Is the Space with Ricci Scalar Zero Flat?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of a spacetime described by a specific metric, particularly focusing on whether a Ricci scalar of zero implies that the space is flat. Participants explore the implications of the Riemann tensor and the Ricci tensor in this context, touching on concepts from general relativity and coordinate systems.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a metric and calculates the Riemann tensor components, concluding that the Ricci scalar is zero.
  • Another participant agrees that the spacetime is flat but notes that a zero Ricci scalar does not necessarily indicate flatness, as it can also occur in vacuum regions.
  • A correction is made regarding terminology, emphasizing the distinction between "Riemann" and "Reimann," and clarifying that the Ricci scalar is zero where the stress-energy tensor is zero.
  • Participants identify the metric as Rindler coordinates on Minkowski space, asserting that Minkowski space is flat regardless of the coordinate system used.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of the sign in the metric, with some participants questioning whether all components of the Riemann tensor can be zero in flat space represented in polar coordinates.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the interpretation of the metric, with some participants initially misunderstanding the role of the variable theta.
  • One participant asks for information on how the Ricci tensor relates to the curvature of space, prompting a response that the Ricci tensor describes curvature rather than arising from it.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of a zero Ricci scalar and the conditions under which spacetime can be considered flat. There is no consensus on whether the metric implies flatness or the conditions under which the Ricci tensor is defined.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight that the definition of flat space requires all components of the Riemann tensor to be zero, which may not align with certain interpretations of the metric in question. The discussion also reveals potential misunderstandings regarding the nature of the coordinates used.

Apashanka
Messages
427
Reaction score
15
Given metric ds2=dr2-r22
Gamma comes as Γ122=r,Γ212221=1/r
The Reimann tensor comes as
R11=R2121=∂1Γ212m12Γ21m=0,only non zero terms .
Similary R22=R1212=∂1Γ122m21Γ1m2=0,only non zero terms.
Therefore R(ricci scaler)=0
Is the space flat??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
All of the terms of the Riemann tensor are zero so yes, this spacetime (it's got a Lorentzian signature) is flat. Presumably it's just a funny set of coordinates on Minkowski spacetime.

Note that the Ricci scalar being zero is not enough to determine whether or not the spacetime is flat. It's always zero in vacuum, whether the spacetime is flat or not.
 
For what it's worth, it is Riemann, not Reimann, and scalar, not scaler.
As to your question, the Ricci scalar will be zero anywhere the stress-energy tensor is zero. For example the space outside a black hole event horizon has a zero Ricci scalar. Is this space flat? (Ibix beat me to it).
 
Note that your line element is just the line element for Rindler coordinates on Minkowski space in 1+1 dimensions. Minkowski space is, as should be expected, flat regardless of what coordinates you happen to use.
 
Orodruin said:
Rindler coordinates
Knew I should have recognised it...
 
Orodruin said:
Note that your line element is just the line element for Rindler coordinates on Minkowski space in 1+1 dimensions. Minkowski space is, as should be expected, flat regardless of what coordinates you happen to use.
But every flat space doesn't have R to be 0 ,as expected instead of -ve sign in between if +ve sign is there (which reduces to 2-D polar flat) then R is not zero,isn't it?!
 
Apashanka said:
But every flat space doesn't have R to be 0 ,as expected instead of -ve sign in between if +ve sign is there (which reduces to 2-D polar flat) then R is not zero,isn't it?!
The definition of a flat space is one for which all components of the Riemann tensor are zero. Thus the Ricci scalar is zero.

I can't follow what you are saying exactly. I think you are claiming that some elements of the Riemann tensor are non-zero in flat space in polar coordinates. This is not correct.
 
Ibix said:
The definition of a flat space is one for which all components of the Riemann tensor are zero. Thus the Ricci scalar is zero.

I can't follow what you are saying exactly. I think you are claiming that some elements of the Riemann tensor are non-zero in flat space in polar coordinates. This is not correct.
I was misunderstood ,
I got it now
 
Apashanka said:
Given metric ds2=dr2-r2dθ2
An usulal thus plain metric is [tex]ds^2=dr^2+r^2d\theta^2[/tex]. Your case has different sign
[tex]ds^2=dr^2-r^2d\theta^2[/tex].
Would you show me what kind of space your geometry says about?
 
  • #10
sweet springs said:
Would you show me what kind of space your geometry says about?
As noted by @Orodruin in #4, it's Rindler coordinates on flat Minkowski spacetime.
 
  • #11
Ibix said:
As noted by @Orodruin in #4, it's Rindler coordinates on flat Minkowski spacetime.
Indeed it is, but an unusual choice of letters. The Rindler metric would usually be written as $$ds^2 = dx^2 - x^2 dt^2$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix
  • #12
Now I know theta is time. Wrongly I interpreted it angle in xy plane. Thanks.
 
  • #13
DrGreg said:
Indeed it is, but an unusual choice of letters. The Rindler metric would usually be written as $$ds^2 = dx^2 - x^2 dt^2$$
Alternatively, with the opposite sign convention, it is the Milne model coordinates on the future light-cone of a point in 1+1D Minkowski space:
$$
ds^2 = dt^2 - t^2 dx^2
$$
 
  • #14
sweet springs said:
Now I know theta is time. Wrongly I interpreted it angle in xy plane. Thanks.
Well, it is "hyperbolic angle" in the XT plane where ##X = x \cosh t## and ##T = x \sinh t## (under the usual convention ##c = 1##).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sweet springs
  • #15
Yea, the angle starts from $$-\infty$$ to $$+\infty$$, not from 0 to $$2\pi$$.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
Can anyone please provide any information how is the Ricci tensor arises due to curvature of space??
 
  • #17
Apashanka said:
how is the Ricci tensor arises due to curvature of space?

The Ricci tensor doesn't "arise due to" the curvature of spacetime. It describes the curvature of spacetime (more precisely, the part of the curvature of spacetime that is due to the presence of stress-energy at the location where the tensor is evaluated).

Also, as in what I just wrote, it's the curvature of spacetime, not space.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
11K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K