1

What does gravity look like in a compact space, such as a universe with spatial periodic boundary conditions equivalent to a 3-torus, or a ball with opposite points on the surface of the ball identified? In particular, what is the equivalent to the Schwarzschild vacuum solution to the Einstein field equations? I have only a smattering of General Relativity, and so I am unsure if this is a meaningful question to ask.


Background:

I know that to solve General-Relativity problems, we must solve the Einstein field equations $$G_{\mu \nu} = \kappa T_{\mu \nu}$$ along with the matter/field equations of motion.

The Schwarzschild metric describes a spherically-symmetric, static, vacuum ($T_{\mu \nu}=0$) solution to Einstein's equations.

$$ds^2 = -(1+GM/r)dt^2 + (1+GM/r)^{-1}dr^2 + r^2 (d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta \ d\varphi^2)$$

According to my understanding, all that we need to do to find this metric is to enforce a spherically-symmetric form for the metric, yielding $$ds^2 = -B(r)dt^2 + A(r)dr^2 + r^2 (d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta \ d\varphi^2)$$ and to specify $T_{\mu \nu} = 0$.

The partial differential Einstein equations simplify to ordinary differential equations in $A(r)$ and $B(r)$, and solving those yields the form of the Schwarzschild metric. $M$ is a constant of integration that is identified as the mass via the Newtonian far-field limit.

Can I enforce periodic boundary conditions, like $r=r+R$ for some constant $R$? Would I find a different metric? Specifying periodic boundary conditions in space seems to me to overdetermine the ordinary differential equations in $A(r)$ and $B(r)$, so I might be going the wrong way about this.

Nihar Karve
  • 8,445
user196574
  • 2,010
  • I think in general you can't solve this problem analytically. In mixing spherical symmetry and cubic lattice symmetry, you lose the nice properties of both. Physically, if the box were large compared to the black hole, you would expect the geometry to look approximately like Schwarzschild, except near the boundaries. – Andrew Nov 20 '20 at 23:56
  • @Andrew That's good point. What about a space like a ball with opposite points on the surface identified? I would guess that should be able to be written spherically symmetically. – user196574 Nov 21 '20 at 00:00
  • Interesting. I am not sure. I think you would have a hard time with smoothness across this boundary. Ie just picture a Gaussian in 2 spatial dimensions, with circular boundary condition with antipodal points identified. The Gaussian will be continuous across the boundaries, but there will be a kink where you suddenly go from decreasing values to increasing values. – Andrew Nov 21 '20 at 00:03
  • 1
    A Friedmann universe with $k=+1$ is compact. – G. Smith Nov 21 '20 at 00:18
  • @G.Smith Thank you for that point. Just to double-check, for $k=1$, do the Einstein field equations require a non-zero $T_{\mu \nu}$? – user196574 Nov 21 '20 at 00:29
  • 1
    Yes. This is not a vacuum solution, but you didn’t mention vacuum in your title so I wasn’t sure whether you were only interested in vacuum solutions. – G. Smith Nov 21 '20 at 01:00

0 Answers0