DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:1710.06434V2 [Gr-Qc] 19 Apr 2018 Study Spacetime Symmetries and We fit the Examples Into Ifold

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:1710.06434V2 [Gr-Qc] 19 Apr 2018 Study Spacetime Symmetries and We fit the Examples Into Ifold Spacetime symmetries and topology in bimetric relativity Francesco Torsello,1, ∗ Mikica Kocic,1, y Marcus H¨og˚as,1, z and Edvard M¨ortsell1, x 1Department of Physics & The Oskar Klein Centre, Stockholm University, AlbaNova University Centre, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden We explore spacetime symmetries and topologies of the two metric sectors in Hassan{Rosen bimetric theory. We show that, in vacuum, the two sectors can either share or have separate spacetime symmetries. If stress{energy tensors are present, a third case can arise, with different spacetime symmetries within the same sector. This raises the question of the best definition of spacetime symmetry in Hassan{Rosen bimetric theory. We emphasize the possibility of imposing ansatzes and looking for solutions having different Killing vector fields or different isometries in the two sectors, which has gained little attention so far. We also point out that the topology of spacetime imposes a constraint on possible metric combinations. Keywords: Modified gravity, ghost-free bimetric theory, bimetric relativity, spacetime symmetries, isometries, Killing vector fields, topology I. INTRODUCTION In this case, it is straightforward to talk about a space- time symmetry, since the whole system is invariant under Symmetries are fundamental in physics. The invari- the transformation. If this is not the case, however, the ance of physical quantities under a given transformation definition of a spacetime symmetry is ambiguous. Solu- allows physicists to simplify their models of Nature and tions having different KVFs and showing this ambiguity, to better understand them. in the context of the HR bimetric theory, are presented The first computed exact solution in general relativity in section II B. (GR) is the Schwarzschild solution [1], which was de- When finding particular solutions, the most common termined by assuming a static and spherically symmet- ansatzes presume the same isometries in both sectors ric spacetime. Schwarzschild's approach has been widely (some exceptions can be found in [4,5]). This study and fruitfully used until our days. Indeed, the standard investigates when this is the most general ansatz, and if way for finding particular solutions of certain field equa- there are other possible ansatzes which can, in principle, tions is to impose some symmetries to the system, and lead to new solutions of the bimetric field equations. This deduce the appropriate ansatz for the dynamical fields. turns out to be the case. In (pseudo-)Riemannian geometry, spacetime symme- We also answer to the question if there are any con- tries are characterized by Killing vector fields (KVFs), straints on the solutions of HR bimetric theory, based on whose integral curves define paths along which the phys- the underlying topology of the spacetime. The answer ical quantities can be invariant. When this happens, the turns out to be yes, as we will discuss in section II A. standard terminology is that the physical quantity pos- The paper is organized in two main sections. In sec- sesses a symmetry along that path (or that the path de- tion II, we focus on HR bimetric theory, reviewed in sec- fines a \collineation" for the physical quantity). In the tion II A. We start by discussing explicit examples hav- case of a symmetry of the metric tensor, they coincide ing the described properties in section II B. These exam- with its isometries. We refer the reader to [2] for a basic ples should be thought of as a selection of cases showing treatment of spacetime symmetries and to [3] for a more different possible configurations of spacetime symmetries advanced approach. in HR theory. In principle, they may or may not pro- In this paper we explore the relation between the KVFs vide any other physical information. In section II C we of two metrics defined on the same differentiable man- arXiv:1710.06434v2 [gr-qc] 19 Apr 2018 study spacetime symmetries and we fit the examples into ifold. The motivation for this study comes from the a more general framework. We determine a conserved Hassan{Rosen (HR) bimetric theory (introduced in sec- vector current and state two propositions helpful for un- tion II), where this geometrical framework naturally ap- derstanding the structure of spacetime symmetries in the pears. When two metrics are concerned, the question of theory. We define the concepts of \bimetric spacetime whether an isometry of one metric is a spacetime sym- symmetry", \sectoral spacetime symmetry" and \narrow metry for the whole system arises. We will see that, if spacetime symmetry" in bimetric relativity, as symme- the two metrics share their isometries, then the latter tries shared by all tensors, by the tensors in one metric will be spacetime symmetries for all other tensor fields. sector only and by some generic tensors, respectively. In AppendixA, we provide some strategies for constructing bimetric ansatzes having different KVFs. In section III, ∗ [email protected] we fit the results of section II into a wider perspective. y [email protected] In particular, we summarize the main geometric concepts z [email protected] and results we have used in studying spacetime symme- x [email protected] tries. We explore the topic in a generic setup, i.e., we do 2 µ ρ µρ not assume any relation between the two metrics, other or, in index notation, S ρS ν := g fρν . The βn pa- than they are defined on the same differentiable manifold. rameters are generic real numbers and the en(S) are the µ After that, we state our conclusions. elementary symmetric polynomials of S ν , The reader specifically interested in HR bimetric the- ory can find all the related results in section II and Ap- e0 (S) = 1; pendixA. The paper being quite technical|especially e1 (S) = λ1 + λ2 + λ3 + λ4; section III|the reader interested mainly in the results e2 (S) = λ1λ2 + λ1λ3 + λ1λ4 + λ2λ3 + λ2λ4 + λ3λ4; and their discussion is invited to read the brief summaries at the end of section II and the beginning of section III, e3 (S) = λ1λ2λ3 + λ1λ2λ4 + λ1λ3λ4 + λ2λ3λ4; and the conclusions. e4 (S) = λ1λ2λ3λ4; (4) µ where the λn are the eigenvalues of S ν . II. ISOMETRIES IN THE HASSAN-ROSEN Varying (1) with respect to gµν and fµν , we get the BIMETRIC THEORY bimetric field equations, m4 1 Recently, there has been a noteworthy interest in con- µ µ µ Gg ν + 2 Vg ν = 2 Tg ν ; (5a) structing a classical nonlinear theory of interacting spin- Mg Mg 2 fields. This interest culminated in the discovery of m4 1 G µ + V µ = T µ ; (5b) two such theories which are free from the pathologi- f ν M 2 f ν M 2 f ν cal Boulware{Deser ghost [6], thanks to the particular f f µ form of the interaction potential between the spin-2 ten- with Gg;f ν being the Einstein tensors for gµν and fµν , µ sor fields. These theories are the de Rham{Gabadadze{ Tg;f ν being the stress{energy tensors for the two inde- µ Tolley (dRGT) massive gravity [7,8], which was proven pendent matter sources and Vg;f ν , here referred to as to be ghost-free in [9], and the Hassan{Rosen (HR) bi- the \tensor potentials." being equal to, metric theory [10, 11], whose unambiguous definition and spacetime interpretation are provided in [12]. 3 n µ X X n+k n−k We focus on the HR bimetric theory, describing two Vg ν = βn (−1) ek(S) S ; (6a) interacting, dynamical and symmetric spin-2 fields, gµν n=0 k=0 3 n and fµν . It has seven degrees of freedom propagating µ X X n+k −1 −n+k five massive and two massless mode around proportional Vf ν = β4−n (−1) ek(S ) S : (6b) backgrounds [13{15]. One possible interpretation of this n=0 k=0 theory is to consider both the symmetric spin-2 fields Combining (5) with their own traces we obtain, as metrics defined on the same differentiable manifold. Here, we follow this interpretation and, therefore, aim to 1 1 1 understand the relations between the KVFs of the two R µ = m4 V δµ − V µ + T µ − T δµ ; g ν M 2 2 g ν g ν g ν 2 g ν metrics and, consequently, between their isometries. g (7a) A. Review of the theory, and topological constraint µ 1 4 1 µ µ µ 1 µ Rf ν = 2 m Vf δ ν − Vf ν + Tf ν − Tf δ ν ; Mf 2 2 The action of HR bimetric theory is [10], (7b) Z p 1 4 2 4 αβ αβ αβ S = d x −g M Rg + Lg − m V (S) where T = g T , T = f T , V = g V and 2 g g αβ g f αβ f g αβ g V = f V αβ. 1 f αβ f 2 Noting that the stress{energy tensors T µ and + det (S) Mf Rf + Lf (1) g ν 2 µ Tf ν are divergence-less due to diffeomorphism in- R 4 p where two Einstein{Hilbert actions constitute kinetic variance of the matter actions d x −g Lg and R 4 p terms for both metrics, minimally coupled to two inde- d x −g det (S) Lf , the Bianchi constraints follows pendent matter sources described by the lagrangian den- from taking the divergence of (5), sities L , L (see, e.g., [16] regarding ghost-free matter g f ν ~ ν couplings). The \bimetric potential" is defined as, rν Vg µ = 0; rν Vf µ = 0; (8) 4 where r is the compatible covariant derivative of g X µ µν V (S) := βnen (S) : (2) and r~ µ is the compatible covariant derivative of fµν .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Symmetries and Pre-Metric Electromagnetism
    Symmetries and pre-metric electromagnetism ∗ D.H. Delphenich ∗∗ Physics Department, Bethany College, Lindsborg, KS 67456, USA Received 27 April 2005, revised 14 July 2005, accepted 14 July 2005 by F. W. Hehl Key words Pre-metric electromagnetism, exterior differential systems, symmetries of differential equations, electromagnetic constitutive laws, projective relativity. PACS 02.40.k, 03.50.De, 11.30-j, 11.10-Lm The equations of pre-metric electromagnetism are formulated as an exterior differential system on the bundle of exterior differential 2-forms over the spacetime manifold. The general form for the symmetry equations of the system is computed and then specialized to various possible forms for an electromagnetic constitutive law, namely, uniform linear, non-uniform linear, and uniform nonlinear. It is shown that in the uniform linear case, one has four possible ways of prolonging the symmetry Lie algebra, including prolongation to a Lie algebra of infinitesimal projective transformations of a real four-dimensional projective space. In the most general non-uniform linear case, the effect of non-uniformity on symmetry seems inconclusive in the absence of further specifics, and in the uniform nonlinear case, the overall difference from the uniform linear case amounts to a deformation of the electromagnetic constitutive tensor by the electromagnetic field strengths, which induces a corresponding deformation of the symmetry Lie algebra that was obtained in the linear uniform case. Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Exterior differential systems 4 2.1 Basic concepts. ………………………………………………………………………….. 4 2.2 Exterior differential systems on Λ2(M). …………………………………………………. 6 2.3 Canonical forms on Λ2(M). ………………………………………………………………. 7 3. Symmetries of exterior differential systems 10 3.1 Basic concepts.
    [Show full text]
  • Spacetime Symmetries and the Cpt Theorem
    SPACETIME SYMMETRIES AND THE CPT THEOREM BY HILARY GREAVES A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School|New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Philosophy Written under the direction of Frank Arntzenius and approved by New Brunswick, New Jersey May, 2008 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Spacetime symmetries and the CPT theorem by Hilary Greaves Dissertation Director: Frank Arntzenius This dissertation explores several issues related to the CPT theorem. Chapter 2 explores the meaning of spacetime symmetries in general and time reversal in particular. It is proposed that a third conception of time reversal, `geometric time reversal', is more appropriate for certain theoretical purposes than the existing `active' and `passive' conceptions. It is argued that, in the case of classical electromagnetism, a particular nonstandard time reversal operation is at least as defensible as the standard view. This unorthodox time reversal operation is of interest because it is the classical counterpart of a view according to which the so-called `CPT theorem' of quantum field theory is better called `PT theorem'; on this view, a puzzle about how an operation as apparently non- spatio-temporal as charge conjugation can be linked to spacetime symmetries in as intimate a way as a CPT theorem would seem to suggest dissolves. In chapter 3, we turn to the question of whether the CPT theorem is an essentially quantum-theoretic result. We state and prove a classical analogue of the CPT theorem for systems of tensor fields. This classical analogue, however, ii appears not to extend to systems of spinor fields.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1606.08018V1 [Math.DG] 26 Jun 2016 Diinlasmtoso T Br H Aiyo Eeaie Robert Generalized of Family Spacet Robertson-Walker the Classical the Extends fiber
    ON SYMMETRIES OF GENERALIZED ROBERTSON-WALKER SPACE-TIMES AND APPLICATIONS H. K. EL-SAYIED, S. SHENAWY, AND N. SYIED Abstract. The purpose of the present article is to study and characterize sev- eral types of symmetries of generalized Robertson-Walker space-times. Con- formal vector fields, curvature and Ricci collineations are studied. Many im- plications for existence of these symmetries on generalied Robertson-Walker spacetimes are obtained. Finally, Ricci solitons on generalized Robertson- Walker space-times admitting conformal vector fields are investigated. 1. An introduction Robertson-Walker spacetimes have been extensively studied in both mathemat- ics and physics for a long time [5, 8, 16, 19, 25, 26]. This family of spacetimes is a very important family of cosmological models in general relativity [8]. A general- ized (n + 1) −dimensional Robertson-Walker (GRW) spacetime is a warped product manifold I ×f M where M is an n−dimensional Riemannian manifold without any additional assumptions on its fiber. The family of generalized Robertson-Walker spacetimes widely extends the classical Robertson-Walker spacetimes I ×f Sk where Sk is a 3−dimensional Riemannian manifold with constant curvature. The study of spacetime symmetries is of great interest in both mathematics and physics. The existence of some symmetries in a spacetime is helpful in solving Einstein field equation and in providing further insight to conservative laws of dy- namical systems(see [18] one of the best references for 4−dimensional spacetime symmetries). Conformal vector fields have been played an important role in both mathematics and physics [10–12,21,23,30]. The existence of a nontrivial conformal vector field is a symmetry assumption for the metric tensor.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 How Could Relativity Be Anything Other Than Physical?
    How Could Relativity be Anything Other Than Physical? Wayne C. Myrvold Department of Philosophy The University of Western Ontario [email protected] Forthcoming in Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics. Special Issue: Physical Relativity, 10 years on Abstract Harvey Brown’s Physical Relativity defends a view, the dynamical perspective, on the nature of spacetime that goes beyond the familiar dichotomy of substantivalist/relationist views. A full defense of this view requires attention to the way that our use of spacetime concepts connect with the physical world. Reflection on such matters, I argue, reveals that the dynamical perspective affords the only possible view about the ontological status of spacetime, in that putative rivals fail to express anything, either true or false. I conclude with remarks aimed at clarifying what is and isn’t in dispute with regards to the explanatory priority of spacetime and dynamics, at countering an objection raised by John Norton to views of this sort, and at clarifying the relation between background and effective spacetime structure. 1. Introduction Harvey Brown’s Physical Relativity is a delightful book, rich in historical details, whose main thrust is to an advance a view of the nature of spacetime structure, which he calls the dynamical perspective, that goes beyond the familiar dichotomy of substantivalism and relationism. The view holds that spacetime structure and dynamics are intrinsically conceptually intertwined and that talk of spacetime symmetries and asymmetries is nothing else than talk of the symmetries and asymmetries of dynamical laws. Brown has precursors in this; I count, for example, Howard Stein (1967) and Robert DiSalle (1995) among them.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting Supersymmetry
    Interpreting Supersymmetry David John Baker Department of Philosophy, University of Michigan [email protected] October 7, 2018 Abstract Supersymmetry in quantum physics is a mathematically simple phenomenon that raises deep foundational questions. To motivate these questions, I present a toy model, the supersymmetric harmonic oscillator, and its superspace representation, which adds extra anticommuting dimensions to spacetime. I then explain and comment on three foundational questions about this superspace formalism: whether superspace is a sub- stance, whether it should count as spatiotemporal, and whether it is a necessary pos- tulate if one wants to use the theory to unify bosons and fermions. 1 Introduction Supersymmetry{the hypothesis that the laws of physics exhibit a symmetry that transforms bosons into fermions and vice versa{is a long-standing staple of many popular (but uncon- firmed) theories in particle physics. This includes several attempts to extend the standard model as well as many research programs in quantum gravity, such as the failed supergravity program and the still-ascendant string theory program. Its popularity aside, supersymmetry (SUSY for short) is also a foundationally interesting hypothesis on face. The fundamental equivalence it posits between bosons and fermions is prima facie puzzling, given the very different physical behavior of these two types of particle. And supersymmetry is most naturally represented in a formalism (called superspace) that modifies ordinary spacetime by adding Grassmann-valued anticommuting coordinates. It 1 isn't obvious how literally we should interpret these extra \spatial" dimensions.1 So super- symmetry presents us with at least two highly novel interpretive puzzles. Only two philosophers of science have taken up these questions thus far.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of Two-Time Physics
    INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM GRAVITY Class. Quantum Grav. 18 (2001) 3113–3130 PII: S0264-9381(01)25053-9 Survey of two-time physics Itzhak Bars CIT-USC Center for Theoretical Physics and Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-2535, USA Received 16 October 2000 Published 1 August 2001 Online at stacks.iop.org/CQG/18/3113 Abstract Two-time physics (2T) is a general reformulation of one-time physics (1T) that displays previously unnoticed hidden symmetries in 1T dynamical systems and establishes previously unknown duality-type relations among them. This may play a role in displaying the symmetries and constructing the dynamics of little understood systems, such as M-theory. 2T-physics describes various 1T dynamical systems as different d-dimensional ‘holographic’ views of the same 2T system in d + 2 dimensions. The ‘holography’ is due to gauge symmetries that tend to reduce the number of effective dimensions. Different 1T evolutions (i.e. different Hamiltonians) emerge from the same 2T-theory when gauge fixing is done with different embeddings of d dimensions inside d + 2 dimensions. Thus, in the 2T setting, the distinguished 1T which we call ‘time’ is a gauge- dependent concept. The 2T-action also has a global SO(d, 2) symmetry in flat spacetime, or a more general d + 2 symmetry in curved spacetime, under which all dimensions are on an equal footing. This symmetry is observable in many 1T-systems, but it remained unknown until discovered in the 2T formalism. The symmetry takes various nonlinear (hidden) forms in the 1T-systems, and it is realized in the same irreducible unitary representation (the same Casimir eigenvalues) in their quantum Hilbert spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Supersymmetry and Lorentz Violation
    Supersymmetry and Lorentz Violation Summer School on the SME June 5, 2012 M. Berger Symmetries in Particle Physics • Spacetime symmetries and internal symmetries • Local and global symmetries • Exact and spontaneously broken symmetries The Lorentz symmetry and supersymmetry are both spacetime symmetries. 1) Supersymmetry is experimentally determined to be a broken symmetry. 2) Could the Lorentz symmetry also be broken at some level? Uses of spacetime symmetries Why study spacetime symmetries? -- historical significance, unification -- physical insight, simplifies calculations (conservation laws) Why study breaking of spacetime symmetries? Cornerstone of modern theory -- must be tested -- valuable to have theoretical framework allowing violations Probe of Planck-scale physics -- Lorentz violation, SUSY breaking “Planck-scale” physics = quantum gravity/string theory/etc.: effects at scale MP ~ 1/G N Evolution of the Knowledge of Spacetime Symmetries • Stern and Gerlach: Intrinsic spin, properties with respect to the rotation operator J doubles the number of electron states • Dirac: particle/antiparticle, properties with respect to the Lorentz boost generator, K, doubling the number of electron states: electron- positron • Supersymmetry: introduces a new generator Q doubling the number of states once again: electron and scalar electron (selectron) Difference: Lorentz symmetry is exact as far as we know; supersymmetry must be broken. If we lived at the Planck scale, we might be surprised to learn from our experiments that supersymmetry is a broken spacetime symmetry. MLV << MSUSY << MPl Symmetries and Divergences • Gauge symmetry: Gauge boson is massless and the symmetry protects the mass to all orders in pertubation theory (no quadratic divergences) • Chiral symmetry: An exact chiral symmetry for a fermion implies its mass term.
    [Show full text]
  • Mathematics of General Relativity - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Page 1 of 11
    Mathematics of general relativity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 1 of 11 Mathematics of general relativity From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The mathematics of general relativity refers to various mathematical structures and General relativity techniques that are used in studying and formulating Albert Einstein's theory of general Introduction relativity. The main tools used in this geometrical theory of gravitation are tensor fields Mathematical formulation defined on a Lorentzian manifold representing spacetime. This article is a general description of the mathematics of general relativity. Resources Fundamental concepts Note: General relativity articles using tensors will use the abstract index Special relativity notation . Equivalence principle World line · Riemannian Contents geometry Phenomena 1 Why tensors? 2 Spacetime as a manifold Kepler problem · Lenses · 2.1 Local versus global structure Waves 3 Tensors in GR Frame-dragging · Geodetic 3.1 Symmetric and antisymmetric tensors effect 3.2 The metric tensor Event horizon · Singularity 3.3 Invariants Black hole 3.4 Tensor classifications Equations 4 Tensor fields in GR 5 Tensorial derivatives Linearized Gravity 5.1 Affine connections Post-Newtonian formalism 5.2 The covariant derivative Einstein field equations 5.3 The Lie derivative Friedmann equations 6 The Riemann curvature tensor ADM formalism 7 The energy-momentum tensor BSSN formalism 7.1 Energy conservation Advanced theories 8 The Einstein field equations 9 The geodesic equations Kaluza–Klein
    [Show full text]
  • Translational Spacetime Symmetries in Gravitational Theories
    Class. Quantum Grav. 23 (2006) 737-751 Page 1 Translational Spacetime Symmetries in Gravitational Theories R. J. Petti The MathWorks, Inc., 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] Received 24 October 2005, in final form 25 October 2005 Published DD MM 2006 Online ta stacks.iop.org/CQG/23/1 Abstract How to include spacetime translations in fibre bundle gauge theories has been a subject of controversy, because spacetime symmetries are not internal symmetries of the bundle structure group. The standard method for including affine symmetry in differential geometry is to define a Cartan connection on an affine bundle over spacetime. This is equivalent to (1) defining an affine connection on the affine bundle, (2) defining a zero section on the associated affine vector bundle, and (3) using the affine connection and the zero section to define an ‘associated solder form,’ whose lift to a tensorial form on the frame bundle becomes the solder form. The zero section reduces the affine bundle to a linear bundle and splits the affine connection into translational and homogeneous parts; however it violates translational equivariance / gauge symmetry. This is the natural geometric framework for Einstein-Cartan theory as an affine theory of gravitation. The last section discusses some alternative approaches that claim to preserve translational gauge symmetry. PACS numbers: 02.40.Hw, 04.20.Fy 1. Introduction Since the beginning of the twentieth century, much of the foundations of physics has been interpreted in terms of the geometry of connections and curvature. Connections appear in three main areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Effective Field Theory for Spacetime Symmetry Breaking
    RIKEN-MP-96, RIKEN-QHP-171, MAD-TH-14-10 Effective field theory for spacetime symmetry breaking Yoshimasa Hidaka1, Toshifumi Noumi1 and Gary Shiu2;3 1Theoretical Research Devision, RIKEN Nishina Center, Japan 2Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA 3Center for Fundamental Physics and Institute for Advanced Study, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract We discuss the effective field theory for spacetime symmetry breaking from the local symmetry point of view. By gauging spacetime symmetries, the identification of Nambu-Goldstone (NG) fields and the construction of the effective action are performed based on the breaking pattern of diffeomor- phism, local Lorentz, and (an)isotropic Weyl symmetries as well as the internal symmetries including possible central extensions in nonrelativistic systems. Such a local picture distinguishes, e.g., whether the symmetry breaking condensations have spins and provides a correct identification of the physical NG fields, while the standard coset construction based on global symmetry breaking does not. We illustrate that the local picture becomes important in particular when we take into account massive modes associated with symmetry breaking, whose masses are not necessarily high. We also revisit the coset construction for spacetime symmetry breaking. Based on the relation between the Maurer- arXiv:1412.5601v2 [hep-th] 7 Nov 2015 Cartan one form and connections for spacetime symmetries, we classify the physical meanings of the inverse Higgs constraints by the coordinate dimension of broken symmetries. Inverse Higgs constraints for spacetime symmetries with a higher dimension remove the redundant NG fields, whereas those for dimensionless symmetries can be further classified by the local symmetry breaking pattern.
    [Show full text]
  • SPACETIME Symmetrles and SOME SOLUTIONS of the FIELD EQUATIONS
    SPACETIME SYMMETRlES AND SOME SOLUTIONS OF THE FIELD EQUATIONS S. D. Maharaj1 1 Department of Mathematics and Applied Mathematics University of Natal King George V Avenue Durban 4001 South Africa 59 Abstract We investigate the role of symmetries, in particular conformal symmetries, in general relativity. Conformal Killing vectors in the k = 0 Robertson-Walker spacetimes, the pp-wave spacetimes and spherically symmetric spacetimes are generated. Examples of solutions with a conformal symmetry are presented to the Einstein, the Einstein-Klein-Gordon and the Einstein-Maxwell field equa­ tions. An irreducible Killing tensor is found in static, spherically symmetric spacetimes. 1. Introduction Exact solutions of the Einstein field equations are important because of wide applications to cosmology and relativistic astrophysics. For a comprehensive list of 1 exact solutions to th<? field equations see Kramer et al • Most of the solutions have been found by placing restrictions on the spacetime geometry, assuming a special form for the matter distribution or imposing ~n equation of state. Very often a solution is found by making ad hoc choices for the geometrical and matter variables. A more recent and systematic approach is to impose a symmetry requirement on the spacetime manifold. This places additional conditions on the gravitational field and may simplify integration of the field equations. A variety of symmetries may be defined on the spacetime manifold by the action of the Lie derivative operator on the metric tensor, the connection coefficients, the Ricci tensor, the curvature tensor and the Weyl tensor. A detailed discussion of the geometric interpretations and interrelationships of these symmetries is given by 2 3 4 5 Katzin and Levine • • • • We are ·particularly interested in conformal symmetries which are associated with constants of the motion along null geodesics for massless particles.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Classical Symmetries and Conservation Laws
    3 Classical Symmetries and Conservation Laws We have used the existence of symmetries in a physical system as a guiding principle for the construction of their Lagrangians and energy functionals. We will show now that these symmetries imply the existence of conservation laws. There are different types of symmetries which, roughly, can be classi- fied into two classes: (a) spacetime symmetries and (b) internal symmetries. Some symmetries involve discrete operations, hence called discrete symme- tries, while others are continuous symmetries. Furthermore, in some theories these are global symmetries,whileinotherstheyarelocal symmetries.The latter class of symmetries go under the name of gauge symmetries.Wewill see that, in the fully quantized theory, global and local symmetries play different roles. Spacetime symmetries are the most common examples of symmetries that are encountered in Physics. They include translation invariance and rotation invariance. If the system is isolated, then time-translation is also a symme- try. A non-relativistic system is in general invariant under Galilean trans- formations, while relativistic systems, are instead Lorentz invariant. Other spacetime symmetries include time-reversal (T ), parity (P )andcharge con- jugation (C). These symmetries are discrete. In classical mechanics, the existence of symmetries has important conse- quences. Thus, translation invariance,whichisaconsequenceofuniformity of space, implies the conservation of the total momentum P of the system. Similarly, isotropy implies the conservation of the total angular momentum L and time translation invariance implies the conservation of the total energy E. All of these concepts have analogs in field theory. However, infieldtheory new symmetries will also appear which do not have an analog in the classi- 52 Classical Symmetries and Conservation Laws cal mechanics of particles.
    [Show full text]