How Does Physics Behave in 2+2 Dimensional Spacetimes?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Intrastellar
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the complexities of 2+2 dimensional spacetimes and their implications for physics, particularly the presence of closed timelike curves. Participants reference the paper "Why 3+1 metric rather than 4+0 or 2+2?" by H van Dam and Y. Jack Ng, published in Physics Letters B in 2001, which explores the challenges of such metrics. The conversation also touches on the Anthropic Principle and the fictional exploration of multidimensional time in Greg Egan's book "Dichronauts." The consensus is that physics becomes problematic with multiple timelike dimensions, as traditional spacetime concepts do not apply.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of closed timelike curves
  • Familiarity with the Anthropic Principle
  • Knowledge of pseudoriemannian manifolds
  • Basic concepts of spacetime metrics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the paper "Why 3+1 metric rather than 4+0 or 2+2?" by H van Dam and Y. Jack Ng
  • Explore the implications of closed timelike curves in theoretical physics
  • Investigate the mathematics behind pseudoriemannian manifolds and their applications
  • Read Greg Egan's "Dichronauts" for a fictional perspective on multidimensional time
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, mathematicians exploring spacetime concepts, and science fiction writers interested in multidimensional time narratives.

Intrastellar
Gold Member
Messages
123
Reaction score
42
Does anyone know of any resources studying these spacetimes and how physics looks like in them ? Writing 2+2 never gets you any good results on google.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
These google searches may help. (In addition to google, try https://scholar.google.com/ )
signature 2+2 spacetime
multidimensional time

One problem with two timelike directions is the presence of closed timelike curves.
Possibly interesting reference that came up:
Why 3+1 metric rather than 4+0 or 2+2? H van Dam, Y. Jack Ng (Physics Letters B, 2001)
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01140-6
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Intrastellar
robphy said:
These google searches may help. (In addition to google, try https://scholar.google.com/ )
signature 2+2 spacetime
multidimensional time

One problem with two timelike directions is the presence of closed timelike curves.
Possibly interesting reference that came up:
Why 3+1 metric rather than 4+0 or 2+2? H van Dam, Y. Jack Ng (Physics Letters B, 2001)
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01140-6

It's kind of a strange argument to claim that something must be true, because otherwise, things would be very boring. Maybe that, together with the Anthropic Principle (in boring universes, there are no people to wonder what the laws of physics are)?
 
Greg Egan is a science fiction writer who spends his mathematics prowess describing such worlds. The book "Dichronauts" investigates a fictional world in such a universe. His webpage with the mathematics and descriptions provides more detail than the book does.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Intrastellar
Well, one use for signatures other than (1,n) is that the generalizations of Nash embedding theorems to pseudoriemannian manifolds requires an (m,M) flat manifold in general, where m > 1, and M > n, to embed the arbitrary (1,n) manifold (for isometric smooth embedding).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Intrastellar
Mathematicians call this "neutral signature" and you can find loads of math papers on the subject. You are not going to find much physics, though, as physics doesn't make much sense with more than one time direction.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Intrastellar
From what I have read space time is time like or space like. Is there a unique variable, st, for space time and how is it measured by itself?
 
@JAYJACOBUS , welcome to PF!

JAYJACOBUS said:
From what I have read

Where? Please give a specific reference.

JAYJACOBUS said:
space time is time like or space like

This is not correct. In fact it doesn't even make sense. Particular vectors at a particular event in spacetime can be timelike or spacelike (or null), but not spacetime itself.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
4K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
841
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K