I Is Zero Curvature Space Equivalent to Flat Space in General Relativity?

Click For Summary
In general relativity, a flat space is defined by an invariant metric field, but this definition can vary across different coordinate systems. While zero curvature implies flatness, the converse is not true; a flat space can be represented in various coordinate systems without altering its intrinsic geometry. The Riemann curvature tensor being zero is the definitive criterion for flat spacetime, and this property remains consistent across all coordinate transformations. Discussions highlight the complexity of relating different metrics and their curvature properties, emphasizing that while metrics can change, the underlying geometry does not. Ultimately, the distinction between zero curvature and flatness is crucial for understanding the nature of spacetime in relativity.
  • #31
Jianbing_Shao said:
Perhaps I can not express my opnion clearly, what I stressed is just that: to a vector field ##v(x)##, and we can express ##v(x)## using basis ##e^\mu(x)##.then
$$v(x)=v_\mu(x)e^\mu(x)$$
also we can express ##v(x)## using basis ##e'^\mu(x)##, and
$$v(x)=v_\mu(x)e^\mu(x)=v'_\mu(x)e'^\mu(x)$$
then because all the basis ##e^\mu(x)## are coordinate basis, so sometimes when we express ##v(x)## from one basis to another, then the changes of components can not be equivalantly described as change under coordinate transformation
I am sorry, it is impossible to deduce what you are trying to say here. If anything, this post made your argument murkier, not clearer.
 
  • Like
Likes PeterDonis
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
vanhees71 said:
In 2D just extend @Orodruin 's example of the 1D circle to a 2D cylinder surface :wink:
Actually, as I hinted to in a later post (#17), the cylinder is not as easy to get as the circle as the cylinder does admit a global coordinate system (being homeomorphic to ##\mathbb R^2 \setminus \{0\}##). The problem becomes showing that there is no way to arrange such a global coordinate system such that the metric becomes diagonal with the diagonal entries equal to one.

Edit: Just to be a little more specific. The global coordinate system on the cylinder ##x^2+y^2=r^2_0## as a submanifold of ##\mathbb R^3## using coordinates ##\xi## and ##\eta## on ##\mathbb R^2 \setminus \{0\}## can be constructed as
$$
x = \frac{r_0 \xi}{\sqrt{\xi^2 + \eta^2}}, \quad
y = \frac{r_0 \eta}{\sqrt{\xi^2 + \eta^2}}, \quad
z = \frac{r_0}{2} \ln\left(\frac{\xi^2 + \eta^2}{r_0^2}\right).
$$
Of course, in these coordinates, the induced metric from the embedding in ##\mathbb R^3## does not take the ##\delta## form, but it shows that a global coordinate system exists, making the argument a bit muddier than for the circle.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #33
Ibix said:
What do you mean by "it can change" as it goes around the loop? To what are you comparing it?
I know where I was wrong, thanks ! everyone
 
  • #34
Jianbing_Shao said:
I know where I was wrong, thanks ! everyone
Please tell us. We would like to make sure that you have gotten it right. (It happens more than you would think that people tell us they have gotten it, only to return with similar misconceptions a few days later.)
 
  • #35
Orodruin said:
I am sorry, it is impossible to deduce what you are trying to say here. If anything, this post made your argument murkier, not clearer.
Perhaps it can be stated that not all metric ##g_{\mu\nu}(x)## can globally transform to ##\eta_{\mu\nu}## under coordinate transformation.
 
  • #36
Another way to start classifying random metrics, and if they're flat, is to look into Petrov classifications if you have not OP.
 

Similar threads

Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
921
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
3K
Replies
38
Views
676
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K