Topology of Minkowski spacetime

In summary: Any two points on a physical interval are connected by a directed path, regardless of their distance measured in terms of the Euclidean metric. This is not something that can be described in terms of the Euclidean metric alone. Dslowik is right – the Lorentz metric is needed to describe the physical structure of spacetime. But it’s not something that we “add on” to the Euclidean metric – it’s intrinsic to it. This is a pretty deep philosophical issue, but I think it’s important to at least be aware of it, in order to understand how Quantum theory and Relativity are related.
  • #1
ConradDJ
Gold Member
319
1
I recently Googled "spacetime topology" and found that the topology of Minkowski spacetime is generally described as that of an R4 manifold.

This is not my field, but I'm surprised. Perhaps mathematically the (---+) "Lorentz signature" can be taken as a secondary characteristic of the manifold... but physically, it seems very basic to the topology of spacetime that any two points on a "light-like interval" are directly connected.

I understand that they are not the same point in spacetime, and I understand that there is a time-direction in the connection between them. That is, when I look at a star, there is a "null" spacetime distance between the place and time the photon was emitted and the place and time where it reaches my eye -- but this is a one-way "causal" connection from the star to my eye.

Does anyone know of a treatment of spacetime topology that discusses this kind of directed connection across a "null interval"?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
The ability to define light cones is due to the (-+++) signature of the spacetime metric. R^4 itself does not inherently have a metric, and we can place on it metrics of different signature, and different metrics of the same signatue.

Spacetimes with (++++) signature are usually called "Euclidean", and spacetimes with (-+++) signature are usually called "Lorentzian","semi-Riemanninan", or "pseudo_Riemannian". The (-+++) spacetime with flat metric is usually called "Minkowski spacetime".

Minkowski spacetime can have different topologies. These topologies may induce "preferred frame" effects. http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0101014

A general reference: http://books.google.com/books?id=d6q8LAGPBecC&dq=joshi+global+structure&source=gbs_navlinks_s, especially chapter 4 "Causality and spacetime topology".
 
Last edited:
  • #4
dextercioby said:
Please, see this ongoing discussion in the topology subforum.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=495816


Thank you – both these replies were very helpful. The thread referenced above was started by dslowik, who posted on the same issue https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=495486"

Dslowik seems to be concerned about the same issue I am, though he’s coming at it from a mathematical perspective. He says, for example –
dslowik said:
Lorentz metric is not really a metric in the sense of metric spaces of a topology course since it admits negative values. If I use it to define the usual open sphere about a point, that sphere includes the entire light-cone through that point...
dslowik said:
It seems that ST is a topological manifold with a locally Euclidean metric. This describes its topological structure as a metric space. We than add further structure to this metric/topological space by adding the non-Riemanian Lorentz metric. Thus we are using one metric and corresponding open balls to describe the topology, and another metric to describe the 'physical' distance between points. The physical distance between some points is 0, which is a very different topology than the locally Euclidean one; but the Lorentz metric can't be used to describe open balls for a topology?

... it seems odd to me that we impose a locally euclidean topology, then use a quite different metric to describe physical separation of points.


If I understand this correctly, it seems that describing spacetime as a manifold with a Lorentz metric is a mathematical kludge – something that works for purposes of calculations, but doesn’t really show us what’s going on, physically.

Dslowik seems to think that the zero absolute spacetime distance between points on the light-cone could and maybe should be treated as a basic topological feature of spacetime, not as something secondary, added on with the metric.

It seems that maybe Hawking et al did something like this in a 1976 paper that I’m not able to access. Does anyone know where I can find out more about their approach?
http://link.aip.org/link/doi/10.1063/1.522874" [Broken]


My issue here is a philosophical one. In order to understand the underlying connection between Quantum theory and Relativity, I think we need to be able to describe the world of physical interaction that can actually be observed, from a point of view inside it.

Instead, both Quantum theory and Relativity have so far been formulated within an essentially classical framework, where every effort is made to eliminate “the observer” so we can continue imagining the universe from a “God’s-eye” viewpoint. Clearly this approach works very well for most purposes – but I think, among other things, it prevents us from seeing how these two theories are fundamentally related.

Specifically – when we start by describing spacetime as an R^4 manifold that’s locally Euclidean, we’re already rooting ourselves in the classical framework. Dslowik is pointing out that physical spacetime – as opposed to the convenient mathematical structure we use to describe it – is not Euclidean even locally. The main issue is not that it’s “curved” but that the topology of physical connections – i.e. the actual interactions taking place at a given place and time – is entirely different from R^4.

In the spacetime of physical connections, for example, there is no such thing as a “spacelike interval” or a “spacelike hypersurface”. All physical interaction operates either extremely locally – on the scale of an atomic nucleus – or on the light-cone, across a “null interval”... depending on whether the interaction is mediated by massless or massive particles.

I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with the usual mathematics of Relativity, wherever it works. Because light-speed is so fast as compared with the processes we normally deal with, it makes lots of sense to describe the world as if it were locally Euclidean. And of course, adding a (+++–) metric to the R^4 manifold gives us an effective way of describing spacetime curvature. But maybe we shouldn’t expect our mathematical conveniences to give us insight into fundamental physics.

I’ve been trying to envision the topology of the “physical spacetime” we actually observe, as something like a web of communications among different observers, on their respective light-cones. So far the closest analogy I can think of is the “topology” of distributed parallel processing in a computer system with many CPUs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime_topology" [Broken], there are alternative spacetime topologies (“Zeeman” and “Alexandrov”) that may relate to this picture.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

1. What is Minkowski spacetime?

Minkowski spacetime is a mathematical model used to describe the four-dimensional universe in which we live. It combines three dimensions of space and one dimension of time into a single four-dimensional continuum. It was introduced by mathematician Hermann Minkowski in 1908.

2. What is the significance of Minkowski spacetime in physics?

Minkowski spacetime is significant in physics because it provides a geometric framework for understanding the relationship between space and time. It is used in theories such as Einstein's theory of special relativity to explain the behavior of objects moving at high speeds.

3. What is the topology of Minkowski spacetime?

The topology of Minkowski spacetime is flat, meaning that it has no curvature. In other words, the distance between any two points in Minkowski spacetime is always the same, regardless of their location. This is in contrast to other spacetime models, such as the curved spacetime of general relativity.

4. How is the topology of Minkowski spacetime represented mathematically?

The topology of Minkowski spacetime is represented mathematically using the Minkowski metric, which is a mathematical equation that describes the distance between two points in Minkowski spacetime. It is also represented using the concept of spacetime intervals, which measure the separation between two events in Minkowski spacetime.

5. Can the topology of Minkowski spacetime change?

No, the topology of Minkowski spacetime is fixed and cannot change. This is because it is a fundamental property of the universe, and any changes to it would result in changes to the laws of physics. However, the geometry of Minkowski spacetime can be transformed through mathematical operations, such as Lorentz transformations, which are used in special relativity.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top