e. some matter or energy that is left behind. For a lamp, a star, or an evaporating
black hole, the exhausts are the emitted radiation; for a car engine it is a certain amount
of hot gases; for a water turbine it is the slowly moving water leaving the turbine; for a
rocket it is the matter ejected at its back end; for a photon rocket or an electric motor it is
electromagnetic energy. If the power of an engine gets close to the limit value, the exhausts
increase dramatically in massenergy. For extremely high exhaust masses, the gravitational
attraction from these exhausts prevents further acceleration of the engine with respect to its
own exhausts. The maximum power bound thus expresses that there is a built-in braking
mechanism in nature.
Yet another equivalent limit appears when the maximum force is divided by c; this leads
to a maximum mass change in nature:
dm
dt

c
3
4G
= 1.0 10
35
kg,s . (192)
This bound poses a limit to pumps, jet engines and fast eaters. To get a feeling for the
limit, we recall an old denition: a black hole is matter in permanent free fall. The matter
ow, properly dened, just saturates the limit (192). The mass change limit expresses that
even the appetite of black holes is limited. Indeed, like the force bound, also the other two
limits are realized only on horizons. In fact, the mass change bound (192) and the mass
concentration limit (190) are essentially the same limit.
The claim of a maximum force in nature is almost too fantastic to be true. The rst task
is therefore to check it in all possible ways.
Experimental tests
Like the statement of a maximum speed in nature, also a maximum force must rst of all
be checked with experiment. Now, it is straightforward to conrm that no physical system
shows forces that even come close to the maximum force limit. Likewise, all objects in
everyday life are much larger than black holes of the same mass.
The same is the case in the microscopic world. Even the large accelerations that particles
feel in collisions inside the sun, in the most powerful accelerators, or in reactions due to
cosmic rays are found implying force values much smaller than the force bound. The same
is valid for neutrons in neutron stars, for quarks inside protons, or for particles observed to
fall towards black holes.
The force limit is only realized for matter moving exactly on a horizon. One such horizon
is well-known: the night sky. However, it is not possible yet to measure experimentally the
force value to which particles (or any other system) located there are subjected.
In the astronomical domain, forces between stars or galaxies are always below the limit,
as are forces in their interior. Not even the interactions between any two halves of the uni-
verse are found to exceed the limit, whatever physically sensible division between the two
halves is taken. (What is meant by a physically sensible division will be dened below;
for unrealistic divisions, exceptions to the maximum force claim can be constructed. The
reader might enjoy searching for such an exception.)
Astronomers have also failed to nd any region of space-time whose curvature is large
enough to allowexceeding the force limit; indeed, none of the numerous recent observations
of black holes have brought to light forces larger than the limit value or objects smaller than
the corresponding black hole radii. Despite these difculties, the force limit is observable
and falsiable. In fact, the force limit might be tested with high precision measurements
at gravitational wave detectors or in binary pulsars. A variation of this test, making use of
the appearance of the force limit in general relativitys relation between distance errors and
energy errors, has already been proposed elsewhere. Ref. 253
Like the force limit, also the power limit must be checked with observations. The lumi-
nosity of a star, a quasar or a gamma ray burster can indeed approach the power limit; so
does the power emitted from a binary pulsar. However, no violation of the power limit has
ever been observed. Even the sum of all light output from all stars in the universe does not Ref. 255
exceed the limit. Similarly, even the brightest sources of gravitational waves, merging black
holes, do not exceed the power limit. Gravitational wave detectors can thus be used to test
the maximum power value.
The power limit implies that the highest luminosities are only achieved when systems
emit energy at the speed of light. Indeed, the maximum emitted power is only achieved
when all matter is radiated away as rapidly as possible: the emitted power P = Mc
2
,(R,v)
cannot reach the maximum value if the body radius R is larger than a black hole or the
emission speed v is lower than that of light. The sources with highest luminosity must
therefore be of maximum density and emit entities without rest mass, such as gravitational
waves, electromagnetic waves or (maybe) gluons.
Einsteins expression for the power of gravitational radiation emitted by any system is
bound from above by the power limit. The only system that might saturate the limit is the Ref. 255
universe as a whole, in the case that light, neutrino, particle and gravitational wave ows are
added together. Indeed, the power limit can be tested by measuring to a high precision the
energy ow through the sky. It is predicted that this measurement a further test of general
relativity will saturate the power value. The experiment might even give a hint about new
particles that need to be found in order to saturate the limit.
In fact, together with the nite age and size of the universe, the power limit explains in a
simple way why the sky is dark at night: all stars in the universe, taken together, emit less
light than the power limit species.
In summary, in case of the maximum force limit the experimental data is not in contrast
with the claim; however, no known system with a horizon yet allows to reach or to measure
the maximum force value. In case of the maximum power limit, the experimental situationis
better, as several astronomical sources approaching the limit are available. The measurement
of the luminosity of the universe might even allow to check the limit with precision in the
foreseeable future.
The lack of high-precision experimental tests implies that imagined tests become partic-
ularly important. For a most efcient exploration of these tests, the force limit needs to be
claried in detail.
Conditions of validity
The maximum force value is not valid in every case. To clarify the point, the best way is
to compare the issue with that of the maximum speed. The speed of light (in vacuum) is
an upper limit only under strict conditions. It is a limit for motion of mass or energy only;
it can be exceeded for motions of non-material points. (Indeed, the cutting point of a pair
of scissors, a laser light spot on the moon, or the group velocity or phase velocity of wave
groups can exceed the speed of light.) The speed of light is a limit only if measured near the
moving mass or energy. (The moon moves faster than light if one turns around ones axis
in a second; distant points in a Friedmann universe move apart from each other with speeds
larger than the speed of light.) Finally, the observer must be realistic; the observer must be
made of matter and energy and thus move slower than light. (No system moving with or
above the speed of light can be an observer.) Ref. 260
The conditions for the validity of maximum force (and of the other bounds) are quite
similar to those for the validity of maximum speed. The force must be measured by an
observer which is located nearby. In addition, the observer must be realistic: the observer
must be of nite size, of nite mass and must not be a black hole. In particular, relativistic
gravity forbids point-like observers and test masses; they are not realistic. In addition, the
measured force must relate real energy values. If any of these conditions is not veried,
counter-examples to the maximum force claim can be found. It is worth exploring a few of
them in detail.
If an observer were point-like, he or she could approach the horizon of a black hole or a
second point-like system and be subject to forces which are innitely large. However, such
a situation is neither physically sensible nor realistic; taking into account the proper size
of the observer always eliminates the possibility of exceeding the maximum force bound.
An example will be explored below. Other apparent transgressions of the force limit can
be constructed when calculating the gravitational attraction between any two systems of
matter that come arbitrarily close, such as two point-like electrons, or even two pieces of
an electron or of a quark. However, the term arbitrarily close is not physically sensible.
There are two reasons. First, two objects or particles coming close enough possess such
a high energy that long before touching they will form a black hole. Second, no realistic
observer of nite size and mass can detect arbitrary close spacings; the smallest distance he
or she can observe is (twice) its own gravitational radius. Observers must not be black holes
and thus cannot be point-like. Together, these limiting conditions avoid most paradoxes.
An example will be shown in detail below.
If an observer is not nearby (or if it is assumed to be unrealistically large), extrapolation
can lead to further apparent counter-examples. For example, the freedom to dene coordi-
nate systems of any desired form seems to allow force values beyond the limit. Indeed, a
coordinate system can be chosen in such a way that a force value F in an inertial frame is
transformed to any desired value F
in a different coordinate system. For example, this can Ref. 261

happen near Rindler horizons of accelerated observers. However, in taking this conclusion
one has either extrapolated to a distant situation, or assumed that local observers at that dis-
tant situation can be point-like (or at least, smaller than a black hole), or both. This habit is
difcult to get rid of, as both special relativity and Galilean physics assume that observers
can be made as small as desired. However, this habit is not correct and must be changed. In
fact, the habit of imagining that observers can be point-like is the main reason that the force
limit has not been discussed before. Using point-like observers to disprove the force limit is
as wrong as using observers moving faster than light to disprove the speed limit in nature.
First Gedanken experiments and resolved paradoxes
Wenn eine Idee am Horizonte eben aufgeht, ist gew ohnlich die Temperatur der Seele dabei sehr kalt. Erst
allm ahlich entwickelt die Idee ihre W arme, und am heissesten ist diese (das heisst sie tut ihre gr ossten
Wirkungen), wenn der Glaube an die Idee schon wieder im Sinken ist.
Friedrich Nietzsche
The next step in the discussion of the force limit is the same as in the discussion of the speed
limit. We need to show that all imaginable experiments not only real ones satisfy the
limit. In special relativity, the properties of velocity addition and the divergence of kinetic
energy near the speed of light are sufcient to dismiss all imaginable attempts to exceed
the speed limit. In relativistic gravitation, there is a similar general answer; it will become
clear when a few examples are studied. The discussion will show that is it impossible both
to measure and to generate forces exceeding the limit.
The simplest attempt to exceed the force limit is to try to accelerate an object with a force
larger than the maximum value. A rst limitation to this dynamic attempt is provided by
special relativity: the acceleration of an object is limited by its length. Indeed, at a distance
given by c
2
,a in direction opposite to the acceleration a, a (Rindler) horizon appears: noth-
ing behind that distance can interact with the body. The surface is called a horizon because
a lack of interaction also prevents to see further than that distance. In other words, an accel-
erated body breaks at the latest at that point; the force F on a body of mass M and length L
is thus limited by
F
M
L
c
2
. (193)
It is straightforward to add the (usually small) effects of gravity. To be observable, an accel-
erated body must remain larger than a black hole; inserting the corresponding size condition
(190) we get the force limit (188). Dynamic situations thus do not allow us to exceed the
force limit.
We can also try to generate a higher force in a static situation, for example by pulling
two ends of a rope in opposite directions. We assume for simplicity that an unbreakable
rope exist. To produce a force exceeding the limit value, we need to store large (elastic)
energy into the rope. This energy must enter from the ends. When we increase the tension
in the rope to higher and higher values, more and more (elastic) energy must be stored
in smaller and smaller distances. To exceed the force limit, we would need to add more
energy per distance than a black hole can hold. But a black hole is surrounded by a horizon.
The horizon leads either to the breaking of the rope or to the detachment of the pulling
When an idea is just rising on the horizon, the souls temperature with respect to it is usually very cold. Only
gradually does the idea develop its warmth, and it is hottest (which is to say, exerting its greatest inuence)
when belief in the idea is already once again in decline. Friedrich Nietzsche (18441900), German philosopher
and scholar. This is aphorism 207 Sonnenbahn der Idee - from his text Menschliches Allzumenschliches
Der Wanderer und sein Schatten.
system from the rope. Indeed there is no way to stretch a rope across a black hole, even if
it is unbreakable. Horizons thus make it impossible to generate forces larger than the force
limit. In fact, the assumption of innite wire strength is unnecessary; the force limit cannot
be exceeded even if the strength of the wire is only nite.
We note that it is not important whether an applied force pulls as for ropes or wires
or pushes. In the case of pushing two objects against each other, an attempt to increase the
force value without end will eventually lead to the formation of a black hole in the space
between them or even in the space surrounding them. By denition, this happens precisely
at the force limit. As there is no way to use a black hole to push (or pull) onto something, the
attempt of achieving a higher force ends once a black hole is formed. Static forces cannot
exceed the limit value.
A force limit provides a maximum momentum change per time. We can also search for
a way to stop a moving physical system so abruptly that the maximum force might be
exceeded. We directly note that the non-existence of rigid bodies in nature, already known
from special relativity, makes a completely sudden stop impossible. Nevertheless, special
relativity on its own provides no lower limit on the stopping time. However, the inclusion
of gravity does. Stopping a moving system implies a transfer of energy. The energy density
in nature cannot exceed the mass density of a black hole times c
2
. Stopping a particle or a
system in too abrupt a way would require more energy to be transferred over the stopping
distance than can be put into a black hole of that size. Stopping an object thus does not
allow to exceed the force limit.
Similarly, if a rapid system is reected instead of stopped, a certain amount of energy
needs to be transferred and stored, though for a short time. During that time the energy
has to be taken over by the mirror and then returned to the system being reected. But the
stored energy per stopping distance cannot be larger than the energy of a black hole with
the corresponding diameter otherwise the energy would be swallowed and could not be
returned to the reected system. This argument applies from galaxies down to high-energy
particles. The force limit thus cannot be overcome by stopping or reecting a system with
high momentum.
Instead of systems that pull, push, stop or reect matter, we can explore systems where
radiation is used instead. However, the arguments hold in exactly the same way, indepen-
dently of whether photons, gravitons or other particles are used.
In fact, in all Gedanken experiments the maximum energy density of a black hole results
in a maximum force. (The converse also holds. Matter is concentrated energy; a large force
is required to concentrate a large energy in a small region of space whether this is done
by colliding particles, by annihilation or by gravitational collapse. To put an energy E into
a size L, the necessary force is given by F = E,L = Mc
2
,L. A maximum force of c
4
,4G
thus implies a size limit for a mass M given by L = 2R 4GM,c
2
.)
These general claims can also be tested with more concrete Gedanken experiments. For
example, building an innitely high brick tower does not generate a sufciently strong force
on its foundations; calculating the weight by taking into account its decrease with height
yields a nite value that never reaches the force limit. If we continually increases the mass
density of the bricks we need to take into account that the tower will change into a black
hole.
Even the attraction between the earth and a black hole or between two attracting black
holes does not yield sufciently high force values. Indeed, two black holes (of masses m
and M) cannot come closer than the sum of their horizon radii. For large black hole masses,
universal gravity provides a good approximation to determine their gravitational attraction.
Using F =GmM,r
2
with the distance r given by the (naive) sum of the two black hole radii
as r = 2G(M+m),c
2
, one gets
F =
c
4
4G
Mm
(M+m)
2
, (194)
which is never larger than the force limit. Two attracting black holes thus do not exceed the
force limit in the inverse square approximation. Like above, the minimum size of masses
does not allow to exceed the a maximum force. The inverse square law of universal gravity
thus does not allow to nd values higher than the force limit, provided the proper size of the
objects is taken into account.
It is well known that gravity bends space. To be fully convincing, the calculation needs
to be repeated taking space curvature into account. The simplest way is to study the force
generated by a black hole on a test mass hanging from a wire that is lowered towards a black
hole horizon. For an unrealistic point mass, the force would diverge on the horizon. Indeed, Ref. 255
for a point mass m lowered towards a black hole of mass M at (conventionally dened
radial) distance d, the force would be
F =
GMm
d
2
1
2GM
dc
2
. (195)
The expression diverges at d = 0, the location of the horizon. However, even a test mass
cannot be smaller than its own gravitational radius. If we want to reach the horizon with
a realistic test mass, we need to reduce the test mass m. Only a light and thus small
mass can get near the horizon. In that case, the resulting force tends to zero, as d =
2G(m+M),c
2
d =2GM,c
2
requires m0, which makes the force F(m, d) vanish. If on
the other hand, we remain away from the horizon and look for the maximum force by using a
mass as large as can possibly t into the available distance (the calculation is straightforward
algebra) again the force limit is never exceeded. In other words, for realistic test masses,
expression (195) is never larger than c
4
,4G. Taking into account the minimal size of test
masses thus prevents that the maximum force is exceeded in gravitational systems.
Also the theoretical search for physical systems that produce (naked) singularities
which would allow to produce forces of any value desired has not been successful. (We
return to the point below.) Ref. 255
We also need to check whether the force limit can be exceeded in other ways. The trans-
formation properties of the force 4-vector suggest that we can beat the force limit if the
boost velocity is high enough. However, also this argument disregards that all observers
have a nite extension L; an observer cannot be a black hole. Any boost that exceeds the
force value would transform an observer at that point to an entity smaller than a black hole.
This is impossible. The point can also be made in the following way. No observer can mea-
sure a force F larger than the limit force. If he did, the energy E = FL accumulated inside
his own size L while travelling through the force region would be larger than that of a black
hole; the situation would imply a transfer of energy from the force eld to the observer
which would be so high that the observer would turn into a black hole. However, a higher
density is not possible; already an observer that is a black hole could not communicate its
results to the outside world. In other words, boosts do not help to beat the force limit. (We
return to the issue below.)
The limit due to black hole formation also applies if the observer is strongly accelerating.
All these extreme observers show that we have to leave behind us a dearly held thinking
habit that we have kept from classical physics. In classical physics we are used to think
that the interaction necessary for a measurement can be made as small as desired. This
statement, however, is not valid for all observers; in particular, extreme observers cannot
full it. For them, the measurement interaction is always large.
The microscopic world fares no better. High forces do appear when two equal elementary
particles of high energy are smashed against each other. However, if the combined energy
of the two particles would be high enough to challenge the force limit, a black hole appears
before they can get sufciently close.
We can further attempt to exceed the force limit by accelerating an elementary particle
as strongly as possible or by colliding it with other particles. However, quantum theory
provides a limit to the acceleration of elementary particles given by Ref. 262
a
2mc
3
h
. (196)
In particular, this acceleration limit is satised in particle accelerators, in particle collisions
and in pair creation. For example, the spontaneous generation of electronpositron pairs in
high electromagnetic elds or near black hole horizons respects the limit (196). Inserting
the maximum possible mass for an elementary particle, namely the Planck mass, we again
get the maximum force as upper value.
Are black holes really the most dense form of matter or energy? The study of black hole
thermodynamics shows that mass concentrations with higher density than black holes would
contradict the principles of thermodynamics. In black hole thermodynamics, surface and Ref. 255
entropy are related; reversible processes that reduce entropy could be realized if physical
systems could be compressed to smaller values than the black hole radius. As a result, the
size of black holes is the limit size for a mass in nature. Equivalently, the force limit cannot
be exceeded in nature.
In special relativity, composing velocities by a simple addition of their magnitudes is not
possible. Also in the case of force such a naive sumis incorrect. If textbooks on relativity had
explored the behaviour of force vectors under addition with the same care with which they
explore the addition of velocity vectors, the force bound would have appeared much earlier
in the literature. However, special relativity is not sufcient to discover the limitations. Any
force implies momentum ow, and any momentum ow implies an energy ow. General
relativity is thus required to study these situations.
In summary, in all situations where the force limit is challenged, whenever the energy
ow reaches the black hole massenergy density in space or the corresponding momentum
ow in time, an event horizon appears; the appearing horizon makes it impossible to exceed
the force limit.
Gedanken experiments with the power limit
Like the force bound, also the power bound must be valid for all imaginable engines and
sources. A typical case would be the acceleration of a mass pulled by an unbreakable and
massless wire (assuming again that such a wire would exist). Now, as soon as the engine
would reach the power bound, either the engine or the exhausts would get transformed into
a black hole. If the engine is transformed into a black hole, it cannot emit any power; if the
exhausts are transformed, the power is limited by the size of the emitted black hole exhausts.
In either case the power limit cannot be exceeded. The power limit thus holds independently
of whether the engine is mounted inside the accelerating body or outside, on its track.
The power limit is often mentioned in relativity textbooks, though never in its full gen- Ref. 255
erality. Similarly, a maximum luminosity bound is often mentioned in astrophysical discus-
sions. The maximum bound on power, i.e. on energy per time, is claimed here to be valid
for any energy ow through any physical surface whatsoever. The physical surface may
even run across the whole universe. The stress is on physical. A surface is physical if (a)
it does not cross a horizon, and if (b) none of its parts is localized more exactly than the
minimum length possible in nature. The minimum length (and the corresponding maximum
curvature) will be introduced later; they are given by the corrected Planck length. If a sur-
face is not physical, counter-examples to the power or force limits can be found; however,
these counter-examples make no statements about nature. (Ex falso quodlibet.)
An absolute power limit states a limit on the energy that can be transported per time
through any imaginable surface. At rst sight, it may seem that the combined power emitted
by two radiation sources that each emit 3/4 of the maximum value should give 3/2 times the
upper value. However, the attempt does not lead to success; two such lamps are so massive
that they will form a black hole. No radiation can leave.
Another approach is to shine a powerful, short and spherical ash of light onto a spher-
ical mass. At rst sight it seems that the force and power limits can be exceeded, because
light energy can be concentrated into small volumes. However, one rapidly nds that high
concentrations of light energy form a black hole or induce the mass to form one. There is
no way to pump more energy per time into a mass than the amount limited by the power
limit. In fact, it is impossible to group light sources in such a way that their total output is
larger than the power limit. Every time the force limit is approached, a horizon appears that
prevents exceeding the limit.
One possible system that actually achieves the power limit is the nal stage of black hole
evaporation. But even in this case the power limit is not exceeded.
Checking that no set-up ever exceeds the maximum power from microscopic to astro-
physical is a further test of the principle. The challenge seems easy, as the surface may run
across the whole universe or envelop any number of elementary particle reactions. However,
no such choice is successful.
Gedanken experiments with momentum ow
The discussion of the power limit allows us to state the force limit with higher clarity. Force
is the time derivative of momentum. The force limit states that the ow of momentum per
time through any physical surface whatsoever cannot exceed c
4
,4G. The size of the surface
is not limited. Even dividing the universe into two and shooting as many black holes as
possible from one half of the universe to the other does not allow to exceed the force limit
(nor the power limit). The force bound is also independent of the shape of the surface (as
long as it is physical); this independence is a shadow of the diffeomorphism invariance of
general relativity.
The maximum force limit states that the stressenergy tensor, when integrated over any
physical surface, does not exceed the limit value. No such integral, over any physical surface Ref. 254
whatsoever, of any tensor component in any coordinate system, can exceed the force limit,
provided that it is measured by a nearby observer or a test body with a realistic proper size.
The maximum force limit thus applies to any component of any force vector, as well as to
its magnitude. It applies to gravitational, electromagnetic and nuclear forces. It applies to
all realistic observers. Whether the forces are real or ctitious is not important. It also plays
no role whether we discuss 3-forces of Galilean physics or 4-forces of special relativity.
Indeed, the force limit applied to the 0-th component of the 4-force is the power limit. (In
fact, the power limit implies that ow of water through tubes is limited in throughput. Can
you conrm this?) Challenge 575 ns
This formulation of the force limit sheds additional light on the issue of Lorentz boosts
that was mentioned above. A Lorentz boost of any non-vanishing force value seems to allow
exceeding the force limit at high speeds. However, implicit in this argument is the assump-
tion that there is no minimum length in nature. Without a minimum length, Lorentz boosts
are able to squeeze space-time without end and to increase the ow of momentum through a
surface without any upper bound. However, in the same way that every observer has a min-
imum size, also every physical surface has a minimum position indeterminacy, or apparent
thickness. This minimum thickness appears when the smallest possible observer is chosen;
the value is given by the corrected Planck length. The central point is that in all physical Ref. 253
solutions of the eld equations the value of the observable force, when averaged over this
minimum length, cannot exceed the force limit. Testing this condition on the known solu-
tions of the eld equations is an additional (but not necessarily powerful) way to check the
maximum force principle.
In summary, nature shows three equivalent bounds: the force limit, the power limit and
the mass change limit. They provide bounds to the ow of momentum, the ow of energy
and the ow of mass. All three limits are satised both in observation and in theory. Values
exceeding the limits can neither be generated nor measured. Gedanken experiments also
show that the three bounds are the tightest ones possible. Obviously, all three limits are
open to future tests and to further Gedanken experiments. Thus we can now turn to the nal
part of the argument.
Deducing all of general relativity
In order to elevate the maximum force limit to a physical principle, it is not sufcient to
show that it is a valid limit in nature. In addition, the full theory of general relativity, must
be deduced from it. To achieve this, we explore those systems that realize maximum force.
We directly note a central aspect. In the same way that the speed of light is never achieved
for matter, the force limit is never achieved in any accessible region of space-time. More pre-
cisely, it is impossible that the maximum force appears in nature across a three-dimensional
volume. If that were the case, a Lorentz boost could yield an even higher force value for the
points inside that volume. A neighbourhood of a point showing the maximum force must
have two properties: (1) it contains points with strictly smaller force values, and (2) any path
from lower values towards force values beyond the limit must be blocked.
The maximum force limit thus implies that the maximum value can only appear on a
point, a line, or a surface. The surface is obviously the most general case. In addition, such
a surface cannot be crossed: a surface on which the maximum force appears must be a limit
surface. In other words, surfaces which show the maximum force are what is usually called
a horizon. For example, the outer surface of the smallest possible (spherical) masses are
dened by having the maximum force as surface gravity (times mass); such a surface is
necessarily a horizon.
The maximum force appears on horizons. Every horizon implies an energy ow. We
explore a horizon of area A with surface gravity a crossed by an energy E. A maximum
force implies a maximum energy ow. For an energy E owing through a horizon surface
A we take the equal sign in the force limit and deduce
EL
A
=
c
4
4G
, (197)
where L is the proper length of the moving energy pulse or mass ow, taken in the direction
perpendicular to the horizon. On a horizon, bodies feel the surface gravity a. Now, special
relativity shows that a pulse or body under acceleration a must have aL c
2
. On a horizon,
the extreme case takes place, so that we have
E =
c
2
4G
aA , (198)
where a is the surface gravity of the horizon and A its area. We rewrite the relation (198) for
the differential case as
E =
c
2
4G
aA . (199)
In this way, the relation also applies to curved horizons and to horizons changing over time.
Relation (199) is well-known, though with somewhat different names for the observables.
No communication is possible across a horizon; thus the detailed fate of energy owing
through a horizon is unknown. Energy whose fate is unknown is usually called heat. Re-
lation (199) therefore states that the heat owing through a horizon is proportional to the
horizon area. (When quantumtheory is introduced into the discussion, the area of a horizon
can be called entropy and its surface gravity can be called temperature; relation (199) can
then be rewritten as Q = TS. However, this translation, which requires the quantum of
action, is unnecessary here. The present discussion remains purely relativistic.)
In 1995, Jacobson has given a simple proof that if heat ow is proportional to horizon Ref. 264
area and surface gravity for all observers and all horizons, then general relativity holds. The
clearest summary of the derivation appears when the quantumof action and thus the whole
discussion of horizon thermodynamics is left out.
We start by introducing the local Killing eld that generates the horizon, with suitably
dened magnitude and direction, in order to specify exactly what is meant by the term
perpendicular used above. The surface gravity a then is the acceleration of the Killing
orbit with the maximal norm. Using the stressenergy tensor T
ab
, the heat or energy ow
then becomes T
ab
a
. Jacobson uses the Raychaudhuri equation (and assumes vanishing Ref. 264
torsion) to show that on a horizon the energyarea relation (199) can be rewritten as
T
ab
a
d
b
=
c
4
8G
R
ab
a
d
b
, (200)
where d is a general surface element and R
ab
is the Ricci tensor. In this case, the Ricci
tensor describes how the shape of the horizon changes over space and time. This equation,
together with the local conservation of energy and momentum, can only be satised if
T
ab
=
c
4
8G
R
ab
(
1
2
R+)g
ab
. (201)
The constant appears as integration constant whose value is not xed. These are the full
eld equations of general relativity, including the cosmological constant . By choosing
a suitable observer, we can position a horizon at any required point in space-time. The
equations of general relativity are thus valid generally, for all times and positions.
In case of a non-vanishing cosmological constant, the force limit holds exactly only if
the constant is positive; this is the case for the presently measured value, which is Ref. 259
10
52
,m
2
. Indeed, the radiusmass relation of black holes Ref. 255
2GM = Rc
2
(1

3
R
2
) (202)
implies that a radius-independent maximum force is valid only for positive or zero cosmo-
logical constant. For a negative cosmological constant the force limit would only be valid
for innitely small black holes. In the following, we take a pragmatic approach and note
that a maximum force limit can be seen to imply a vanishing or positive cosmological con-
stant. Obviously, the force limit does not specify the value of the constant; to achieve this,
a second principle needs to be added. A straightforward formulation is proposed below. P. 290
In short, the maximum force principle is a simple way to state that on horizons, energy
ow is proportional to area and surface gravity. This connection allows to deduce the full
theory of general relativity. In particular, a maximum force value is thus sufcient to tell
space-time how to curve. We note that if no force limit would exist in nature, it would be
possible to pump any desired amount of energy through a given surface, including any
horizon. In this case, energy ow would not be proportional to area, horizons would not
have the properties they have and general relativity would not hold. We thus get an idea
how the maximum ow of energy, the maximum ow of momentum and the maximum
ow of mass are all connected to horizons. The case is most obvious for black holes, where
the energy, momentum, or mass are those falling into the black hole.
The force limit can also be visualized in another way. The force limit avoids that space-
time is torn into separate pieces. It ensures that space and time (in general relativity) remain
a continuous manifold, without being ripped or forming defects of any kind.
The force limit also implies that the smallest possible masses in nature are black holes.
The precise value of the size of (spherical) black holes was deduced from the maximum
force limit already above. In other words, the maximum force limit implies the validity of
the Schwarzschild solution and the existence of black holes.
In summary, the ideas, the effects and the full eld equations of general relativity follow
from the maximum force principle; at the same time, the maximum force itself is contained
in general relativity. The two approaches are equivalent. The maximum force limit encom-
passes all of general relativity.
Consequences for general relativity
Wir leben zwar alle unter dem gleichen Himmel,
aber wir haben aber nicht alle den gleichen Horizont.
Konrad Adenauer
The maximum force principle implies that gravitational energy as long as it can be dened
falls in gravitational elds in the same way as other energy types. For example, it predicts
that the Nordtvedt effect vanishes. Lunar range measurements have conrmed this absence. Ref. 255
The maximum force principle contains only one new parameter, namely the gravitational
constant G. As such it is in contrast with any theory that contains other parameters. The fa-
mous BransDicke theory, which differs from general relativity for high curvatures, violates
the maximum force limit and is thus eliminated as a description of nature.
The maximum force is the standard of force. As a result, one can argue that the gravita-
tional constant G is a deduced quantity, deduced from this maximum force. As mentioned
above, the maximum force also measures the elasticity of space-time.
The maximum force is the standard of force. This implies that the gravitational constant
G is constant in space and time or at least, that its variations across space and time cannot
be detected. Present data supports the claim to high precision. The force limit also implies Ref. 265
that gravitational waves, being waves of massless energy, travel with the speed of light c.
A force or power limit implies that perfectly plane waves of any type do not exist in
nature. Every wave whether electromagnetic, gravitational or made of matter carries
energy and momentum; a perfectly plane wave would have innite size and would carry
innite momentum and energy. Such a wave would exceed both the force and the power
limit. Taken the other way round, a wave whose integrated intensity approaches the force
and power limits cannot be plane. The power limit thus implies a limit on the product of
intensity I (measured in energy per time and area) and size/curvature radius R of the front
of a wave:
4R
2
I
c
5
4G
. (203)
Obviously, this statement is difcult to check experimentally, whatever the frequency and
type of wave, as the value appearing on the right hand side is extremely large. Maybe fu-
ture experiments with gravitational wave detectors, X-ray detectors, gamma ray detectors,
radio receivers or particle detectors might allowtesting the relation with precision. The non-
existence of plane gravitational waves also avoids the predicted production of singularities
when two such waves collide.
The maximum force principle, or the equivalent minimum size of matterenergy systems,
prevents the formation of naked singularities and implies the validity of cosmic censorship.
In particular, the maximum force principle can thus be seen as a way to deduce the Penrose
inequality m
A,16 c
2
,G that describes the maximum size of black holes.
The maximum force is realized for systems which produce the maximum energy ux
through a surface. If such a surface, a horizon, is closed and bounded, there is a black hole
inside. In order that the ux is maximal on each point of the surface, the surface area must
be small enough. The well-known hoop conjecture states simply speaking that matter or
energy which is compressed into a region of space smaller than its own gravitational size
in all directions must form a black hole. In other words, for spherical situations at least, Ref. 266
the force bound implies the hoop conjecture. For aspherical situations, the maximum force
limit suggests the same result, as a less than maximal ux in a surface point implies the lack
of the horizon property at that point and its environment.
Since the night sky is also a horizon, it is predicted that all energy owing through it adds
up to a power given by c
5
,4G. Precision measurements of the uxes (matter, light, grav-
itational waves, etc.) might allow to check this prediction. In addition, the measurements
might allow to check wether unidentied matter or radiation types exists in nature.
The relation of the maximum force principle to theories with torsion still needs to be
explored. The inclusion of torsion into general relativity does not require new fundamental
constants; indeed, the absence of torsion was assumed in the Raychaudhuri equation used by
Jacobson. The use of the extended Raychaudhuri equation, which includes torsion, should Ref. 267
allow to deduce the full EinsteinCartan theory from the maximum force principle.
Outlook
In summary, the maximum force principle allows a simple axiomatic formulation of gen-
eral relativity. At the same time, the principle has obvious applications for the teaching of
the eld. The maximum force principle brings general relativity to the level of rst year
university and possibly to secondary school students; only the concept of maximum force
and the concept of horizon is necessary. The maximum force limit also proposes several
experimental tests and Gedanken experiments at high curvature.
The negative energy volume density c
4
,4G introduced by the positive cosmological
constant corresponds to a negative pressure, as both quantities have the same dimensions.
When multiplied with the minimumarea (given by the corrected Planck area) we get a force P. 880
value
F =
hc
2
= 4.8 10
79
N . (204)
This is also the gravitational force between two corrected Planck masses located at the
cosmological distance
,4. If we make the (wishful) assumption that this is the smallest

possible force in nature (the numerical factor is not nalized yet), we get the fascinating
conjecture that the full theory of general relativity, including the cosmological constant, is
dened by the combination of a maximum and a minimum force in nature.
We are now ready to explore the consequences of general relativity and its eld equations
in more detail.
Bibliographic references
251 The author thanks Corrado Massa, Peter Brown and Steve Carlip for interesting discussions.
Cited on page 275.
252 It might be that the rst published statement of the principle was in an earlier edition of this
text, in the chapter on gravitation and relativity, presently on page 301. The reference is C.
SCHILLER, Motion Mountain A Hike Through and Beyond Space and Time Following the
Concepts of Modern Physics, found at http://www.motionmountain.net. Discussions of the ap-
proach can be found in various usenet discussion groups over the subsequent years. Cited on
page 275.
253 C. SCHILLER, Maximum force and minimum distance: physics in limit statements,
http://www.motionmountain.net/C19-LIMI.pdf, part of this text. Cited on pages 275, 276,
279 and 286.
254 G.W. GIBBONS, The maximum tension principle in general relativity, Foundations of Physics
32, pp. 1811o1, :oo:, or http://www.arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0210109. Cited on pages 275
and 286.
255 H.C. OHANIAN & R. RUFFINI, Gravitation and Spacetime, W.W. Norton & Co., New York,
1. Cited on pages 276, 277, 279, 283, 284, 285, 288 and 289.
256 R. PENROSE, Naked singularities, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 224,
pp. 1:1, 1. Cited on page 277.
257 G. HUISKEN & T. ILMANEN, The Riemannian Penrose Inequality, Int. Math. Res. Not. 59,
pp. 1o1o8, 1 Cited on page 277.
258 S.A. HAYWARD, Inequalities relating area, energy, surface gravity and charge of black holes,
Physical Review Letters 81, pp. , 18. Cited on page 277.
259 See for example R.A. KNOP & al., New constraints on Omega M, Omega Lambda, and w
from an independent set of eleven high-redshift supernovae observed with HST, Astrophysical
Journal 598, pp. 1o:1, :oo. Cited on page 288.
260 E.F. TAYLOR & J.A. WHEELER, Spacetime Physics Introduction to Special Relativity, sec-
ond edition, Freeman, 1:. Cited on page 280.
261 This candidate counterexample was suggested by Steve Carlip. Cited on page 280.
262 E.R. CAIANIELLO, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento 41, p. o, 18. Cited on page 284.
263 R.P. FEYNMAN, R.B. LEIGHTON & M. SANDS, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Addison
Wesley, 1, volume II, p. :-1. Cited on page .
264 T. JACOBSON, Thermodynamics of spacetime: the Einstein equation of state, Physical Review
Letters 75, pp. 1:6o1:6, 1 or http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9504004. Cited on pages
287 and 288.
265 C. WILL, Was Einstein Right? Putting General Relativity to the Test, Oxford University Press,
1. See also his paper http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9811036. Cited on page 289.
266 K.S. THORNE, Nonspherical Gravitational Collapse - A Short Review, in JOHN KLAUDER,
editor, Magic without Magic: John Archibald Wheeler, W.H. Freeman & Co., San Francisco,
1:, pp. :1:8. Cited on page 290.
267 G.E. PRINCE & M. JERIE, Generalising Raychaudhuris equation, in Differential Geometry
and Its Applications, Proc. Conf., Opava (Czech Republic), August 2731, 2001, Silesian Uni-
versity, Opava, 2001, pp. :::. Cited on page 290.

C20 Maxforce PDF

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

C20 Maxforce PDF

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

CHAPTER III

GRAVITATION AND RELATIVITY

in a different coordinate system. For example, this can Ref. 261

,4. If we make the (wishful) assumption that this is the smallest

Você também pode gostar