CONFORMAL TRANSFORMATIONS THAT CLICKBONUS ⑤ (full length) / Following the phase all the way to its destination

Bonus ④ nearly concluded that gravity cannot see the phase of a mass. Quantise, and there turns out to be exactly one way through.

Can gravity see a phase? \(G\) carries units — so it was bookkeeping. The physics is \(\alpha_G\), a different number for every particle.
And there is only one kind of place in the universe where a mass phase can show up: a spacetime that rotates.

What you need: division, the argument of a complex number, and the nerve to drop "the strength of gravity" \(\alpha_G=(m/M_{\rm Pl})^2\)

Bonus ④ chased "does the electron's mass have an imaginary part" and found that the phase has two knobs (Weyl and chiral), that a lone phase is bookkeeping while phase differences are physics. This time we follow where that phase goes in gravity, all the way. The answer comes in three stages — classical gravity does not see the phase; quantum gravity sees it through an anomaly; and it is visible only when spacetime is rotating. Along the way it also turns out that there is no such thing as a single "strength of gravity".

01\(G\) was bookkeeping

Apply episode 10's decision procedure to the most famous constant of all. Newton's \(G\) has units \(\mathrm{m^3\,kg^{-1}\,s^{-2}}\) — emphatically dimensionful. Left column: bookkeeping.

So what is the physics? Build a dimensionless quantity out of \(G\), \(\hbar\), \(c\) and a mass, and there is only one answer.

The dimensionless coupling of gravity
$$\alpha_G=\frac{G m^2}{\hbar c}=\left(\frac{m}{M_{\rm Pl}}\right)^2$$

Exactly the same shape as the fine structure constant \(\alpha=e^2/(4\pi\varepsilon_0\hbar c)\) — except that a mass appears in it.

That is the decisive difference. Charge is quantised, so \(\alpha\) is the same number for every particle; mass is not quantised. So \(\alpha_G\) is a different number for every particle.

\(m/M_{\rm Pl}\)\(\alpha_G=(m/M_{\rm Pl})^2\)
neutrino (\(m_3\))\(4.10\times10^{-30}\)\(1.68\times10^{-59}\)
electron\(4.19\times10^{-23}\)\(1.75\times10^{-45}\)
muon\(8.65\times10^{-21}\)\(7.49\times10^{-41}\)
proton\(7.69\times10^{-20}\)\(5.91\times10^{-39}\)
tau\(1.46\times10^{-19}\)\(2.12\times10^{-38}\)
top quark\(1.41\times10^{-17}\)\(2.00\times10^{-34}\)
Planck mass\(1\)\(\mathbf{1}\)

From the neutrino to the top that is a spread of \(1.19\times10^{25}\). Which means:

Conclusion of section 01

"Gravity is weak" is a sentence with no meaning until you name the particle.

There is no single strength of gravity. \(G\) is bookkeeping; the physics is a per-particle \(\alpha_G\). Against electromagnetism, \(\alpha/\alpha_G(e)=4.17\times10^{42}\) — but that too needs the rider "for the electron".

02\(\alpha_G\) is "how close to being a black hole"

This number has a far more intuitive meaning. Every particle comes with two lengths: its size as a black hole (the Schwarzschild radius) and its size as a quantum (the Compton wavelength).

The calculation — two lines

The two lengths

$$r_s=\frac{2Gm}{c^2},\qquad \lambda_C=\frac{\hbar}{mc}$$

Divide, and every unit cancels

$$\frac{r_s}{\lambda_C}=\frac{2Gm}{c^2}\cdot\frac{mc}{\hbar}=\frac{2Gm^2}{\hbar c}=2\alpha_G$$

The mass appears squared because one length grows with \(m\) and the other shrinks as \(1/m\).

The one line of this episode (1 of 3)
$$\alpha_G=\frac12\cdot\frac{r_s}{\lambda_C}=\frac12\cdot\frac{\text{size as a black hole}}{\text{size as a quantum}}$$

\(\alpha_G\) simply is "how close this particle is to being a black hole".

For the electron, \(r_s/\lambda_C=3.50\times10^{-45}\): compared with its quantum spread, its horizon is \(10^{-45}\) of nothing. Conversely, look for the mass at which \(\alpha_G=1\) and you find the Planck mass — the point where a particle's Compton wavelength becomes its own horizon. The definition of "the quantum gravity scale" falls out of this single line.

A link back to the previous series Bonus ③ showed that \(M/m_P=R_H/2\ell_P\) is an identity. That is \(\alpha_G\) restated for the universe treated as one particle — the universe has \(\alpha_G\simeq(4\times10^{60})^2\), which is to say it satisfies the black-hole condition many times over. Which is exactly why it has a horizon.

03The electron's gravity is the product of two unsolved problems

Where does \(\alpha_G(e)=1.75\times10^{-45}\) come from? In the style of episode 4, split the mass into "dimensionless coupling × scalar vacuum value" by substituting \(m_e=y_e v/\sqrt2\). That is all.

The one line of this episode (2 of 3)
$$\alpha_G(e)=\underbrace{\frac{y_e^2}{2}}_{4.31\times10^{-12}}\times\underbrace{\left(\frac{v}{M_{\rm Pl}}\right)^2}_{4.07\times10^{-34}}=1.75\times10^{-45}$$

Left is the flavour problem (why is \(y_e\sim10^{-6}\)?), right the hierarchy problem (why is \(v\ll M_{\rm Pl}\)?). Two of the great unsolved problems in physics, sitting side by side in a product.

In orders of magnitude, 11.4 and 33.4: three quarters of the reason gravity is weak for an electron is the hierarchy problem, one quarter the flavour problem. And recall bonus ④ — the left factor had a face: \(\delta\) stands \(2.27^\circ\) short of the zero at \(135^\circ\). The sensitivity there was \(d\ln m_e/d\delta=0.90\) per degree, so

$$\frac{d\ln\alpha_G(e)}{d\delta}=1.80\ \text{per degree}\qquad\Longrightarrow\qquad \text{move } \delta \text{ by } 1^\circ \text{ and gravity on an electron changes by a factor of 6}$$
Then isn't \(M_{\rm Pl}\) bookkeeping too? It is. As episode 4 showed, in the Weyl-invariant writing \(M_{\rm Pl}^2=\xi\phi^2\) — the Planck mass is a value of the dilaton, and it moves with the gauge. So \(M_{\rm Pl}\) on its own is bookkeeping, and the physics is only the ratio \(m/M_{\rm Pl}\). The formula above being a product of two dimensionless numbers is not a coincidence: there is no other way to write it.
◇ ◇ ◇

04Classical gravity does not see the phase

Now the main business. Feed bonus ④'s mass \(m=m_1+im_2\gamma_5\) to gravity. Gravity couples to exactly one thing: the stress-energy tensor \(T_{\mu\nu}\).

But as section 04 of bonus ④ showed, the chiral rotation \(\psi\to e^{i\alpha\gamma_5/2}\psi\) maps the theory exactly onto the theory with mass \(|m|=\sqrt{m_1^2+m_2^2}\). Every observable is the same — including \(T_{\mu\nu}\). Therefore:

Verdict from classical gravity

Gravity sees only \(|m|\). The phase is completely invisible.

This is a completely independent second confirmation of bonus ④'s "② a lone chiral phase is bookkeeping". That argument was in the language of field theory; this one is in the language of geometry, and they land in the same place.

Section 02's \(\alpha_G\) says the same thing: \(\alpha_G=(|m|/M_{\rm Pl})^2\) has no slot for a phase. To gravity, the imaginary part of a mass may as well not exist.

── And there it does not end. The step "the chiral rotation maps it away" is exactly where quantum mechanics bites.

05The bill goes to \(R\tilde R\)

Recall episode 8. A knob that is free classically leaves a trace when you quantise — an anomaly. The chiral rotation has one too, and in fact two kinds.

The chiral anomaly, in full $$\partial_\mu j_5^\mu=\frac{e^2}{8\pi^2}\,F\tilde F\ +\ \frac{1}{384\pi^2}\,R\tilde R$$

The first term is the electromagnetic field, the second the gravitational one. \(R\tilde R=\tfrac12\epsilon^{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}R_{\alpha\beta}{}^{\rho\sigma}\) is called the Pontryagin density.

What it means: when you rotate away the mass phase \(\theta\), that \(\theta\) is not annihilated — it moves into the coefficient of \(R\tilde R\) in the action (a gravitational theta term). A re-entry in the ledger, not a deletion.

That makes three of these across the series.

Knob free classicallyTrace left by quantisationWhere it shows upEpisode
Weyl \(\Omega\)conformal anomaly \(T^\mu_\mu=\tfrac{\beta}{2g}F^2\)\(\beta\) function, 99% of the proton massep. 8
chiral \(\alpha\) (EM)\(F\tilde F\) = \(\theta_{\rm QCD}\)neutron EDM, \(\bar\theta<10^{-10}\)bonus ④
chiral \(\alpha\) (gravity)\(R\tilde R\) = \(\theta_{\rm grav}\)this episodebonus ⑤

So where does \(R\tilde R\) actually appear? This is the prettiest part.

06\(R\tilde R\) exists only where spacetime rotates

In a vacuum solution the curvature information condenses into a single complex number, the Weyl scalar \(\Psi_2\) (for the class known as type D). And the two curvature invariants are precisely its real and imaginary parts.

The two invariants in vacuum type D

Kretschmann invariant (the familiar "size of the curvature")

$$R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}R^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}\ \propto\ \mathrm{Re}\!\left(\Psi_2^2\right)$$

Pontryagin density (the one in the anomaly)

$$R\tilde R\ \propto\ \mathrm{Im}\!\left(\Psi_2^2\right)$$

Real and imaginary parts of the same complex number. One is how much it bends, the other how much it twists.

And for the Kerr solution (a rotating black hole) that complex number has a closed form.

$$\Psi_2=-\frac{M}{(r-i\,a\cos\theta)^3}$$

where \(a=J/Mc\) is the rotation parameter. The imaginary part comes only from \(a\cos\theta\). Therefore:

The one line of this episode (3 of 3)

The gravitational field has an imaginary part only when spacetime is rotating.

At \(a=0\) (Schwarzschild) \(\Psi_2=-M/r^3\) is real and \(R\tilde R=0\). FRW is conformally flat, so the whole Weyl tensor vanishes and again \(R\tilde R=0\). Neither the expanding universe nor a quiet black hole reflects the phase.

Spacetime\(\mathrm{Re}(\Psi_2^2)\)\(\mathrm{Im}(\Psi_2^2)\)Is the phase visible?
FRW (expanding universe)00no (conformally flat)
Schwarzschild\(\ne0\)\(\mathbf{0}\)no
Kerr (rotating black hole)\(\ne0\)\(\boldsymbol{\ne0}\)yes

Put numbers in. Dividing out the \(1/r^6\) radial falloff and evaluating at the reference point \(r=2M\), \(\cos\theta=0.5\):

\(a/M\)real part (normalised)imaginary part\(|\mathrm{Im}/\mathrm{Re}|\)
0 (static)1.00000.00000
0.30.88580.42700.48
0.60.58630.72891.24
0.90.20740.83704.04
0.998 (near-extremal)0.08640.82989.60

At \(a/M\approx0.53\) the imaginary part overtakes the real one. Near a rapidly spinning black hole the "imaginary" curvature invariant is ten times the "real" one. As a mirror for the phase of a mass, there is no brighter place in the universe.

Figure: a meridional slice of Kerr spacetime (schematic; horizontal is the equatorial direction, vertical the rotation axis). Left is the real part, right the imaginary part. Turn up \(a/M\) and the left barely changes while the right grows out of nothing. The black region is inside the horizon.
a/M = 0.900
positive zero negative inside the horizon

For \(a\gtrsim0.9\) a sign reversal appears in the right-hand picture, because \(\Psi_2^2\) goes as \((r-ia\cos\theta)^{-6}\) and the argument gets multiplied by \(6\): move towards the pole and the argument passes \(180^\circ\), flipping the sign of the imaginary part. At \(a/M=0.998\) it winds to \(6\varphi=251^\circ\) just outside the horizon.

◇ ◇ ◇

07And yet, naively, it cancels

Time to hit the brakes honestly. The picture above is pretty, but as it stands it is not an observable. Two reasons.

Reason ①: it averages to zero over a sphere. \(\mathrm{Im}(\Psi_2^2)\) is an odd function of \(\cos\theta\) — opposite signs in the northern and southern hemispheres — so integrating over a sphere kills it. Numerically,

$$\left\langle \mathrm{Im}(\Psi_2^2)\right\rangle_{r=3M}\ \sim\ 10^{-17}\quad(\text{zero to numerical precision}),\qquad \max\left|\mathrm{Im}\right|=0.837$$

Reason ②: a constant \(\theta_{\rm grav}\) is a total derivative. The integral of the Pontryagin density is

$$\int R\tilde R\,\sqrt{-g}\,d^4x=32\pi^2\times(\text{Pontryagin number})$$

which on a closed manifold is an integer. So if \(\theta_{\rm grav}\) is a constant, all it can affect is the topology of spacetime; in an ordinary asymptotically flat spacetime nothing happens at all. Exactly the situation of the QED theta term, which is unobservable in the absence of magnetic monopoles.

So how could it ever matter? There is only one answer — make \(\theta_{\rm grav}\) a field rather than a constant.

The only way to make it bite
$$S\supset\int \theta(x)\,R\tilde R\qquad\Longrightarrow\qquad \text{if } \partial_\mu\theta\ne0 \text{ it survives integration by parts}$$

This has a name — dynamical Chern–Simons gravity (Jackiw & Pi, 2003). And what happens there is dramatic.

survives
Schwarzschild remains a solution, untouched\(R\tilde R=0\), so the new term contributes nothing at all
breaks
Kerr is no longer a solution\(R\tilde R\ne0\) acts as a source; frame dragging picks up a correction

The non-rotating black hole is unharmed; only the rotating one breaks. Section 06's statement about \(\mathrm{Im}(\Psi_2)\) translates directly into the existence or non-existence of a solution.

And which field is that? Episode 4 showed that the scale factor of spacetime is not a property of spacetime but a field living on it — the dilaton \(\phi\). If \(\theta_{\rm grav}\) were tied to that \(\phi\), then the bill for the mass phase would go to the dilaton and show its face at rotating black holes. But this is a story told by this article, not a derivation. \(\phi R\) and \(\theta R\tilde R\) are different couplings, and calling them the same field is only justified inside specific frameworks such as the string-theoretic axio-dilaton.

08Verdict — there are only three places a phase can show

Together with bonus ④, here is every place the phase of a mass can surface in an observation.

WhereMechanismStatus
electron EDMphase difference between mass and Yukawa → asymmetric charge distribution\(d_e/(e\lambda_C)<1.1\times10^{-19}\)
strong CP\(\arg\det M_q\) → \(F\tilde F\) → neutron EDM\(\bar\theta<10^{-10}\)
rotating spacetimegravitational anomaly → \(R\tilde R\propto\mathrm{Im}(\Psi_2^2)\)only if \(\theta\) is a field

All three share a feature: not one dimensionful quantity appears. The EDM is a ratio of lengths, \(\bar\theta\) is an angle, the Pontryagin number is an integer. Exactly as episode 10's procedure demands, the physics of phases was dimensionless from beginning to end.

Aside — the two smallest scales in nature Since we are talking about gravity, let us also make the vacuum energy dimensionless. \(\rho_\Lambda^{1/4}=2.24\) meV, and dividing by \(M_{\rm Pl}\) gives \(1.84\times10^{-31}\). Bonus ④'s neutrino gives \(m_3/M_{\rm Pl}=4.10\times10^{-30}\). The two smallest scales in nature are only a factor of 22 apart — while everything else is separated by factors of \(10^{25}\). ── There is no theory explaining this. It may be a coincidence.
The honest line

Dynamical Chern–Simons gravity in section 07 is a proposal for modified gravity, not established physics. "Kerr ceases to be a solution" is a consequence within that framework. The observational bounds are still loose, and there is no evidence that this effect exists in nature.

The anomaly coefficient \(1/384\pi^2\) is convention-dependent (Dirac versus Weyl fermion, and whether a factor of \(1/2\) is folded into the definition of \(R\tilde R\)); other sources write \(768\pi^2\) and so on. Likewise the proportionality constant and sign in \(R\tilde R\propto\mathrm{Im}(\Psi_2^2)\) depend on conventions; this article uses only the qualitative fact that it comes from the imaginary part.

The closed form for \(\Psi_2\) holds only for vacuum type-D solutions. With matter present there are five Weyl scalars and this simple restatement fails. The meridional slice in the figure is a schematic: Boyer–Lindquist coordinates plotted directly on a plane, not proper distance.

"The dilaton is \(\theta_{\rm grav}\)" at the end of section 07 is this article's storytelling. The closeness of \(\rho_\Lambda^{1/4}\) and \(m_\nu\) in section 08 is an unexplained numerical coincidence. And the remarks about \(\delta\) in section 03 presuppose bonus ④'s Koide relation — an empirical formula with no derivation that holds only for pole masses.

Exercises
  1. What is inaccurate about "gravity is \(10^{40}\) times weaker than electromagnetism"?
    Show the answer
    It never names the particle. \(\alpha/\alpha_G\) is \(4.17\times10^{42}\) for the electron, \(1.2\times10^{36}\) for the proton, \(3.6\times10^{31}\) for the top. The "weakness" goes as the square of a mass ratio, so it differs by \(10^{25}\) from particle to particle. The same trap as trying to compare the dimensionful \(G\) with anything.
  2. What kind of particle has \(\alpha_G=1\)?
    Show the answer
    One with \(r_s=2\lambda_C\) — a particle of Planck mass (\(1.22\times10^{19}\) GeV, about 22 μg). Its quantum spread is the same size as its own horizon. That is the definition of the Planck mass, and the content of the phrase "the quantum gravity scale".
  3. Why is \(R\tilde R=0\) in an FRW universe?
    Show the answer
    Because FRW is conformally flat. Conformal flatness makes the Weyl tensor identically zero, and \(R\tilde R\) is built from the Weyl part, so it vanishes even away from vacuum. This is a direct consequence of episode 6's "a conformal transformation can flatten FRW". However fast it expands, an expanding universe does not twist.
  4. If \(\mathrm{Im}(\Psi_2^2)\) averages to zero over a sphere, how can it matter at all?
    Show the answer
    Because what matters is not the average but the product \(\int\theta(x)R\tilde R\). If \(\theta\) is a field with spatial dependence, the product of two odd functions is even and survives. It vanishes for constant \(\theta\) and does not for a field \(\theta\) — another way of saying section 07's "total derivative or not".
  5. (Harder) From \(\Psi_2=-M/(r-ia\cos\theta)^3\), derive the condition for the imaginary part to exceed the real one.
    Show the answer
    \(\Psi_2^2\propto(r-ia\cos\theta)^{-6}=\rho^{-6}e^{6i\varphi}\) with \(\varphi=\arctan(a\cos\theta/r)\). So the real part goes as \(\cos6\varphi\), the imaginary as \(\sin6\varphi\), and the condition is \(|\tan6\varphi|>1\), i.e. \(\varphi>7.5^\circ\). At the reference point \(r=2M,\cos\theta=0.5\) we have \(\tan\varphi=a/4\), hence \(a/M>4\tan7.5^\circ=0.527\). That is the table's "overtakes at 0.53".

SummaryThe phase shows only in a spacetime that turns

First, \(G\) was bookkeeping, because it carries units. The physics is \(\alpha_G=(m/M_{\rm Pl})^2\), which differs per particle and spans \(10^{25}\) from neutrino to top. "Gravity is weak" is meaningless until you name the particle. And \(\alpha_G=\frac12(r_s/\lambda_C)\) — \(\alpha_G\) simply is how close that particle is to being a black hole, with \(\alpha_G=1\) marking the Planck mass.

The electron's \(\alpha_G=1.75\times10^{-45}\) splits exactly into \((y_e^2/2)\times(v/M_{\rm Pl})^2\) — the flavour problem (11.4 orders) times the hierarchy problem (33.4 orders). Joined to bonus ④, the left factor means "\(\delta\) is \(2.27^\circ\) short of a zero". Move \(\delta\) by \(1^\circ\) and gravity on an electron changes sixfold.

The phase itself is entirely invisible to classical gravity, because \(T_{\mu\nu}\) is chiral-rotation invariant — an independent second confirmation of bonus ④'s conclusion. But quantise, and that chiral rotation carries an anomaly: the bill goes to the coefficient of \(R\tilde R\). That is the third instance, after episode 8's conformal anomaly and strong CP's electromagnetic chiral anomaly.

And we located where \(R\tilde R\) lives. In vacuum type D, \(R\tilde R\propto\mathrm{Im}(\Psi_2^2)\), and the imaginary part of Kerr's \(\Psi_2=-M/(r-ia\cos\theta)^3\) comes only from \(a\cos\theta\). Zero for the expanding universe (conformally flat) and zero for Schwarzschild; nonzero only for Kerr. At \(a/M\approx0.53\) the imaginary part overtakes the real one, and at \(a/M=0.998\) it is 9.6 times larger. ── Ask whether a mass has an imaginary part, and the only mirror is the imaginary part of the gravitational field; and the gravitational field has an imaginary part only when spacetime rotates. Though it averages to zero over a sphere, and a constant \(\theta\) is a total derivative. To make it bite, \(\theta\) must be a field — and then Schwarzschild survives while Kerr alone stops being a solution.

This document is bonus episode ⑤ of the series "Conformal Transformations That Click", written for high-school and university students who enjoy physics. That \(\alpha_G=Gm^2/(\hbar c)=(m/M_{\rm Pl})^2\) is the dimensionless gravitational coupling, and that \(r_s/\lambda_C=2\alpha_G\), are elementary identities. The table values were computed for this article using \(M_{\rm Pl}=1.2209\times10^{19}\) GeV, \(v=246.22\) GeV and PDG masses. The split \(\alpha_G(e)=(y_e^2/2)(v/M_{\rm Pl})^2\) is also an identity. That a chiral rotation leaves \(T_{\mu\nu}\) invariant, and hence that classical gravity does not see the phase of a mass, is a standard consequence. The gravitational chiral anomaly \(\partial_\mu j_5^\mu\supset(1/384\pi^2)R\tilde R\) has been known since Kimura (1969) and Delbourgo & Salam (1972), but the coefficient depends on conventions (Dirac versus Weyl, and the normalisation of \(R\tilde R\)). \(\int R\tilde R=32\pi^2\times\)(Pontryagin number) is standard. That in vacuum type-D solutions the Kretschmann invariant and the Pontryagin density are proportional to \(\mathrm{Re}(\Psi_2^2)\) and \(\mathrm{Im}(\Psi_2^2)\) respectively, and that Kerr has \(\Psi_2=-M/(r-ia\cos\theta)^3\), are standard (proportionality constants and signs are convention-dependent). The numbers in the table and figure (the imaginary part overtaking the real at \(a/M=0.53\), a factor 9.6 at \(a/M=0.998\), a spherical average of \(10^{-17}\)) were computed for this article at the reference point \(r=2M,\cos\theta=0.5\). Dynamical Chern–Simons gravity is a modified-gravity proposal beginning with Jackiw & Pi (2003), not an established theory. That Schwarzschild is preserved while Kerr is not (slowly rotating solutions acquiring corrections) is a standard result in that field, but it has not been observationally confirmed. The suggestion at the end of section 07 that the dilaton is \(\theta_{\rm grav}\) is this article's storytelling, not a derivation. \(\rho_\Lambda^{1/4}=2.24\) meV was computed here from \(h=0.674\) and \(\Omega_\Lambda=0.685\); its closeness to the neutrino mass is an unexplained numerical coincidence. The remarks about \(\delta\) in section 03 presuppose bonus ④'s Koide relation, an empirical formula with no theoretical derivation that holds only for pole masses. The figure is schematic, plotting Boyer–Lindquist coordinates directly on a plane, and does not represent proper distance. The academic standard is the \(\Lambda\)CDM model including inflation, together with unmodified general relativity. ── To print, use your browser's Print → Save as PDF (sliders freeze and answers are hidden in the print version).

Print / save as PDF: ⌘+P (Ctrl+P on Windows). On screen, the slider changes the rotation parameter and you can watch the right-hand picture — the imaginary part — grow out of nothing. "Show the answer" opens each solution.