I Equation of state for Einstein field equations

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the relationship between the Einstein field equations (EFE) and the concept of an equation of state in general relativity. The original poster attempted to derive closed-form solutions for the interior metric of a static spherical mass but faced challenges regarding the requirement of an equation of state. It was clarified that the equation of state is a functional relationship between pressure and energy density, not simply the EFE themselves. The moderator emphasized that the assumption of isotropic pressure does not constitute an equation of state, which must explicitly relate pressure and energy density. The thread concluded with the moderator suggesting that further inquiries about equations of state should be based on established definitions and sources.
grav-universe
Messages
460
Reaction score
1
Years ago I posted a thread where I solved for the exterior vacuum metric for a static spherical mass using only a single one of the unknown functions, A, B, or D, where D = C r^2, since they are inter-related. A moderator here graciously supplied the EFE's as A, B, and D relate to the energy density and pressures and suggested or asked if the same thing could be done for the interior metric. This sparked an interest in me to attempt it and after a few months I posted a thread with full solutions in the form of crude infinite Taylor series, which were necessary to work around square roots and denominators in the EFE's in order to integrate. The thread was removed by the same moderator stating that the solutions should be in closed form, and suggested referring to the only closed form interior solution known, that for a constant energy density. Okay, fair enough I suppose, so for years I attempted a full solution in closed form to no avail. But along the way, however, I found some particular forms for the energy density distributions that allow full solutions in closed form, so want to post some of those which I have found. I messaged first to make sure everything is up to speed, but was told I must first have an equation of state before I can use those solutions, otherwise it is personal research and verging on personal speculation. I'm not sure what this means. As far as I can tell, the EFE's themselves are the equations of state to begin with. Is that correct? If I assume isotropic pressures and make a coordinate choice and input a form for the energy density distribution directly into the EFE's and find solutions for A, B, and D in closed form, then as far as I know I am just working through the math of the EFE's exactly as they stand according to the mainstream, right?

So in an effort to comply, I would like to know what the equation of state for the EFE's should be, then, or what form it should take, and I will gladly begin my thread with that as well. Is it just the EFE's themselves? I would have started by stating those anyway. Is it the form of the energy density distribution I am solving for? The only form of the energy density distribution known in closed form is that of constant energy density, let's call it J, where J is constant. So let's say I want to add an extra term to that and solve for say, J - K r, where K is also constant. Would this be my equation of state in that case, then, that which I am solving for? I'm not sure if just stating a random energy density distribution to be solved for is the perceived problem here also. I would not not be stating that the energy density distribution must take this form, just what the solutions to the EFE's would be if it did. J and K allow for two parameters in the input instead of just one. If K = 0, then it reduces to just the constant energy density solution, so the known solution is still contained as a subset where K just expands upon that by allowing another possible term. Would starting the thread with the EFE's spelled out for energy density and pressure in terms of A, B, and D, assuming isotropic pressure and stating the coordinate choice, and then stating that we are solving for an energy density distribution of J - K r be enough here to consider the equation of state to be satisfied? What am I missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The equation of state is not given by the EFE; the EFE tell you how spacetime responds to energy-momentum. The equation of state of a medium relates different aspects of the medium to one other, like the density and pressure. That's contained in the energy momentum tensor you plug into the EFE .
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
haushofer said:
The equation of state is not given by the EFE; the EFE tell you how spacetime responds to energy-momentum. The equation of state of a medium relates different aspects of the medium to one other, like the density and pressure. That's contained in the energy momentum tensor you plug into the EFE .
Okay thank you. So from what you are saying, I gather that the assumption that the pressure is isotropic is my equation of state? That is, p = s for the radial and tangent pressures, thereby relating two aspects of the medium together?
 
@grav-universe as I told you in the PM thread we are having, the term "equation of state" is a standard term in physics and thermodynamics. Look it up. Even Wikipedia has an article on it. The term is not limited to GR or to solutions of the EFE; it is a term of very general application.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50 and vanhees71
grav-universe said:
So from what you are saying, I gather that the assumption that the pressure is isotropic is my equation of state?
No. As I told you in the PM thread, an equation of state is a functional relationship between the pressure ##p## and the energy density ##\rho##. Please take the time to learn this standard term. Once you have done that, if you have questions based on what you read in a source that discusses equations of state, you can start a new thread to ask them. In the meantime, this thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Moderator's note: Spin-off from another thread due to topic change. In the second link referenced, there is a claim about a physical interpretation of frame field. Consider a family of observers whose worldlines fill a region of spacetime. Each of them carries a clock and a set of mutually orthogonal rulers. Each observer points in the (timelike) direction defined by its worldline's tangent at any given event along it. What about the rulers each of them carries ? My interpretation: each...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 186 ·
7
Replies
186
Views
11K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K