1

By the laws of general relativity and the existence of black holes, what makes our universe to be just 4 dimensional but not 5 or more because a 5-d black hole can violate theory of relativity?

Reference: End Point of Black Ring Instabilities and the Weak Cosmic Censorship Conjecture

Does this mean the "Theory of Relativity" is wrong?

John Rennie
  • 355,118
hxri
  • 1,275
  • 8
  • 21
  • Why would relativity be wrong just because a 5D black hole behaves weirdly? We're not supposed to live in a 5D universe. Also, why do you think it "breaks" GR, the abstract of the linked article doesn't say that at all. – ACuriousMind Feb 19 '16 at 15:12
  • 1
    @ACuriousMind I think 'break' means 'results in naked singularities'. –  Feb 19 '16 at 16:02
  • Yes, in the 90s Gregory and Laflamme showed that black rings were linearly unstable. Later on it was showed that the final state of the black ring was a naked singularity. – JamalS Feb 19 '16 at 16:05
  • @JamalS How can we explain it mathematically? – hxri Feb 19 '16 at 16:07
  • Okay, so 5D gravity has naked singularities. What is the question about that? – ACuriousMind Feb 19 '16 at 16:11
  • @ACuriousMind mathematical details of it and how does it affect the theory of relativity? – hxri Feb 19 '16 at 16:12
  • 2
    Read the paper, maybe? – ACuriousMind Feb 19 '16 at 16:12
  • 1
    @HariPrasad Well, just read the original papers. It's basically perturbation theory and numerical analysis. – JamalS Feb 19 '16 at 16:12
  • 1
    @ACuriousMind Both at the same time :) Beat me to it! – JamalS Feb 19 '16 at 16:13

1 Answers1

3

Nothing about the type of system described in the paper breaks general relativity in the sense that it causes an internal inconsistency. However general relativity is just a mathematical model, and while the mathematical model is fine what is not so obvious is that it correctly describes the real world. Ultimately we can only judge this by experiment, which is hard because it's hard to find systems extreme enough for GR effects to dominate that are easy to experiment on. The observations we have been able to make have so far supported GR in all respects (add the recent LIGO observation to this evidence!).

While experimental evidence is hard to come by, there could be theoretical evidence. For example if GR could be shown to make a prediction that was physically absurd this would be evidence that GR is not a good description of the real world.

One of the features of GR is that it predicts curvature singularities i.e. points in spacetime where the curvature is undefined. For why this is a problem see my answer to if singularities can be observed from the rest of spacetime, causality may break down. However as far as we know these singularities are always hidden behind an event horizon and this makes them harmless. This principle has been raised to the standard of a conjecture - the cosmic censorship hypothesis.

What the paper claims is evidence that in the 5D system they describe a form of the cosmic censorship hypothesis called the weak cosmic censorship hypothesis may be violated. I don't know enough about the subject to comment on their working, but let's be charitable and assume that their conclusions are correct. Would this be evidence that GR is not a good description of the real world?

Well firstly there's the obvious point that they are working in 5D. GR claims to represent our four dimensional universe, so the fact that weird behaviour crops up in other dimensions shouldn't trouble us.

Secondly it isn't obvious that a GR prediction of naked singularities would actually be a problem. Pretty much every physicist I know expects that singularities don't actually exist and that some future theory of quantum gravity will replace them with a non-singular geometry. When GR predicts a singularity that just means we've entered a regime where GR needs to be extended to include quantum effects.

And even if naked singularities really did exist, would this be evidence for anything other than that the universe is stranger than we though? Mankind has been discovering that the universe is stranger they we thought since we first climbed down from the trees, and naked singularities would be just one more step in this journey.

John Rennie
  • 355,118
  • Thank you. But there is a possibility that we have more than 4 dimensions. So that itself seems to denote the inconsistency of GR. am i wrong? – hxri Feb 19 '16 at 16:53
  • 1
    @HariPrasad: There is a possibility that you may turn into a chicken, but since I have no experimental evidence for it I have discounted the possibility. If evidence for a fifth macroscopic dimension is found we will have to look long and hard at whether GR is still trustworthy in circumstances where the fifth dimension is involved. However since no experimental evidence for it has ever emerged I have discounted the possibility. – John Rennie Feb 19 '16 at 16:59
  • Upvote for that hilarious comment. – Horus Feb 20 '16 at 15:34