Do wormholes require higher dimensions?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether wormholes require higher dimensions for their existence. Participants explore the implications of wormhole geometry, topology changes, and the mathematical representation of these concepts, focusing on theoretical aspects rather than experimental or applied contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that wormholes can be visualized as shortcuts on a 2D surface, suggesting that higher dimensions may be necessary for their construction.
  • Others argue that higher dimensions are not required, asserting that wormhole geometry can be described using only four coordinates (t,x,y,z) without needing to reference additional dimensions.
  • A participant questions whether a wormhole would change the topology of the universe from a sphere to a toroid, leading to further discussion about the nature of wormholes and their topological implications.
  • Some participants note that while a wormhole might change the topology, it depends on the specific characteristics of the wormhole, with examples provided of different types of wormholes and their potential topological effects.
  • There is a discussion about extrinsic curvature, with some participants suggesting that a jump in extrinsic curvature might indicate an embedding in a higher-dimensional space, while others clarify that standard wormhole geometries do not necessarily require this.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of higher dimensions for wormholes, with no consensus reached. The discussion includes competing perspectives on the implications of extrinsic curvature and topology changes associated with wormholes.

Contextual Notes

Some claims about extrinsic curvature and topology changes remain unresolved, with participants providing various interpretations and examples without reaching a definitive conclusion.

friend
Messages
1,448
Reaction score
9
Every picture I've seen to illustrate wormholes is always a shortcut from one point on a 2D surface to another. And it's easy to see that the distance is shorter through the wormhole since we are view it from a 3D perspective. This makes me wonder if higher dimensions are required to construct wormholes. It seems the wormhole must travel through the higher dimension in order to create a shorter distance through the regular space. Do wormholes need higher dimensions to exist?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
friend said:
Every picture I've seen to illustrate wormholes is always a shortcut from one point on a 2D surface to another. And it's easy to see that the distance is shorter through the wormhole since we are view it from a 3D perspective. This makes me wonder if higher dimensions are required to construct wormholes. It seems the wormhole must travel through the higher dimension in order to create a shorter distance through the regular space. Do wormholes need higher dimensions to exist?

No, there is no higher dimension required. It's merely a product of trying to embed the wormhole geometry so that our human brains can visualize it (as you mention, embedding R^2 with a wormhole in R^3). To see this, you can just write down the wormhole geometry referring to only 4 coordinates, the normal (t,x,y,z). No reference to any fourth spatial dimension is required in the mathematics. (If this is uncomfortable to you, note that you can write down the surface of the sphere using only 2 coordinates, or the surface of a 3-sphere using only 3 coordinates. These both exist independently of the higher dimensions we typically try to embed them in.)
 
Nabeshin said:
No, there is no higher dimension required. It's merely a product of trying to embed the wormhole geometry so that our human brains can visualize it (as you mention, embedding R^2 with a wormhole in R^3).
I imagine, however, that a wormhole would change the topology of the universe, from a sphere to a toroid, right?
 
friend said:
I imagine, however, that a wormhole would change the topology of the universe, from a sphere to a toroid, right?

This actually depends on the nature of the wormhole. You can have what we might classically think of as a 'wormhole' (the example I'm seeing here is that of a narrow throat connecting to an umbilical 'baby universe', like this: http://images.quickblogcast.com/4988-4889/onedrop3.gif ), but nevertheless the global topology is still trivial.

I do think it's true that if you have a genuine wormhole to either a) a second, asymptotically flat universe, or b) another region of the same universe, that you create a torus-like topology (in terms of genus I'm not too sure how it actually changes). Note however that there is no local way to distinguish between the two situations I've just described, so attempting to discern anything about the topology from a wormhole is not advisory.
 
Nabeshin said:
No, there is no higher dimension required. It's merely a product of trying to embed the wormhole geometry so that our human brains can visualize it (as you mention, embedding R^2 with a wormhole in R^3). To see this, you can just write down the wormhole geometry referring to only 4 coordinates, the normal (t,x,y,z). No reference to any fourth spatial dimension is required in the mathematics. (If this is uncomfortable to you, note that you can write down the surface of the sphere using only 2 coordinates, or the surface of a 3-sphere using only 3 coordinates. These both exist independently of the higher dimensions we typically try to embed them in.)

Is that true? I always thought there has to be a jump in the extrinsic curvature in wormhole geometries. Having a jump in extrinsic curvature basically means that your manifold is embedded to a higher dimensional manifold in a funny way.
 
It's true. Neither a wormhole nor any other curved spacetime needs to be embedded in a higher dimensional space. We like to draw pictures of an embedding just for the purposes of visualization.
 
clamtrox said:
Is that true? I always thought there has to be a jump in the extrinsic curvature in wormhole geometries.

There does not have to be a jump in extrinsic curvature, but there can be, i.e., it is possible to "make" a wormhole by gluing together two 4-dimensional spacetimes along a 3-dimensional hypersurface such that the extrinsic curvature of the hpersurface is different on each side. Then, there is a delta function source for T on the hypersurface, just as there is a delta function charge density for charge sprayed onto the surface of a sphere.

Standard Morris-Thorne wormholes are not like this, but Visser gave examples of wormholes that are like this.
clamtrox said:
Having a jump in extrinsic curvature basically means that your manifold is embedded to a higher dimensional manifold in a funny way.

[edit]Bill_K posted while I was writing and thinking.[/edit]

No. Extrinsic curvature in standard general relativity usually refers to the the extrinsic curvature of a lower-dimensional surface embedded in 4-dimensional spacetime.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K