Is this line element known to anyone ?

In summary, the conversation discusses a 4D metric with the constraint of motion on the surface of a 3D sphere. The metric satisfies the Einstein field equations with a non-zero component of the energy-momentum tensor, which can be interpreted as the energy required to keep a particle constrained to a sphere. The curvature scalar is 2/B, indicating a constant curvature and total energy A. The possibility of this metric being a viable interpretation is discussed, along with its relation to the Schwarzschild metric and the possibility of light being trapped on the surface.
  • #1
Mentz114
5,432
292
This is based on the metric of the surface of a 3D sphere. A and B are constants with dimension (length)^2. Coordinates are

[tex] x^0 = t, x^1 = \theta, x^2 = \phi[/tex]

[tex]ds^2 = -c^2AB^{-1}dt^2 + Bd\theta^2 + Bsin^2(\theta)d\phi^2[/tex]

It satisfies the Einstein field equations with only one component of the energy-momentum tensor non-zero -

[tex]T^{00} = \frac{c^2A}{B^2}[/tex]

The curvature scalar is

[tex]R^\mu_{ \mu} = \frac{2}{B}[/tex]

This looks like a two-dimensional static cosmos with constant curvature ( radius sqrt(B)) and total energy A, and no energy currents.

Is this a viable interpretation ?

[ Assuming I haven't made any gross errors in the calculation...]
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
I checked your two results with "Great.m", it is correct.
(see http://library.wolfram.com/infocenter/MathSource/4781/ )

It is funny (and obvious) that if you add a third spatial coordinate r = sqrt(B),
the energy momentum and the curvature drop to zero.

Why is it that constraining motion to a sphere leads to Too =/= 0 ?
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Thanks, lalbatross. I tried adding a radius spatial coord with g_rr = 1 and
get the same values as the 3D except for T11 which is now 1/B. Looks like a constant pressure term. I now think this is an interior solution of a fluid of constant pressure.

Why is it that constraining motion to a sphere leads to Too =/= 0 ?
Maybe because the constraint induces constant curvature which requires a source ?
 
Last edited:
  • #4
If g_rr=1 and r²=B, you get no curvature and Too=0.
For the interpretation, maybe you could get it by writing the equation of motion of a particle.
This Too must be what keeps a particle on the surface of a sphere.
What is the physical interpretation of Too and how does it relate to keeping a particle constrained to a sphere?
 
  • #5
Using

[tex]ds^2 = -c^2AB^{-1}dt^2 + dr^2 + Bd\theta^2 + Bsin^2(\theta)d\phi^2[/tex]

I get the same curvature, the same T_00 and T_11 = 1/B.

I have written out the equations of motion for the 3D and 4D case but I can't solve them. Obviously the null geodesics will be like great circles in the 3D case.

What is the physical interpretation of Too and how does it relate to keeping a particle constrained to a sphere?
The rest mass/energy that causes the cuvature ?
 
Last edited:
  • #6
Sorry for being a bit lazy with latex.
I was also a bit too fast in my answer.
What I meant is:

[tex]ds^2 = -c^2dt^2 + dr^2 + r^2d\theta^2 + r^2sin^2(\theta)d\phi^2[/tex]

which meant B=r² and A=B, which i only a special case.

Anyway, in this special case, it is clear that the 3D nergy momentum should be related to the centripedal force needed to keep a particle moving on a sphere. When A is different from B, an additional interpretation would be needed.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Yes, that metric has no curvature. If you're keeping the motion on the surface then dr = 0 and you get back to two spatial dimensions, where I started from.

I don't think that the 4D metric in my post#5 is physical.
 
  • #8
It could be physical.
You just need the T to be so.
You could check if such a metric could not occur in a central potential.
Is it not possible, for some A and B, to get the Swchartchild metric restricted on the dr=0 surface?
 
  • #9
Hi lalbatros.

I've worked out T for the 4D metric and I get

[tex]T^{00}=\frac{1}{Ac^2}, T^{11}= -\frac{1}{B}[/tex] all other components zero. Curvature scalar is still 2/B.

T_11, which we can interpret as radial momentum, depends only on B which seems very weird.

So it could be the interior r < sqrt(B) of a sphere of matter. Interestingly, light rays can be trapped to surfaces of constant r, that is great circles. I'm not sure if light could escape.

If this is so, then the exterior solution must be Schwarzschild and the joining will probably give the relation between A and B.

I'm sure I've seen this in a textbook. I'm going to look for it.
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Is this line element known to anyone ?

What is a line element?

A line element is a type of mathematical object used in geometry to represent a line or line segment. It contains information about the direction and length of a line.

How is a line element different from a line?

A line is a geometric figure that extends infinitely in both directions, while a line element is a mathematical object that represents a specific line or line segment. A line element has a defined length and direction, whereas a line has no specific length or direction.

Can a line element be known to more than one person?

Yes, a line element is a mathematical concept that can be known and understood by multiple people. It is a universal concept that can be studied and used by anyone who understands mathematics.

How is a line element used in science?

Line elements are used in various fields of science, such as physics and engineering, to represent physical objects and their properties. They are particularly useful in describing the motion and structure of objects in space.

Are there different types of line elements?

Yes, there are different types of line elements, such as straight lines, curved lines, and infinite lines. Each type has its own unique properties and can be used to represent different objects and phenomena in science.

Similar threads

Replies
44
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
571
Replies
3
Views
960
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
892
Replies
8
Views
3K
Back
Top