I Approximate local flatness = Approximate local symmetries?

AI Thread Summary
Pseudo-Riemannian manifolds, like spacetime, can be locally approximated as Minkowskian, which is crucial for understanding relativity in curved spacetimes. This approximation raises the question of whether local symmetries, such as Poincaré and Lorentz, also hold only approximately. However, these local symmetries are exact within the tangent space at each event, not merely approximations of the overall spacetime. Therefore, while spacetime may be curved, the symmetries in the tangent space remain precise. This distinction is essential for the application of local symmetries in the context of relativity.
Suekdccia
Messages
352
Reaction score
30
TL;DR Summary
Approximate local flatness = Approximate local symmetries?
Pseudo-Riemannian manifolds (such as spacetime) are locally Minkowskian and this is very important for relativity since even in a highly curved spacetime, one could locally approximate the spacetime into a flat minkowski one.

However, this would be an approximation. Perhaps this is a naive question but, would this mean that the local symmetries (such as Poincaré, Lorentz...) hold also only approximately?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Suekdccia said:
would this mean that the local symmetries (such as Poincaré, Lorentz...) hold also only approximately?
No. The "local symmetries" you refer to are symmetries of the tangent space at each event. They are not symmetries of the spacetime. In the tangent space those symmetries are exact.
 
Abstract The Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) has significantly advanced our ability to study black holes, achieving unprecedented spatial resolution and revealing horizon-scale structures. Notably, these observations feature a distinctive dark shadow—primarily arising from faint jet emissions—surrounded by a bright photon ring. Anticipated upgrades of the EHT promise substantial improvements in dynamic range, enabling deeper exploration of low-background regions, particularly the inner shadow...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
Title: Can something exist without a cause? If the universe has a cause, what caused that cause? Post Content: Many theories suggest that everything must have a cause, but if that's true, then what caused the first cause? Does something need a cause to exist, or is it possible for existence to be uncaused? I’m exploring this from both a scientific and philosophical perspective and would love to hear insights from physics, cosmology, and philosophy. Are there any theories that explain this?
Back
Top