De Sitter Vacuum: Is it the Only Positive CC Solution?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wabbit
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Positive Vacuum
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
4 replies · 1K views
Messages
1,284
Reaction score
208
Assuming a spacetime with zero Weyl curvature and an Einstein tensor proportional to the metric, is it true that in a finite neighborhood of any point, that spacetime must be isometric to a de Sitter vacuum, or are there other possible solutions, and if so how are they classified?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Einstein tensor proportional to the metric implies constant scalar curvature. Then vanishing of the Weyl curvature implies that the space is maximally symmetric ##R_{mnpq} = k ( g_{mp}g_{nq} - g_{mq}g_{np})## and therefore of constant sectional curvature. Therefore such a space is, by a conformal rescaling of the metric, equivalent to one of the model constant curvature spaces. For signature ##(1,d-1)## and positive cosmological constant, this is indeed de Sitter.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: wabbit
Thanks - you say "by a conformal rescaling", so it isn't isometric, only conformally equivalent ? I must say conformal transformations isn't something I am really familiar with.

Would you have a source to suggest where I could read more about this ?
 
wabbit said:
Thanks - you say "by a conformal rescaling", so it isn't isometric, only conformally equivalent ? I must say conformal transformations isn't something I am really familiar with.

The issue is that the denominator of the formula for sectional curvature involves precisely the same contractions that correspond to the Riemann tensor of a maximally symmetric manifold. So we can rescale ##g' = e^{2\sigma(x)} g## without changing the sectional curvature. With this relation we say that ##g'## is pointwise conformal to ##g##. If there is a diffeomorphism that pulls ##g'## back to ##g##, then we say that the metrics are conformally equivalent and there is a genuine isometry. I think this is a stronger condition than the assumptions warrant.

Would you have a source to suggest where I could read more about this ?

It is probably overkill and yet might not even answer all questions that you might have, but the most specific reference I know of is Besse, Einstein Manifolds. Some results are discussed in the first few pages of this lecture.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: wabbit