Notes on Relativity and Cosmology - Physics Department, UCSB

Notes on Relativity and Cosmology - Physics Department, UCSB Notes on Relativity and Cosmology - Physics Department, UCSB

web.physics.ucsb.edu
from web.physics.ucsb.edu More from this publisher
27.09.2014 Views

212 CHAPTER 8. GENERAL RELATIVITY AND CURVED SPACETIME some new dimension, but rather they mean that the geometry on the spacetime is more complicated than that of Minkowski space. For example, they mean that not every circle has circumference 2πR. Another comment that should be made involves the relationship between the metric and the geometry. We have seen that the metric determines the geometry: it allows us to compute, for example, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its radius. One might ask if the converse is true: Does the geometry determine the metric? The answer is a resounding “no.” We have, in fact, already seen three metrics for flat space: We had one metric in (orthogonal) Cartesian coordinates, one in ‘tilted’ Cartesian coordinates where the axes were at some arbitrary angle θ, and one in polar coordinates. Actually, we have seen infinitely many different metrics since the metric was different for each value of the tilt angle θ for the tilted Cartesian coordinates. So, the metric carries information not only about the geometry itself, but also about the coordinates you happen to be using to describe it. The idea in general relativity is that the real physical effects depend only on the geometry and not upon the choice of coordinates 5 . After all, the circumference of a circle does not depend on whether you calculate it in polar or in Cartesian coordinates. As a result, one must be careful in using the metric to make physical predictions – some of the information in the metric is directly physical, but some is an artifact of the coordinate system and disentangling the two can sometimes be subtle. The choice of coordinates is much like the choice of a reference frame. We saw this to some extent in special relativity. For a given observer (say, Alice) in a given reference frame, we would introduce a notion of position (x Alice ) as measured by Alice, and we would introduce a notion of time (t Alice ) as measured by Alice. In a different reference frame (say, Bob’s) we would use different coordinates (x Bob and t Bob ). Coordinates describing inertial reference frames were related in a relatively simple way, while coordinates describing an accelerated reference frame were related to inertial coordinates in a more complicated way. However, whatever reference frame we used and whatever coordinate system we chose, the physical events are always the same. Either a given clock ticks 2 at the event where two light rays cross or it does not. Either a blue paintbrush leaves a mark on a meter stick or it does not. Either an observer writes “I saw the light!” on a piece of paper or she does not. As a result, the true physical predictions do not depend on the choice of reference frame or coordinate system at all. So long as we understand how to deal with physics in funny (say, accelerating) coordinate systems, such coordinate systems will still lead to the correct physical results. The idea that physics should not depend on the choice of coordinates 5 The idea is similar to the principle in special relativity that physical effects are the same no matter which reference frame you use to compute them.

8.4. WHAT IS THE METRIC OF SPACETIME? 213 is called General Coordinate Invariance. Invariance is a term that captures the idea that the physics itself does not change when we change coordinates. This turns out to be an important principle for the mathematical formulation of General Relativity as we will discuss further in section 8.4. 8.4 What is the metric of spacetime? We have now come to understand that the gravitational field is encoded in the metric. Once a metric has been given to us, we have also learned how to use it to compute various objects of interest. In particular, we have learned how to test a space to see if it is flat by computing the ratio of circumference to radius for a circle. However, all of this still leaves open what is perhaps the most important question: just which metric is it that describes the spacetime in which we live? First, let’s again recall that there really is no one ‘right’ metric, since the metric will depend on the choice of coordinates and there is no one ‘right’ choice of coordinates. But there is a certain part of the metric that is in fact independent of the choice of coordinates. That part is called the ‘geometry’ of the spacetime. It is mathematically very complicated to write this part down by itself. So, in practice, physicists work with the metric and then make sure that the things they calculate do not depend on the choice of coordinates. OK then, what determines the right geometry? Recall that the geometry is nothing other than the gravitational field. So, we expect that the geometry should in some way be tied to the matter in the universe: the mass, energy, and so on should control the geometry. Figuring out the exact form of this relationship is a difficult task, and Einstein worked on it for a long time. We will not reproduce his thoughts in any detail here. However, in the end he realized that there were actually not many possible choices for how the geometry and the mass, energy, etc. should be related. 8.4.1 The Einstein equations It turns out that, if we make five assumptions, then there is really just one family of possible relationships. These assumptions are: 1) Gravity is spacetime curvature, and so can be encoded in a metric. 2) General Coordinate Invariance: Real physics is independent of the choice of coordinates used to describe it. 3) The basic equations of general relativity should give the dynamics of the metric, telling how the metric changes in time. 4) Energy (including the energy in the gravitational field) is conserved. 5) The (local) equivalence principle.

8.4. WHAT IS THE METRIC OF SPACETIME? 213<br />

is called General Coordinate Invariance. Invariance is a term that captures<br />

the idea that the physics itself does not change when we change coordinates.<br />

This turns out to be an important principle for the mathematical formulati<strong>on</strong><br />

of General <strong>Relativity</strong> as we will discuss further in secti<strong>on</strong> 8.4.<br />

8.4 What is the metric of spacetime?<br />

We have now come to underst<strong>and</strong> that the gravitati<strong>on</strong>al field is encoded in the<br />

metric. Once a metric has been given to us, we have also learned how to use<br />

it to compute various objects of interest. In particular, we have learned how<br />

to test a space to see if it is flat by computing the ratio of circumference to<br />

radius for a circle. However, all of this still leaves open what is perhaps the<br />

most important questi<strong>on</strong>: just which metric is it that describes the spacetime<br />

in which we live?<br />

First, let’s again recall that there really is no <strong>on</strong>e ‘right’ metric, since the metric<br />

will depend <strong>on</strong> the choice of coordinates <strong>and</strong> there is no <strong>on</strong>e ‘right’ choice of<br />

coordinates. But there is a certain part of the metric that is in fact independent<br />

of the choice of coordinates. That part is called the ‘geometry’ of the spacetime.<br />

It is mathematically very complicated to write this part down by itself. So, in<br />

practice, physicists work with the metric <strong>and</strong> then make sure that the things<br />

they calculate do not depend <strong>on</strong> the choice of coordinates.<br />

OK then, what determines the right geometry? Recall that the geometry is<br />

nothing other than the gravitati<strong>on</strong>al field. So, we expect that the geometry<br />

should in some way be tied to the matter in the universe: the mass, energy,<br />

<strong>and</strong> so <strong>on</strong> should c<strong>on</strong>trol the geometry. Figuring out the exact form of this<br />

relati<strong>on</strong>ship is a difficult task, <strong>and</strong> Einstein worked <strong>on</strong> it for a l<strong>on</strong>g time. We will<br />

not reproduce his thoughts in any detail here. However, in the end he realized<br />

that there were actually not many possible choices for how the geometry <strong>and</strong><br />

the mass, energy, etc. should be related.<br />

8.4.1 The Einstein equati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

It turns out that, if we make five assumpti<strong>on</strong>s, then there is really just <strong>on</strong>e<br />

family of possible relati<strong>on</strong>ships. These assumpti<strong>on</strong>s are:<br />

1) Gravity is spacetime curvature, <strong>and</strong> so can be encoded in a metric.<br />

2) General Coordinate Invariance: Real physics is independent of the choice of<br />

coordinates used to describe it.<br />

3) The basic equati<strong>on</strong>s of general relativity should give the dynamics of the<br />

metric, telling how the metric changes in time.<br />

4) Energy (including the energy in the gravitati<strong>on</strong>al field) is c<strong>on</strong>served.<br />

5) The (local) equivalence principle.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!