Q re de Sitter–Schwarzschild metric

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Buzz Bloom
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Metric
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the de Sitter–Schwarzschild metric, specifically focusing on the notation used for derivatives in the context of a test particle's motion relative to a black hole in a de Sitter universe. Participants explore the implications of using different parameters, such as proper time and affine parameters, in the equations governing this motion.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion regarding the notation of the dot on top of the variable t, with one suggesting it might represent a derivative with respect to an affine parameter.
  • Others clarify that the dot represents the derivative of coordinate time with respect to an affine parameter along the particle's path, specifically for massive particles.
  • One participant proposes that the dot could mean c×d/ds, but seeks confirmation on this interpretation.
  • Another participant emphasizes the distinction between differentiating with respect to a general path versus the specific path of interest, advocating for the use of proper time τ instead of s.
  • There is a discussion about the absence of τ in the equations being analyzed, with participants debating how to incorporate it effectively.
  • One participant notes that the equations derived assume c=1, which may lead to confusion regarding the notation and its implications.
  • Participants discuss the relationship between proper time and coordinate time, with one seeking to confirm their understanding of gravitational time dilation effects on these measures.
  • Another participant points out that coordinate time t is merely a label and lacks physical meaning, particularly in the context of the event horizon.
  • Concerns are raised about coordinate singularities, particularly regarding the t coordinate in the Schwarzschild metric and its implications for labeling events.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the dot notation and the role of proper time versus coordinate time. There is no consensus on how to best incorporate τ into the equations, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of coordinate singularities.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the unclear definitions of parameters and the implications of assuming c=1 in the metric equations. The discussion also highlights the complexity of differentiating along various paths and the potential for confusion regarding the physical meaning of coordinate time.

Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
If I haven't made some error, it looks like the geodesic equations for the dss metric should boil down to
$$\dot{t} = \frac{E}{f(r)} \quad \dot{r} = \sqrt{E^2-f(r)}$$

It'd take more work to write ##\dot{t}## and ##\dot{r}## as a function of ##\tau##, however, so it's difficult to directly confirm that these are the correct solutions as-is. I imagine one could use the chain rule, but I haven't done this.

Here E is some constant, representing the energy, and f(r) is, as previously
$$f(r) = 1 - \frac{2a}{r} - br^2$$

It looks like the motion is best understood by the effective potential technique, as used by MTW and on the forurmilab website for the Schwarzschild case, and that the effective potential ##V^2(r)## is just f(r). When b=0, this matches the Schwarzschild effective potential ##1-2a/r## from the fourmilab site / MTW as it should.

The forumilab website is https://www.fourmilab.ch/gravitation/orbits/

a and b are somewhat inconvenient parameter, I wound up normalizing the event horizon to occur at at r=1, and the cosmologcal horizon at r=C, where C is some constant, and then solves for a and b.

Plotting the effective potential for C=10, I get something that looks like this.
dss_effective_potential.jpg


If the object can reach the peak of the effective potential at ##r=\sqrt[3]{55} \approx 3.8##, with a coordinate velocity ##dr/d\tau## greater than 0, it will reach the cosmological horizon (and continue on to infinity). I've stop the graph at the cosmological horizon as the coordinates are too confusing beyond it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Buzz Bloom
  • #33
pervect said:
it will reach the cosmological horizon (and continue on to infinity)

Actually, there is no "infinity" in Schwarzschild-de Sitter spacetime. It is not asymptotically flat. Schwarzschild spacetime is, but Schwarzschild-de Sitter can be thought of, heuristically, as a finite piece of Schwarzschild, centered on the black hole, "glued" to de Sitter spacetime with a finite size spherical "world tube" taken out. So the asymptotic structure of Schwarzschild-de Sitter spacetime is the same as that of de Sitter spacetime. That means there is no "infinity" in the sense of "escape to infinity". The best you can do, relative to the black hole, is to "escape" beyond the cosmological horizon.
 
  • #34
PeterDonis said:
Actually, there is no "infinity" in Schwarzschild-de Sitter spacetime. It is not asymptotically flat. Schwarzschild spacetime is, but Schwarzschild-de Sitter can be thought of, heuristically, as a finite piece of Schwarzschild, centered on the black hole, "glued" to de Sitter spacetime with a finite size spherical "world tube" taken out. So the asymptotic structure of Schwarzschild-de Sitter spacetime is the same as that of de Sitter spacetime. That means there is no "infinity" in the sense of "escape to infinity". The best you can do, relative to the black hole, is to "escape" beyond the cosmological horizon.

I'll amend my results to omit any statements about what happens after the cosmological horizon, then, since I haven't really analyzed that case.

I'd need some more information to fully appreciate your point, I think. Do you have any references you could share? Aditionally, would you agree that the horizon is a point of no return, that the test particle, once beyond the horizon, does not return to the central mass, nor can signals from the test particle return? You mention an analogy to a sphere. Are there any CTC's in the de-Sitter spacetime? I know there are CTC's in the anti-de-Sitter space time. But I didn't think there were any in the de-Sitter spacetime, though I haven't seen anything definitive.

Additionally, do you have any comment about the solution I found to the geodesic equations, and/or the effective potential diagram?
 
  • #35
pervect said:
I'd need some more information to fully appreciate your point, I think. Do you have any references you could share?

Section 2 of the following paper has a good overview of the geometric and conformal properties of de Sitter spacetime:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0110007.pdf

Note in particular the Penrose diagram in Fig. 2. Unlike asymptotically flat spacetimes, which have a spacelike infinity to the side, and separate timelike and null infinites to the past and future (with the timelike being at the bottom and top, and the null being at an angle between the timelike and the spacelike), de Sitter spacetime has only two infinities, one to the past (at the bottom) and one to the future (at the top), and there is no distinction between timelike and null (both kinds of curves reach the same infinities).

The rest of that section has other good diagrams showing how various commonly used coordinate charts cover de Sitter spacetime, and what portions they cover.

The Penrose diagram of Schwarzschild-de Sitter spacetime is even more interesting, as shown in Fig. 1 of this paper:

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1007.3851.pdf

Note how there are still no spacelike or separate null infinities; instead there is an infinite "row" of alternating Schwarzschild and de Sitter regions.

One thing I have not been able to find is a diagram for gravitational collapse of an object to a black hole in a universe that is asymptotically de Sitter instead of asymptotically flat--i.e., a version of the classic Oppenheimer-Snyder model set in de Sitter spacetime.
 
  • #36
It's messy, but my computer algebra package is confirming the solution.

The highlights:
$$g(r) = \frac{df(r)}{dr} \quad \dot{t}(\tau)= \frac{E}{f(r(\tau))} \quad \dot{r}(\tau) = \sqrt{E^2 - f(r(\tau))} $$

$$ \ddot{t}(\tau) = -\frac{E\,g(r)}{f^2(r)} \dot{r}= \frac{-E\, g(r(\tau)) \sqrt{ E^2 - f(r(\tau))} } {f^2(r(\tau))} $$

$$ \ddot{r}(\tau) = -\frac{1}{2} \, \frac{g(r)} { \sqrt{E^2-f(r)}} \dot{r} = -\frac{g(r(\tau)) } {2 }$$

The rest is more algebra, substuting ##\ddot{t}## ##\dot{t}## ##\ddot{r}## and ##\dot{r}## into the geodesic equations.

Note that when g(r)=0, ##\ddot{r}=0##, which is consistent with the idea that f(r) is the effective potential, and the metastable peak of the effective potential occurs when g(r) = df/dr = 0.

From the expression for ##\dot{r}## we could write

$$\frac{dr}{\sqrt{E^2 - f(r)}} = d\tau$$

which could be integrated to solve for ##\tau(r)## which could be inverted to get ##r(\tau)##, but this gets very messy very quickly.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K