- #1

- 21

- 0

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

In summary, a space is said to be maximally symmetric if it has the same number of symmetries as ordinary Euclidean space, which is \displaystyle \frac{1}{2} n(n+1) linearly independent Killing vectors, where n is the dimension. This can also be characterized by proving that a space is maximally symmetric if and only if it is both homogeneous and isotropic. A manifold is also maximally symmetric if the Riemann tensor obeys a specific relation. Flat Euclidean space has the additional symmetry of conformal Killing vectors, making it "uber-maximally symmetric" compared to other maximally symmetric spaces. However, invoking Noether's Theorem to produce a symmetry from conformal Killing

- #1

- 21

- 0

Physics news on Phys.org

- #2

- 139

- 12

It is also possible to prove that a manifold is maximally symmetric if and only if the Riemann tensor obeys the relation

[tex] \displaystyle R_{abcd} = \frac{R}{n(n-1)} (g_{ac} g_{bd} - g_{ad} g_{bc}) \textrm{,} [/tex]

where [tex] g_{\mu \nu} [/tex] is the metric and [tex] R [/tex] is the curvature scalar.

- #3

Gold Member

- 2,138

- 2

Does this mean a flat Euclidean space is more symmetric than spaces with closed and open curvature (hyperspheric and hyperbolic)?

And second, does this relate to an axis of scale symmetry? I mean a euclidean space looks the same (homogenous) on any scale, whereas step back far enough, and a hypersphere reveals its closed loop paths, a hyperbolic space reveals its divergences.

This would seem to be a third kind of invariance as it is not about translations or rotations but the self-similarity of geometric expansions and contractions.

- #4

- 139

- 12

Does this mean a flat Euclidean space is more symmetric than spaces with closed and open curvature (hyperspheric and hyperbolic)?

It depends on what you mean by "symmetry." Generally, in this context, a "symmetry" is taken to be an isometry of the metric, i.e., a diffeomorphism which pulls back the metric to itself. If this is taken as the definition, then, as I said above, all maximally symmetric spaces share the same number of symmetries. This includes the maximally symmetric spaces of both closed and open varieties, i.e., hyperboloids and hyperspheres (in general relativity, the analogous spaces are the de Sitter and anti-de Sitter cosmologies).

However, if you also include changes of scale in the definition of symmetry, the answer is different. A "change of scale" of the type you have described is usually called a conformal mapping; more precisely, two metrics [tex] g [/tex] and [tex] \tilde{g} [/tex] are conformally related if there exists a (nonvanishing, smooth) function [tex] \omega [/tex] of the coordinate functions such that [tex] \tilde{g} = \omega^2 g [/tex]. The idea of "symmetry under changes of scale" can then be articulated in terms of the existence of a diffeomorphism [tex] \varphi : M \to M [/tex] (where [tex] M [/tex] is the manifold) such that [tex] \varphi^{*} g [/tex] (i.e., the pullback of the metric by [tex] \varphi [/tex]) is conformally related to [tex] g [/tex]. Thus, a space is said to have a

Another way to phrase this is in terms of Killing fields. You may be familiar with ordinary Killing vector fields, which are defined as the generators of isometries and obey the equation [tex] \mathcal{L}_K g = 0 [/tex], where [tex] K [/tex] is the Killing field (i.e., [tex] K [/tex] Lie-transports the metric [tex] g [/tex]). In coordinates, this reduces to [tex] \nabla_{(a} K_{b)} = 0 [/tex]. Similarly, a

[tex]

\nabla_{(a} V_{b)} = \frac{2}{n} (\nabla^c V_c) g_{ab} \textrm{,}

[/tex]

which is called the

- #5

Gold Member

- 2,138

- 2

VKint said:Thus, in addition to a full complement of ordinary Killing vectors, Euclidean space is also blessed with a maximal collection ofconformalKilling vectors, making it "uber-maximally symmetric," unlike hyperspheres and hyperboloids. So, indeed, there is a "third kind of invariance," as you say, having to do with changes of scale, that Euclidean space possesses but other so-called maximally symmetric spaces do not.

Thanks for a quick introduction to the jargon in this area.

It seems significant that flat euclidean geometry is picked out in this regard.

Noether would say for every symmetry there is an inertia or conservation law, so what is law that results from scale symmetry?

- #6

- 139

- 12

Noether would say for every symmetry there is an inertia or conservation law, so what is law that results from scale symmetry?

There are a few problems with attempting to invoke Noether's Theorem to produce a symmetry from conformal Killing vectors. First, in order for Noether's Theorem to apply, you need a differentiable symmetry of an

[tex]

I = \frac{1}{2} \int g_{ab} \frac{dx^a}{d\tau} \frac{dx^b}{d\tau} \textrm{.}

[/tex]

Furthermore, the type of "symmetry" indicated by the existence of conformal Killing vectors isn't exactly a "symmetry" in the sense of Noether's Theorem, since the conformal Killing equation doesn't quite give the invariance of the metric that Noether's Theorem requires. Instead, a conformal symmetry is defined as a diffeomorphism which changes the metric, but only in a certain allowed fashion, i.e., [tex] \varphi^{*} g = \omega^2 g [/tex]. In order to apply Noether's Theorem, it is my (admittedly limited) understanding that you would need something like [tex] \varphi^{*} g = g [/tex], which defines an

Despite all this, the presence of conformal Killing vectors is in fact enough to guarantee that certain quantities will be conserved, but only for a very special class of paths, i.e., null geodesics. (Obviously, this only applies to Lorentzian manifolds. I have no idea whether or not you can use a conformal Killing vector to construct an invariant in an ordinary Riemannian setting.) First, note that for an ordinary Killing vector [tex] K^a [/tex], if [tex] T^b [/tex] denotes the tangent vector to a unit-speed geodesic, we have

[tex]

T^a \nabla_a (T^b K_b) = T^a T^b K_{b;a} + K_b T^a T \indices{^b_{;a}} = 0

[/tex]

(by Killing's equation and the geodesic equation). Thus, the quantity [tex] L = T^b K_b [/tex] is conserved along geodesics. This holds for all Riemannian or pseudo-Riemannian metrics, and gives rise to such classical laws as the conservation of momentum, energy, and angular momentum in flat space.

A similar calculation for conformal geodesics [tex] Y^b [/tex], using the equation I gave in the last post, gives

[tex]

T^a \nabla_a (T^b Y_b) = \frac{1}{n} (\nabla^c Y_c) T^a T_a \textrm{.}

[/tex]

Thus, [tex] L [/tex] is not conserved for conformal Killing fields. However, if [tex] T [/tex] is the tangent to a null geodesic, then [tex] T^a T_a = 0 [/tex], so [tex] L [/tex] is again conserved. I think this is about as close to a Noether current as you can get from a conformal Killing vector. I haven't seen this applied in any specific examples, so I can't at the moment describe in physical terms precisely what this indicates for null paths of interest. I'll get back to you if I have any flashes of inspiration.

- #7

Gold Member

- 2,138

- 2

The physical relevance of the question is the problem of the flatness of the expanding universe. Usually it is taken that it is a surprise the universe is (asymptotically) flat rather than curved positively/negatively. This seems an unnaturally poised situation.

But the alternative view would be that flatness is instead the self-selecting outcome for some reason. Because it has the highest symmetry (having scale symmetry as well) it is the trough state, the equilibrium balance.

Putting it simply, the other noether symmetries are you can go left or right, spin clockwise or anticlockwise, and go backwards or forwards in time (a little questionable this one).

Then in a fractal realm, you would be free to shrink or expand. Go either direction in this sense with no change. An observer moving across scale would still look out and see the same world, the event would still have the same relationship to the context.

A light cone would seem to have this kind of "inertia", this smooth expansion in scale. The intensity of a force wanes with an inverse square law, but the total force is a conserved quantity. So there seems a connection there.

A maximally symmetric space is a mathematical concept that describes a space where every point is equivalent in terms of its properties and the relationships between points. This means that the space has the same properties, such as curvature, at every point and that any transformation of the space, such as rotation or translation, does not change its overall structure.

Some examples of maximally symmetric spaces include spheres, Euclidean spaces, and hyperbolic spaces. These spaces have constant curvature, meaning that the curvature is the same at every point, and they exhibit symmetry under various transformations.

Maximally symmetric spaces are relevant to science because they provide a framework for understanding the properties of physical space and the relationships between objects in that space. They are also used in various branches of science, such as physics and cosmology, to model and study the behavior of the universe.

In general relativity, a maximally symmetric space is significant because it is a solution to Einstein's field equations, which describe the curvature of space-time in the presence of matter and energy. This means that a maximally symmetric space can be used to model the universe and make predictions about its behavior.

Maximally symmetric spaces are closely related to symmetry in physics because they exhibit symmetry under various transformations, such as rotations and translations. This symmetry is important in understanding the laws of nature and how they apply uniformly throughout space and time.

Share:

- Replies
- 9

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 13

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 10

- Views
- 435

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 21

- Views
- 518

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 1K