I Shwartzschild coordinate system

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter omidj
  • Start date Start date
omidj
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
Transformation equations from Schwarzschild coordinate and metric to Minkowski space time
Is there any direct transformation equations from schwarzschild coordinate components of time and distance to a flat Minkowsky space time?
These basis vectors seem to be capable of producing the Shwarzschild metric:
et=√(1-rs/r)cosh(ct) eT +√(1-rs/r)sinh(ct) eR
er=(1/√(1-rs/r))sinh(ct) eT +(1/√(1-rs/r))cosh(ct) eR
(et&er for Schwarzschild and eT&eR for Minkowsky) But when Jacobian matrix is derived, the problem emerges ...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They are different manifolds so there is not a coordinate transform between them. Of course locally you can always find coordinates that approximate Minkowski to first order.
 
  • Like
Likes robphy and PeterDonis
omidj said:
Is there any direct transformation equations from schwarzschild coordinate components of time and distance to a flat Minkowsky space time?
It cannot be done, for about the same reason that we cannot find a transformation between latitude and longitude on the curved surface of the earth and cartesian x-y coordinates on a euclidean plane.

We can of course ignore the curvature completely and use ordinary Minkowski polar coordinates as an approximation valid over sufficiently small regions of spacetime, analogous to the way that we treat the surface of the earth as flat across a sufficiently small area.
 
omidj said:
Is there any direct transformation equations from schwarzschild coordinate components of time and distance to a flat Minkowsky space time?
Please use LaTeX.

As it was already said, such a transformation is impossible. Each spacetime comes with its inherent quantities that are invariant under coordinate transformations. Geodesics in Minkowski spacetime (straight lines) can intersect each other once at most. In Schwarzschild spacetime, they may do so many times (for example: circular orbits in opposite directions). No coordinate transformation can change that.
The question of equivalence up to a coordinate transformation can be a complex challenge in the general case. Sometime it is sufficient to consider a few curvature scalars. Scalar fields are invariant under coordinate transformations, like the Ricci scalar ##R=R^\mu{}_\mu## . For the example given by @Nugatory in post #3, the 2D Euclidean plane has ##R=0## , while the unit sphere has ##R=2## , which proves the claim that they are fundamentally distinct.

Edit: corrected error
 
Last edited:
PeterDonis said:
Note that in Schwarzschild spacetime, which is a vacuum solution, this scalar is zero. The simplest nonzero curvature scalar in Schwarzschild spacetime is the Kretschmann scalar:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kretschmann_scalar
Yes. I should have mentioned it in #4.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top