Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Proc. R. Soc. A
Raminder Shergill, Board Member of Proc. R. Soc A., wrote about the paper "The pseudo-tensor gives positive, mistaken value for gravitational energy",
"The authors argues that the standard calculation by use of pseudo tensor is incorrect for total mass-energy for the gravitation field of a liquid sphere plus the matter. However, the author seems to make a misunderstanding. The results in eq (2.3) and (2.4) are derived from Schwarzschild interior solution. However, in the interior region, the coordinate r becomes time-like. So the caluculation looses its validity. I do not think that it is appopriate for publication".
My answer:
Dear Raminder Shergill:
"Authors have the right to appeal a rejection decision if they regard it as unfair. In this circumstance, referees may be asked by the Editor to comment on issues raised by the authors."
And this is an appeal against your rejection decision.
Contrary to the referee opinion, I do not use the interior region of Schwarzschild's exterior solution where coordinate r becomes time-like. I, together with Tolman and others, consider Schwarzschild's interior solution, which describes the space-time of the sphere, which consists of an incompressible perfect fluid of constant proper density.
Please see e.g. Tolman R. C. “Relativity Thermodynamics and Cosmology (Oxford Clarendon 1969)
"§96          Schwarzschild's exterior and interior solutions          245
To obtain such an interior solution for a particular case, we may assume with Schwarzschild* that the material composing the sphere consists of an incompressible perfect fluid of constant proper density. In accordance with (96.13) we can then write (96.4), (96.5), and (96.6).
*Schwarzschild, Berl. Ber. 1916, p. 424."
Your referee does not know a difference between Schwarzschild exterior and interior solutions. So, you have to exchange the reviewer and change your decision.
See also!topic/sci.physics.relativity/oLCtMMxjQQQ


Log in

No account? Create an account