A basic question in general relativity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of the spacetime interval in general relativity (GR) compared to special relativity (SR), particularly in the context of the equivalence principle and the nature of transformations between frames. Participants explore the implications of these concepts on the conservation of the interval and the geometry of spacetime.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion over the use of the term "conserved" in relation to the spacetime interval in GR, contrasting it with its treatment in SR.
  • Another participant explains that in SR, the interval is conserved only under Poincare transformations, while in GR, the transformations are local and depend on the coordinates.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that the term "conserved" should not be used for the interval, proposing instead that it is frame-invariant in local contexts.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of the proper metric tensor in conserving the interval, indicating a need for clarity in definitions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the terminology and interpretation of the spacetime interval. There are competing views regarding the use of "conserved" versus "frame-invariant," and the implications of local versus global properties in GR and SR.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in understanding the implications of the equivalence principle and the nature of transformations in GR, particularly regarding the definitions and properties of the spacetime interval.

David_cronin
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Dear all,

First, please forgive my english, I am French.

In most textbooks on general relativity (GR) the non trivial geometry is introduced in this way : the equivalence principle says that we can forget gravity as a force and consider an accelerated frame. As this frame is accelerated it is not inertial and therefore the interval (ds^2=dt^2-dx^2) is not conserved anymore (special relativity (SR) teaches us the the interval in conserved but only when going from an inertial frame to another). As the interval encodes the geometry, we see why a non-trivial (non-euclidean) geometry appears.
Sounds good to me.
BUT : in many course on GR, I see that people use the fact that the interval is in fact still conserved when changing frame in GR !
So, I am a bit confused...

Thanks for your help !
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Funny question, and I had to think a little about this :P But I think the confusion arises from the following.

In special relativity the symmetry group is the Poincare group ISO(d-1,1): translations and rotations in spacetime. This is a global symmetrygroup; the transformations don't depend on the coordinates, just on the velocity. Indeed, these transformations are between inertial observers.

In general relativity the symmetry group is GL(4): the group of general coordinate transformations (General Linear transformations in d=4). This is a local symmetrygroup; the transformations can depend on the coordinates.

So in special relativity, ds^2 is a scalar under Poincare transformations, so if you perform transformations which are NOT Poincare (for instance, you go to an accelerating observer) the interval ds^2 will change.

Does this answer your question?
 
I would suggest not using the word "conserved" for this. When something is conserved, we mean that it stays the same from one time to the next. The spacetime interval ds^2 isn't conserved, it's frame-invariant.

GR is locally the same as SR. Locally, you can apply a Lorentz boost, and ds^2 stays the same.

But notice that ds^2 is the square of an infinitesimally small number. What's different in GR is that GR isn't globally the same. In SR it makes sense to ask what is the interval between two widely separated events. In GR, this would only make sense if you specified a path from one event to the other.
 
You have to introduce the proper metric tensor [tex]g_{\mu\nu}[/tex] that conserves [tex]ds^2[/tex]
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K