Is there a unit for expression of degree how much space is curved?
Obviously there is different degrees of warping space, the Sun warps space less than black hole. How in physics is this degree of space warp declared?
How much Jupiter warp space?
How much the Sun warp space?
-
4Have you done any prior research? Did you try e.g. Wikipedia? – Emilio Pisanty Aug 16 '16 at 11:16
-
@EmilioPisanty I did and didn't find an answer do you have an answer? – dllhell Aug 16 '16 at 11:18
-
1Related question here – Aug 16 '16 at 11:18
-
Do you mean locally, or on a cosmological scale? – Aug 16 '16 at 11:19
-
@count_to_10 yes, locally – dllhell Aug 16 '16 at 11:20
-
The local gravitational acceleration is a pretty good measure in the weak field. Within the solar system it's good to one part in $10^{10}$, I believe. – CuriousOne Aug 16 '16 at 11:31
-
@CuriousOne: No, spacetime curvature does not relate in any way to gravitational acceleration, basically because of the equivalence principle. Gravitational acceleration depends on your frame of reference, and can always be made to be zero by picking a free-falling frame (which is what is considered to be an inertial frame in GR). Curvature is a tensor, so if it's nonvanishing in one coordinate system, it's nonvanishing in all other coordinate systems. – Aug 16 '16 at 17:14
5 Answers
As far as in general terms how we measure the curvature of space, we can use geometrical methods, rather than units of any particular coordinate system, to establish the deviation of curved space compared to flat space. Such a curvature measurement is based around a unitless ratio.
Positive curvature will result in a triangle having a total internal angle of greater than 180 degrees, and negative curvature produces a triangle of total internal angle of less than 180 degrees. More on how we can estimate intrinsic curvature on various toplogical surfaces can be found at Gaussian Curvature, Gaussian curvature is defined not as the angular deficit but as the ratio of the angular deficit to the area of the triangle.
The fundamental difference between intrinsic curvature and extrinsic curvature is that to calculate intrinsic curvature, we do not need an extra dimension (which we don't have available to us in 4 dimensional spacetime).
From left to right: a surface of negative Gaussian curvature (hyperboloid), a surface of zero Gaussian curvature (cylinder), and a surface of positive Gaussian curvature (sphere).
Positive curvature of 270 degrees, rather than as in flatspace, the usual 180 degrees of a triangle.
I am deliberately going to skip over the concept of Parallel Transport and go straight to the Geodetic Effect.
In a curved three-dimensional space, a gryoscope is a good physical object analog for a three-dimensional tangent vector.
A gyroscope in orbit around Earth will point in a given direction, and due to Earth's curvature of spacetime, the direction it points will rotate due to the curvature of spacetime caused by the mass of the Earth. This rotation is called the geodetic effect, and the illustration below exaggerates this effect, as it is not detectable by sight, due to the relatively small mass of the Earth.
This gyroscope based method does actually produce a numerical, rather than geometrical, measurement.
An exaggerated representation of the geodetic effect. A gyroscope placed in orbit about the earth precesses due to the curvature of space around the Earth.
There are other effects, such as Frame Dragging Wikipedia , and a good source of more information, from which the above summary and illustrations are taken is The Geodetic Effect.
I also include a comment from Jerry Schirmer: I'd argue that Riemann curvature definitely has a unit -- inverse length squared. Note that the deviation of triangles from 180 degrees depends on the size of the triangle.
-
+1, nice conceptual answer at the appropriate level for the OP. This answer could be improved by explaining in the original example (the spherical triangle) that the Gaussian curvature is defined not as the angular deficit but as the ratio of the angular deficit to the area of the triangle. – Aug 16 '16 at 17:15
-
@BenCrowell thanks Ben, I self study, so in answering the questions, it's as much for myself. TBH, it's the appropriate level for me as well. I will edit the post with your suggestion, as soon as I learn it myself :) – Aug 16 '16 at 17:22
-
1I'd argue that Riemann curvature definitely has a unit -- inverse length squared. Note that the deviation of triangles from 180 degrees depends on the size of the triangle. – Zo the Relativist Aug 19 '16 at 15:08
-
@JerrySchirmer I will incorporate your comment in my answer. At my knowledge level, my immediate (and admittably newbie) response is to say this corresponds to the notion that at a "small" enough local level, $g_{\upsilon\nu}$ goes to $\eta_{\upsilon\nu}$ – Aug 19 '16 at 15:31
-
@count_to_10: yes, that is absolutely right. The mathematically precise way of saying that is that, in some local neighborhood of a point, the manifold can be approximated by the tangent plane to that point. – Zo the Relativist Aug 19 '16 at 17:35
The question is posed at a nontechnical level, and count_to_10 has given a pretty decent nontechnical answer. However, that answer doesn't literally address the OP's question about the units of measurement, or about how much curvature is caused by, e.g., the sun.
Is there a unit for expression of degree how much space is curved?
General relativity doesn't describe gravity as curvature of space, it describes it as curvature of spacetime.
GR has more than one measure of curvature. In fact, there is an infinite number of different ways of measuring curvature, e.g. the Carminati-McLenaghan invariants, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carminati%E2%80%93McLenaghan_invariants. However, there are some measures of curvature that are more fundamental than others and frequently used. These are the Riemann tensor, the Ricci tensor, and the Ricci scalar.
All of these are tensors. (A scalar is a special case of a tensor.) It's a little subtle to define what we mean by the units of a tensor. I have a detailed discussion of this in section 9.6 of my special relativity book. As described there, there are multiple differing conventions for describing the units of a tensor. None of these conventions is right or wrong; you just have to pick one before you can say what you mean by units.
Anyway, if you adopt the convention that I advocate there (which is essentially the one used by Schouten), then the three curvature tensors I describe above all have SI units of meters^-2. To relate this to count_to_10's answer, note that the angular deficit of the triangle in the first figure is proportional to the area of the triangle. Therefore if we want a measure of curvature that is independent of what triangle we use, we need to divide the angular deficit by the area.
How much the Sun warp space?
In a locally Cartesian coordinate system, all the components of the Riemann tensor due to the sun's field are of order $Gm/(c^2r^3)$, where $m$ is the mass of the sun and $r$ is the distance from the sun. As a physical motivation for this expression, without delving into the details of GR, the idea is that GR describes gravity as a fictitious force, and only tidal effects are real. In Newtonian physics, tidal effects go like $Gm/r^3$. The factor of $c^{-2}$ is just a matter of units; we need it in order to get an SI result. Setting $r$ equal to the distance from the earth to the sun, we get about $4\times 10^{-31}\ \text{m}^{-2}$.
between the sum of the angles of the triangle and the total curvature inside that triangle is given by
where θi is the angle measured at each satellite (measured in radians), T is the 2D triangular surface defined by the three satellites being integrated over, K is the Gaussian curvature at each point in the triangle, and dA is the infinitesimal area with curvature K. For a region of space with zero total curvature, the angles will sum to π radians (180∘). Positive curvature leads to a sum larger than π, negative curvature to a sum smaller than π.
k is Coulomb's law constant R is Ricci Tensor - Ricci tensor is unit less so
One way to measure space time curvature is with gyroscopes and they measure arcsec/yr or seconds of arcs per year. But degrees still work in space. If you plaster a triangle on a sphere it's angles will add up to 270 degrees instead of 180.

- 835
-
-
2"If you plaster a triangle on a sphere it's angles will add up to 270 degrees instead of 180." That depends entirely on where/how you plaster it. IIRC, triangles on the surface of a sphere can have total interior angles of 180 to 540 degrees, non-inclusive, depending mostly on their size relative to the sphere. – RBarryYoung Aug 16 '16 at 15:51
-
4This answer is nonsense. k is Coulomb's law constant No, it's not (and it's not the Latin letter "k," either). R is Ricci Tensor No, it's not, as shown by the material you cut and pasted. Ricci tensor is unit less No, it's not. If you express the Ricci tensor in locally Cartesian coordinates, its components have units of meters^-2. You should attribute the material you cut and pasted. The first quote seems to be from WP. – Aug 16 '16 at 16:29
In the Robertson-Walker metric,
$$ (\text{ds})^2 = c^2(\text{dt})^2 - F^2(t)\left[ \frac{(\text{dr})^2}{1-kr^2} + r^2(\text{d}\theta)^2 + r^2\sin^2\theta (\text{d}\phi)^2 \right] $$
The $k$ in the second term is the curvature parameter that takes the values +1 or -1 depending on whether spacetime is positively or negatively curved. This is a simplified version of $K$, which is the Gaussian curvature. The spatial curvature is then related to the Ricci scalar $R$ which is a number that is determined by the geometry of the space around it.

- 167
-
1This doesn't answer the question, and in any case is nonsense. The R in your equation is not the Ricci scalar, it's a unitless cosmological scale factor. The easiest way to see that your R can't be the Ricci scalar is that this metric has flat spacetime as a special case. In flat spacetime, the Ricci scalar vanishes, but this metric does not produce a flat-spacetime metric when we set R=0. – Aug 16 '16 at 16:47
-
I apologise, I competely didn't realise that I had the universal expansion factor $R(t)$ in the same notation as the Ricci scalar $R$. I was trying to start from $k$ as an easy way of seeing positive and negative curvature, going to $K$ which is slightly more involved, finally to the Ricci scalar R which I believe to be the closest thing to a numerical value that determines the nature of the local spacetime. I was basing my answer off chapters in "Relativity, Gravitation and Cosmology" by Robert J. A. Lambourne. – user3264392 Aug 19 '16 at 14:49
Yes. In cosmology, it's called 'the metric'. 'The metric' is the equation the describes how space is 'curved' around bodies, etc, and allows you to distinguish between the 'metric distance' and the 'proper distance'. Barbara Ryden's "Introduction to Cosmology" has a fantastic introduction to the concept, as well some some very nice illustrations.

- 1
-
3No, the metric is not a measure of curvature. You can form curvature tensors using derivatives of the metric, but the metric itself is nonzero in flat space. – Aug 16 '16 at 16:43