Curved space-time and dimensions

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Unkraut
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dimensions Space-time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of curved space-time in general relativity (GTR) and its representation through pseudo-Riemannian manifolds. Participants explore the implications of embedding theorems, particularly regarding the potential physical meaning of extra dimensions in embedding spaces and the differences between Riemannian and Lorentzian embeddings.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the extra dimensions in the embedding space of a curved space-time manifold could have any physical meaning or if they could represent "virtual" processes.
  • Another participant asserts that in general relativity, the extra dimensions do not have any meaning, as Einstein's equations relate the metric and stress-energy tensor solely within space-time.
  • A later reply introduces the idea of duality between mathematical objects in the manifold and those in the embedding space, suggesting that while no established theory exists, it could be a useful mathematical tool.
  • Another participant notes that embedding theorems for Lorentzian manifolds differ significantly from those for Riemannian manifolds, emphasizing that known bounds for Lorentzian embeddings are much worse.
  • It is mentioned that higher-dimensional manifolds with special properties can sometimes be represented as lower-dimensional manifolds with abstract coordinates, which may simplify certain criteria.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the physical meaning of extra dimensions in embedding spaces, with some asserting a lack of meaning in general relativity while others propose the potential for mathematical dualities. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these embedding theorems.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations in understanding Lorentzian embeddings compared to Riemannian embeddings, noting that existing literature may not adequately cover the complexities involved.

Unkraut
Messages
30
Reaction score
1
I don't know anything about GTR, nor do I know anything about differential geometry. But I have one maybe stupid question:
As far as I know space-time in general relativity is represented by a pseudo-riemannian manifold. And according to Whitney's (or Nash's? - don't know who is in charge here) embedding theorem every (Riemannian) manifold can be embedded (isometrically) into an euclidic R^n.
So, if we now have some curved space-time manifold and we find the smallest possible embedding R^n. Could the extra dimensions in the embedding space have any physical meaning? Or are they even known to?
In other words: Would it perhaps make any sense to suppose some "virtual" processes to happen within that embedding space, I mean, just like calculating with complex numbers but only taking real results "for real", that kind of thing?
I'm just a curious pseudo-mathematician trying to understand some physics and asking questions that come to my mind. Sorry if it's stupid.

Unkraut
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They definitely don't have any meaning in general relativity. Einstein's equation defines a relationship between the metric and the stress-energy tensor (i.e. matter), but doesn't relate any of that to anything outside of space-time.

I suppose that what you have in mind is some kind of duality between mathematical objects that "live" in the manifold and mathematical objects that live in an embedding space. I have never heard of anything like that, but I don't see a way to rule out that something like that could be useful as a mathematical tool.
 
Okay, thanks. That's what I expected.
 
Someone who knows this stuff better than I do suggested that I should inform you that embedding theorems for Lorentzian manifolds are quite different from embedding theorems for Riemannian manifolds.

This is how he explained it to me:

Whitney embedding theorem: any smooth m-dimensional RIEMANNIAN manifold you are likely to meet can be embedded in 2m-dimensional euclidean space.

Wikipedia is actually pretty good for RIEMMANNIAN embeddings, but has nothing on LORENTZIAN embeddings, where the known bounds are MUCH worse. You can Google for an old sci.physics.research post which gives a citation for Lorentzian embeddings.

One other thing which might be worth mentioning is that one can sometimes "represent" higher dimensional manifolds with special properties (e.g. special kinds of solutions to the EFE) as lower dimensional manifolds with abstract coordinates, and satisfying a simpler criterion. For example you can look for a paper by H. J. Schmidt, formerly editor of Gen. Rel. Grav.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K