Embedding manifolds that are not very flat.

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Spinnor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Flat Manifolds
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the embedding of manifolds, specifically focusing on the implications of embedding relatively flat versus non-flat 4D spacetimes in higher dimensions. Participants explore the relationship between the curvature of spacetime and the dimensionality required for embedding, touching on concepts from General Relativity and differential geometry.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that a small piece of relatively flat 4D spacetime can be embedded in ten dimensions and questions how this changes if the spacetime is not very flat.
  • Another participant expresses uncertainty about the term "embed" in the context of spacetime having a metric of signature -1, seeking clarification.
  • A different participant attempts to clarify by providing examples of embedding lower-dimensional spheres in higher dimensions and speculates that a small curved 3-dimensional manifold might require a flat space of at most 6 dimensions for proper mapping.
  • Another contribution mentions that space-like sections of Minkowski space are flat and introduces Nash's general isometric embedding theorem for compact manifolds, suggesting that there may be constraints in General Relativity that could affect the embedding dimensions.
  • This participant also expresses a belief that spacetime is only slightly non-flat near large masses, indicating a potential relationship between curvature and embedding requirements.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of curvature for embedding dimensions, with no consensus reached on the exact requirements or constraints involved in embedding non-flat spacetimes.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various mathematical concepts and theorems without resolving the implications of curvature on embedding dimensions or the specific conditions under which these embeddings hold.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying differential geometry, General Relativity, or the mathematical foundations of spacetime embeddings.

Spinnor
Gold Member
Messages
2,231
Reaction score
419
I think I read on these forums that a small piece of relatively flat 4D spacetime of General Relativity can be embedded in ten dimensions. What happens if the small piece of spacetime is not very flat, does this change the number of embedding dimensions required?

Thanks for any help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Spinnor said:
I think I read on these forums that a small piece of relatively flat 4D spacetime of General Relativity can be embedded in ten dimensions. What happens if the small piece of spacetime is not very flat, does this change the number of embedding dimensions required?

Thanks for any help!

I am not sure what you mean by embed since space time has a metric of siganture -1. Can you elaborate?
 
wofsy said:
I am not sure what you mean by embed since space time has a metric of siganture -1. Can you elaborate?

Thanks, I'll try. Leave time out. We can embed a 2 dimensional sphere in 3 dimensions. We can embed a 3 dimensional sphere in 4 dimensions. If we have some small piece of some arbitrary 3 dimensional curved manifold my guess is we need a flat space of at most 6 dimensions to properly map the small curved 3 dimensional piece, is that close?

Thanks for any help!
 
Spinnor said:
Thanks, I'll try. Leave time out. We can embed a 2 dimensional sphere in 3 dimensions. We can embed a 3 dimensional sphere in 4 dimensions. If we have some small piece of some arbitrary 3 dimensional curved manifold my guess is we need a flat space of at most 6 dimensions to properly map the small curved 3 dimensional piece, is that close?

Thanks for any help!

Space like sections of Minkowski space are flat. They are isometric to flat Euclidean three space. If curvature is added then there is a general isometric embedding theorem of Nash for compact manifolds. For GR there may be constraints that lower the Nash lower bound but I have no idea. My naive sense is that space is only slightly not flat and then only in the near vicinity of large masses.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
11K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K