Energy-stress tenor = 0 => flat spacetime?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter simoncks
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Flat Spacetime
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of a zero stress-energy tensor (SET) and its relationship to spacetime curvature. It is established that while a zero Ricci tensor (Rμν = 0) indicates a Ricci-flat condition, it does not guarantee a flat spacetime, as the Riemann curvature tensor (Rμνστ) must also be zero. The analogy with electromagnetism illustrates that the absence of charges does not imply the absence of fields, paralleling the need for boundary conditions in gravitational contexts. Specifically, asymptotic flatness is necessary alongside a zero SET to achieve flat spacetime, but examples like Schwarzschild spacetime demonstrate that this condition alone is insufficient.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of General Relativity concepts, particularly the Ricci and Riemann curvature tensors.
  • Familiarity with the stress-energy tensor and its role in Einstein's field equations.
  • Knowledge of asymptotic flatness and its implications in spacetime geometry.
  • Basic grasp of electromagnetic theory, particularly the relationship between charge and fields.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties and implications of the Riemann curvature tensor in General Relativity.
  • Research the concept of asymptotic flatness and its significance in gravitational theories.
  • Explore the Osvath-Schucking metric and its characteristics, particularly regarding geodesic completeness.
  • Investigate the relationship between gravitational waves and curvature in various spacetime models.
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for physicists, mathematicians, and students of General Relativity who are exploring the nuances of spacetime curvature, gravitational fields, and the implications of the stress-energy tensor in theoretical physics.

simoncks
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
Mathematically,
##T_{\mu_\nu} = 0##
##\Rightarrow~R_{\mu\nu} - \frac{1}{2} R g_{\mu\nu} = 0##

Now multiply both sides by ##g_{\mu\nu}##
with definition of ##R = g^{\mu\nu} R_{\mu\nu}##
##R - \frac{1}{2} R = 0##
##R = 0##

Is that my imagination wrong? I thought 'empty space' might not be flat in general, like the Schwarzschild metric. And, I thought ##R = 0## meant 'the spacetime is flat.

What is the point I missed? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In order to conclude that a space is flat, the entire Riemann curvature tensor must be zero, Rμνστ = 0. In four dimensions, the Riemann tensor has 20 independent components, while the Ricci tensor comprises 10 of them. In a vacuum region, Rμν = 0 ("Ricci flat") that leaves 10 independent components of curvature which may still be nonzero.
 
Then what is the physical meaning of R? One could feel that of the Curvature tensor from parallel transport. But the contraction leaves me no clue to understand it by imagination.
 
simoncks said:
Then what is the physical meaning of R? One could feel that of the Curvature tensor from parallel transport. But the contraction leaves me no clue to understand it by imagination.
You don't really need to have an intuitive feel for it to use it! :wink: But in fact, this was discussed in a recent thread.
 
Bill has already handled the math end, a zero Ricci tensor isn't sufficient to guarantee a zero Riemann tensor.

An EM analogy might be helpful. Suppose you have no charges anywhere. Can you conclude there are no electric or magnetic fields?

No - you can't conclude this, because an electromagnetic wave of any sort has fields and has no charge. (If you want a specific example, consider the plane electromagnetic wave).

To ensure that you have no fields, in addition to not having charges, you must impose appropriate boundary conditions.

The gravitational case is rather similar, asymptotic flatness (a boundary condition) is needed as well as a zero stress energy tensor to get a flat spacetime.
 
pervect said:
asymptotic flatness (a boundary condition) is needed as well as a zero stress energy tensor to get a flat spacetime.

That's not a sufficient condition, because, for example, Schwarzschild spacetime is asymptotically flat and has zero SET everywhere, but it's not flat spacetime.
 
I rather think of the Schwarzschld space-time as being a point mass in my analogy. I'm not sure how to make this idea rigorous, however. The objection is an important one and while I think it's fixable, I'm not sure what it takes to fix it.
 
pervect said:
I rather think of the Schwarzschld space-time as being a point mass in my analogy. I'm not sure how to make this idea rigorous, however. The objection is an important one and while I think it's fixable, I'm not sure what it takes to fix it.

How about geodesic completeness? That would rule out Schwarzschild spacetime. I'm not sure it would rule out all of the vacuum solutions that have nonzero curvature, though.

Edit: Apparently it doesn't; according to Wikipedia, the Osvath-Schucking metric is globally defined and singularity-free, which should mean it's geodesically complete, but is not isometric to Minkowski spacetime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozváth–Schücking_metric
 
We could also drag cosmological constant into this discussion.
 
  • #10
PeterDonis said:
the Osvath-Schucking metric is globally defined and singularity-free, which should mean it's geodesically complete

As far as I can tell, this metric is *not* asymptotically flat. So it's possible that the combination of asymptotic flatness and geodesic completeness is sufficient to guarantee that the Riemann tensor is identically zero and thereby pin down Minkowski spacetime.
 
  • #11
Couldn't there be asymptotically flat spacetimes with gravitational waves and be geodesic-complete? Or how about standing gravitational waves? o.o
 
  • #12
Thank you everyone. Should have read recent thread before asking.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
750
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K