Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Space-time curvature

Today I had an interesting discussion with Andrei
Gruzinov about space-time curvature. I
see clearly now that most of the un-intuitive aspects of
GR (even black holes) have the same source as the
un-intuitive aspects of special relativity. The fact that light
needs no medium for propagation leads to SR, and there
is little conceptually new in GR other than the equivalence
principle. The difference between SR and GR comes from the
fact that accelerations due to sources (such as gravity, EM)
have spatial gradients and this manifests itself as curvature
when you write down the covariant formulation.

There are some aspects of GR that seem really new, for
example the expansion of space. Andrei pointed
out that for an infinite universe you can always reformulate
the problem as particles in space given initial velocities flying
apart; nothing new there. But I don't think a closed universe
with positive curvature can be reformulated in that way
because it is not simply connected, so eventually the particles
will mix and this will produce observational differences.
The thing is, GR is a local theory, it doesn't tell us anything
about the global properties of the universe. We may
need something new altogether to address whether, for
example, the universe can have non-trivial topology.

Erin

3 comments:

Hogg said...

Actually, topology and curvature are not necessarily related, because one is global and one is local. So you can have positive curvature but not be closed, and vice versa.

Erin Sheldon said...

Right, that was my point. GR tells us
about the curvature not the
topology. For example, you can
have flat space that is not simply
connected (toroidal). For the
positive curvature case we usually
assume it is finite and not simply
connected.

Erin

Hogg said...

Oh yeah, duh. I guess I read only the first 75 percent of your post. Sorry and right on.