Can General Relativity and Curved Spaces Be Described in Complex Coordinates?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dmitry67
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complex Geometry
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the possibility of describing General Relativity and curved spaces using complex coordinates. Participants explore the implications of using complex dimensions in the context of pseudo-Euclidean and Minkowski spaces, as well as the dimensionality of manifolds required for embedding 4-dimensional spacetimes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if coordinates are complex, the distinction between Euclidean and Minkowski spaces may only involve the orientation of subsets in a 4-dimensional complex space.
  • Another participant questions the claim regarding the 86-dimensional manifold, implying that the number could be arbitrary and not definitive.
  • A different participant references prior discussions to support the dimensionality claim, indicating that the metric for higher-dimensional pseudo-Riemannian manifolds can lead to various dimensional requirements for embedding 4-dimensional spacetimes.
  • It is noted that Chris Clarke's work suggests that every 4-dimensional spacetime can be isometrically embedded in a flat space of up to 90 dimensions, with 87 being spacelike and 3 timelike.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty regarding the dimensionality of the manifold and the implications of using complex coordinates. There is no consensus on the correctness of the dimensional claims or the interpretation of complex coordinates in this context.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to specific dimensional claims and the potential for different interpretations of complex coordinates, but lacks clarity on the assumptions underlying these claims.

Dmitry67
Messages
2,564
Reaction score
1
I am not familiar with that stuff, so please don't laugh.

I know some facts about the geometry when coordinates are real. In pseudo-euclidean spaces (like in special relativity) T is also real, just the definitions of a distance is different.

R^2 = X^2+Y^2+Z^2 - T^2

But we can say that it is an euclidean space, but T is imaginary. So, if we assume that coordinates are complex, the only difference between euclidaen space and Minkowsky space is an orientation of a subset in a 4-dimensional complex space.

So far I hope it is correct.

My question is, what about General relativity and curved spaces? I read that for 3space+1time curved space can be put into 86 dimensional manifold with 3 timelike dimensions.

What if we work completely in the complex area, so there is no difference between space and time dimensions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Dmitry67 said:
I read that for 3space+1time curved space can be put into 86 dimensional manifold with 3 timelike dimensions.

uhh? 86? :confused:

did you get this from http://www.eng.uah.edu/~jacksoa/literature/MD_Int2.pdf? … 86 was just an academic example … it could have been 42 or 717 or … :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
it is from here: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=290098

George Jones said:
If the metric for the higher dimensional pseudo-Riemannian manifold is required to restrict down to the metric for 4-dimensional spacetime, then it could take a lot of dimensions.

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. A particular spacetime may be embeddable in a flat space that has dimension less than 90, but 90 guarantees the result for all possible spacetimes.

* Clarke, C. J. S., "On the global isometric embedding of pseudo-Riemannian
manifolds," Proc. Roy. Soc. A314 (1970) 417-428
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
9K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K