Can 4D Spacetime be Embedded Isometrically in Fewer than 90 Dimensions?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter stevendaryl
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the embedding of 4D spacetime in higher-dimensional flat spaces, specifically questioning whether it can be done isometrically in fewer than 90 dimensions. Participants explore theoretical implications, analogies, and the significance of dimensionality in embedding curved spacetimes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference a claim that every 4D spacetime can be isometrically embedded in 90-dimensional flat spacetime, consisting of 87 spacelike and 3 timelike dimensions.
  • One participant suggests that smaller regions of spacetime might require fewer dimensions for embedding, proposing a limit theorem regarding the dimensionality needed for local embeddings.
  • Another participant expresses confusion about the physical meaning of "spacelike" and "timelike" in the context of embedding dimensions, questioning their relevance to the embedding process.
  • There is mention of the Whitehead embedding theorem, with a participant recalling that Minkowski spacetime might embed in (88, 2) dimensions.
  • One participant discusses the analogy of a torus, noting that while a torus requires 3D for embedding, smaller sections can be embedded in lower dimensions, raising questions about the dimensionality needed for various curvatures.
  • Another participant argues that any small open set of a 4D Lorentzian manifold retains curvature that requires a significant number of degrees of freedom for description, suggesting a minimal flat generalization of Minkowski space for embedding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the dimensionality required for embedding 4D spacetime isometrically. Multiple competing views and interpretations of the embedding process remain present throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions and implications of "spacelike" and "timelike" dimensions in the context of embeddings. There are also unresolved questions about the specific dimensional requirements for various types of embeddings and the implications of curvature on these requirements.

stevendaryl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
8,943
Reaction score
2,955
According to a quote from a past Physics Forums article, 4D spacetime can be embedded isometrically (preserving the metric) in 90-dimensional flat spacetime:
Chris Clarke* showed that every 4-dimensional spacetime can be embedded isometically in higher dimensional flat space, and that 90 dimensions suffices - 87 spacelike and 3 timelike.

My intuition is that smaller regions of spacetime will require many fewer dimensions. By analogy: a 2D torus requires 3D for an embedding, but any small enough section can be embedded in 2D. My question is whether there is some kind of limit theorem of the form:

For any 4D spacetime, every point belongs to an open set that can be isometrically embedded in flat spacetime of N dimensions or fewer.

where N is some number much smaller than 90. (If we drop the "isometrically", then the answer is clearly N=4, because every 4D manifold is by definition made up of 4D sections stitched.) together.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't understand the qualifiers "spacelike" and "timelike" for embedding dimensions.

When I think about embedding a curved 2D-spacetime in a flat 3D embedding space, I don't see the 3 embedding dimensions as having any physical meaning. They are neither representing space nor time, and the orientation of the 2D-spacetime-surface relative to those 3 dimensions is completely arbitrary.
 
A.T. said:
I don't understand the qualifiers "spacelike" and "timelike" for embedding dimensions.

In this context I would interpret "timelike" and "spacelike" as referring to the signs of the metric coefficients.
 
There is something called the Whiteleigh (spelling?) embedding theorem. From my rapidly fading memory I thought Minkowski space/time would embed in (88, 2).
 
stevendaryl said:
According to a quote from a past Physics Forums article, 4D spacetime can be embedded isometrically (preserving the metric) in 90-dimensional flat spacetime:


My intuition is that smaller regions of spacetime will require many fewer dimensions. By analogy: a 2D torus requires 3D for an embedding, but any small enough section can be embedded in 2D. My question is whether there is some kind of limit theorem of the form:

For any 4D spacetime, every point belongs to an open set that can be isometrically embedded in flat spacetime of N dimensions or fewer.

where N is some number much smaller than 90. (If we drop the "isometrically", then the answer is clearly N=4, because every 4D manifold is by definition made up of 4D sections stitched.) together.

On the torus: a torus whose curvature is zero needs 4-d to embed in. Thus, if its patches embed in flat 2-d, the whole thing needs 4-d. If it has the right curvature, then both its patches and the whole thing embed in 3-d.

As to your actual question, I can an add argument in support, but not an answer (I don't know the answer).

Any arbitrarily small open set if an arbitrary 4-D Lorentzian manifold still has curvature needing 20 degrees of freedom to describe. There is some minimal flat generalization of flat Minkowski space that will embed an arbitrary such open set.

Then, the 90 dimensions needed for the general case would be to handle all complex possible global/topological features possible in the arbitrary manifold.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
11K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
7K