Revision as of 11:19, 3 July 2007 edit84.158.226.2 (talk) →[]’s solution: named corr..: the "Pioneer anomaly"← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:52, 11 January 2025 edit undo178.74.7.149 (talk) →Solving the equations | ||
(107 intermediate revisions by 63 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{short description|Aspect of general relativity}} | |||
{{expert-subject|Physics}} | |||
{{hatnote|Where appropriate, this article will use the ].}} | |||
'''Solutions of the Einstein field equations''' are ]s solving the ] (EFE) of ]. |
'''Solutions of the Einstein field equations''' are metrics of ]s that result from solving the ] (EFE) of ]. Solving the field equations gives a ]. Solutions are broadly classed as ''exact'' or ''non-exact''. | ||
The Einstein field equations are |
The Einstein field equations are | ||
<math>G_{ |
<math display=block>G_{\mu\nu} + \Lambda g_{\mu\nu} \, = \kappa T_{\mu\nu} ,</math> | ||
where <math>G_{\mu\nu}</math> is the ], <math>\Lambda</math> is the ] (sometimes taken to be zero for simplicity), <math>g_{\mu\nu}</math> is the ], <math>\kappa</math> is a constant, and <math> T_{\mu\nu} </math> is the ]. | |||
or more generally | |||
The Einstein field equations relate the Einstein tensor to the stress–energy tensor, which represents the distribution of energy, momentum and stress in the spacetime manifold. The Einstein tensor is built up from the metric tensor and its partial derivatives; thus, given the stress–energy tensor, the Einstein field equations are a system of ten ]s in which the metric tensor can be solved for. | |||
<math>G_{ab} + \Lambda g_{ab} \, = \kappa T_{ab}</math> | |||
where '''<math>\kappa</math>''' is a constant, and the ] on the left side of the equation is equated to the ] representing the energy and momentum present in the spacetime. The Einstein tensor is built up from the ] and its partial derivatives; thus, the EFE are a system of ten ]s to be solved for the metric. | |||
==Solving the equations== | ==Solving the equations== | ||
It is important to realize that the Einstein field equations alone are not enough to determine the evolution of a gravitational system in many cases. They depend on the ], which depends on the dynamics of matter and energy (such as trajectories of moving particles), which in turn depends on the gravitational field. If one is only interested in the ] of the theory, the dynamics of matter can be computed using special relativity methods and/or Newtonian laws of gravity and the resulting stress–energy tensor can then be plugged into the Einstein field equations. But if one requires an exact solution or a solution describing strong fields, the evolution of both the metric and the stress–energy tensor must be solved for at once. | |||
To obtain solutions, the relevant equations are the above quoted EFE (in either form) plus the ] (to determine the evolution of the stress–energy tensor): | |||
It is important to realize that the Einstein field equations alone are not enough to determine the evolution of a gravitational system in many cases. They depend on the ], which in turn depends on the (unknown) metric. If we're only interested in the ] of the theory, we can compute the dynamics of matter using special relativity methods and/or Newtonian laws of gravity and then plug in the resulting stress-energy tensor into the Einstein field equations. But if we want to obtain the exact solution or to deal with strong fields, we need to solve for the evolution of the metric and the stress-energy tensor at the same time. | |||
:<math>T^{ab}{}_{;b} \, = 0 \,.</math> | |||
These amount to only 14 equations (10 from the field equations and 4 from the continuity equation) and are by themselves insufficient for determining the 20 unknowns (10 metric components and 10 stress–energy tensor components). The ] are missing. In the most general case, it's easy to see that at least 6 more equations are required, possibly more if there are internal degrees of freedom (such as temperature) which may vary throughout spacetime. | |||
We start with two sets of equations: | |||
The Einstein field equations (to determine evolution of the metric): | |||
<math>G_{\alpha\beta} + \Lambda g_{\alpha\beta} \, = \kappa T_{\alpha\beta}</math> | |||
The continuity equation (to determine evolution of the stress-energy tensor): | |||
<math>T^{\alpha\beta}_{;\beta} = 0</math> | |||
This is clearly not enough, because we only have 14 equations (10 from the Einstein's equations and 4 from the continuity equation) for 20 unknowns (10 components of the metric and 10 components of the stress-energy tensor). We're missing ]. It's easy to see that, in the most general case, we need at least 6 more equations, possibly more if there are internal degrees of freedom (such as temperature) which may vary throughout space-time. | |||
In practice, it is usually possible to simplify the problem by replacing the full set of equations of state with a simple approximation. Some common approximations are: | In practice, it is usually possible to simplify the problem by replacing the full set of equations of state with a simple approximation. Some common approximations are: | ||
* ]: | |||
* Vacuum: | |||
<math>T_{ |
:<math>T_{ab} \, = 0</math> | ||
* Perfect fluid: | |||
<math>T_{\alpha\beta} \, = (\rho + p)u_\alpha u_\beta + p g_{\alpha\beta}</math> where <math>u^{\alpha}u_{\alpha} = -1\!</math> | |||
* ]: | |||
Here <math>\rho</math> is the mass-energy density measured in a momentary co-moving frame, <math>u_{\alpha}</math> is the fluid's 4-velocity vector field, and <math>p</math> is the pressure. | |||
:<math>T_{ab} \, = (\rho + p)u_a u_b + p g_{ab}</math> where <math>u^au_a = -1</math> | |||
* Non-interacting dust ( a special case of perfect fluid ): | |||
<math>T_{\alpha\beta} \, = \rho u_{\alpha} u_{\beta}</math> | |||
Here <math>\rho</math> is the mass–energy density measured in a momentary co-moving frame, <math>u_a</math> is the fluid's 4-velocity vector field, and <math>p</math> is the pressure. | |||
For a perfect fluid, we need to add one more equation of state that relates density <math>\rho</math> and pressure <math>p</math>. This equation will often depend on temperature, so we also need to include a heat transfer equation or to postulate that heat transfer can be neglected. | |||
* ] ( a special case of perfect fluid ): | |||
Next, notice that only 10 of our original 14 equations are independent, because the continuity equation <math>T^{\alpha\beta}_{;\beta} = 0</math> is a consequence of the Einstein's equations. This reflects the fact that our system is gauge invariant and we need to perform "gauge fixing", i.e. impose 4 constraints on the system, in order to obtain unequivocal results. | |||
:<math>T_{ab} \, = \rho u_a u_b</math> | |||
For a perfect fluid, another equation of state relating density <math>\rho</math> and pressure <math>p</math> must be added. This equation will often depend on temperature, so a heat transfer equation is required or the postulate that heat transfer can be neglected. | |||
A popular choice of gauge is the so-called "De Donder gauge", also known as ] or Lorentz gauge. | |||
Next, notice that only 10 of the original 14 equations are independent, because the continuity equation <math>T^{ab}{}_{;b} = 0</math> is a consequence of Einstein's equations. This reflects the fact that the system is ] (in general, absent some symmetry, any choice of a curvilinear coordinate net on the same system would correspond to a numerically different solution.) A "gauge fixing" is needed, i.e. we need to impose 4 (arbitrary) constraints on the coordinate system in order to obtain unequivocal results. These constraints are known as ]. | |||
<math>g^{\mu\nu} \Gamma^{\sigma}_{\mu\nu} = 0</math> | |||
A popular choice of gauge is the so-called "De Donder gauge", also known as the ] ] or harmonic gauge | |||
:<math>g^{\mu\nu} \Gamma^{\sigma}{}_{\mu\nu} = 0 \,.</math> | |||
In ], the preferred gauge is the so-called "3+1 decomposition", based on the ]. In this decomposition, metric is written in the form | |||
<math> ds^2 \, = (-N + N^i N^j \gamma_{ij}) dt^2 + 2N^i \gamma_{ij} dt dx^j + \gamma_{ij} dx^i dx^j</math>, where <math> i,j = 1\dots 3</math> | |||
:<math> ds^2 \, = (-N + N^i N^j \gamma_{ij}) dt^2 + 2N^i \gamma_{ij} dt dx^j + \gamma_{ij} dx^i dx^j</math>, where <math> i,j = 1\dots 3 \,.</math> | |||
<math>N</math> and <math>N^i</math> can be chosen arbitrarily. The remaining physical degrees of freedom are contained in <math>\gamma_{ij}</math>, which represents the Riemannian metric on 3-hypersurfaces <math>t= |
<math>N</math> and <math>N^i</math> are functions of spacetime coordinates and can be chosen arbitrarily in each point. The remaining physical degrees of freedom are contained in <math>\gamma_{ij}</math>, which represents the Riemannian metric on 3-hypersurfaces with constant <math>t</math>. For example, a naive choice of <math>N=1</math>, <math>N_i=0</math>, would correspond to a so-called ] coordinate system: one where t-coordinate coincides with proper time for any comoving observer (particle that moves along a fixed <math>x^i</math> trajectory.) | ||
Once equations of state are chosen and the gauge is fixed, |
Once equations of state are chosen and the gauge is fixed, the complete set of equations can be solved. Unfortunately, even in the simplest case of gravitational field in the vacuum (vanishing stress–energy tensor), the problem is too complex to be exactly solvable. To get physical results, we can either turn to ], try to find ] by imposing ], or try middle-ground approaches such as ] or linear approximations of the ]. | ||
== |
==Exact solutions== | ||
{{Expand section|date=June 2008}} | |||
Mentioned ] relations say that each element of the space must produce an infinitesimal Gauss’ curvature, now seen in 4 dimensions. Differentially seen and resulting by related ]s the solutions differ for vacuum and matter (different fluids, gases, solids) without elastic effects (then named a ]) or with possible elastic effects, then named a ] (a vector-set, differently acting for each direction), each with one vector only. All possible combined solutions are valid. | |||
{{Main|Exact solutions in general relativity}} | |||
Exact solutions are ]s that are conformable to a physically realistic stress–energy tensor and which are obtained by solving the EFE exactly in ]. | |||
===External reference=== | |||
=== Boundaries for solutions === | |||
written by ] | |||
The field-equations have multiply infinite number-sets of solutions: | |||
* By above mentioned inner boundaries of elements within a given matter or in vacuum, the “equations of state”, give only 10 equations from Einstein's equations, 4 by “continuity equation” but 6 by given physics of a matter, most generally depending on mentioned elastic properties, to get all 20 priory unknowns (10 components). | |||
* Having got these inner boundaries the ] of ] give additionally an infinite number of sets for geometric solutions by realized or supposed boundaries at the extern limits of integral solutions. | |||
* Each ] of single and general solutions – not only of mentioned different material, infinitesimal and integral seen – is again a valid and possible solution. | |||
==Non-exact solutions== | |||
=== Integration of the field equations === | |||
{{Expand section|date=June 2008}} | |||
Such solutions are seen as infinitesimal metrics, but must be shown more clearly by intrinsic curvatures results, shown by an area, a "visible surface" of the space as solution. Each integration – already of a simple scalar-field – gives an arbitrarily chosen constant. It must fulfil real conditions, here only for a beginning and an end. Integration of vector-fields will already give for each direction one solution with by principle unknown functions in all other directions but bounded and limited one to the other. All together must be adapted with and to real physical boundaries at the limits. Rather complicated are integrations for in each direction different vectors of a tensor-field. | |||
{{Main|Non-exact solutions in general relativity}} | |||
The solutions that are not exact are called ''non-exact solutions''. Such solutions mainly arise due to the difficulty of solving the EFE in closed form and often take the form of approximations to ideal systems. Many non-exact solutions may be devoid of physical content, but serve as useful counterexamples to theoretical conjectures. | |||
==Applications== | |||
== Known solutions == | |||
There are practical as well as theoretical reasons for studying solutions of the Einstein field equations. | |||
=== ]s === | |||
Einstein was astonished about two promptly given solutions, by ]: | |||
* The first ] is well known as the first solution of Einstein’s ] and as his “extern solution”, meaning outside of the ]. It describes in ] a kind of to its end more and more contracting tunnel-shape. The geometric surface define all possible circles. The solution give all valid extern effects of a ]. | |||
* The second, so called ] was presented by Schwarzschild some days later only, mainly found in German original and related texts as "innere Schwarzschild Lösung". Schwarzschild had seen that the inner solution of his black hole is equivalently described as an attractor, a super-massive body within the spere of an homogenous isotropic compressed gas, fluid or solid, valid within boundary of R=Schwarzschild radius. | |||
From a purely mathematical viewpoint, it is interesting to know the set of solutions of the Einstein field equations. Some of these solutions are parametrised by one or more parameters. From a physical standpoint, knowing the solutions of the Einstein Field Equations allows highly-precise modelling of astrophysical phenomena, including black holes, neutron stars, and stellar systems. Predictions can be made analytically about the system analyzed; such predictions include the ], the existence of a ], and the orbits of objects around massive bodies. | |||
===] solutions=== | |||
The first ] solution is based on the same mathematical calculus as the second Schwarzschild solution, but explicitly considering molecules of an isotropic homogenous interstellar gas fluid instead of molecules of a super compressed fluid or solid only within its calculated black hole radius. | |||
==See also== | |||
The second solution described for the first time the ] as new solution, assuming that the spatial component of the 4D-metric can be time dependent. The main basis of the actual standard solution at its physical ] has the same problem: While in black holes the time stops for us, the total beginning of the time must be supposed at its Schwarzschild radius, meanwhile declared sufficiently by mainstream but not yet accepted for its critics. | |||
*] | |||
=== ] solutions === | |||
*] | |||
] is another solution to Albert Einstein's field equations of GR by ]. It is an exponential solution. The exponentially expanding universe of the ] form has the scale factor: | |||
==References== | |||
: <center><math> a(t) = e^{Ht} \,</math>,</center> (H = Hubble constant) | |||
{{reflist}} | |||
describing the ]. | |||
* {{cite book |author1=J.A. Wheeler |author2=C. Misner |author3=K.S. Thorne | title=]| publisher=W.H. Freeman & Co| year=1973 | isbn=0-7167-0344-0}} | |||
* {{cite book |author1=J.A. Wheeler |author2=I. Ciufolini | title=Gravitation and Inertia| publisher=]| year=1995| isbn=978-0-691-03323-5}} | |||
* A ] is one with no ordinary matter content (supported e.g. by ]) but with a positive ] which sets the expansion rate, H with the effect that a larger cosmological constant leads to a larger expansion rate. | |||
* {{cite book | author=R.J.A. Lambourne| title=Relativity, Gravitation and Cosmology| publisher=], Cambridge University Press| year=2010| isbn=978-0-521-13138-4}} | |||
A mathematically equivalent negative exponent would produce implosion. A complex exponent shows an oscillation: | |||
===]’s solution === | |||
According to ] and ], the universe is oscillatory and as such expands and contracts periodically over infinite time between the following periodic extremes: | |||
* Einstein had initially preferred a static solution of the GR. Because of its instability he had revised it and named it by himself as his biggest stupor. | |||
* Such an initially maximal huge universe is still affected by a rest of gravity. At thereby initially minimum gas-tension the space must thereby move more and more move to a center inside, finally imploding by gravity. | |||
* At the end of implosion with its minimum space, seen as a maximal compressed interstellar gas will stop to move. Then begins the other extreme, an increasing movement outwards finally exploding. | |||
* The resulting Burbidge’s theory was called the B²FH theory after the participants. | |||
This theory, due to its controversial nature, has brought fame and infamy to Burbidge. | |||
=== ]'s solution === | |||
] meant by principle only that some stellar objects anyhow not obey standard laws (e.g. Hubble's law) and that something like this has to be declared. Arp et. al. discovered highly discontinuous redshifts within filamentary superclusters, voids and related quasars, until now meaning that a too rare statistic probability cannot completely overrule intrinsic effects by generally different considerations of the standard model. It seems that redshift of several "child galaxies" are significantly higher than its "parent galaxies". For Quasars it could be based on ] (Einstein’s clocks run differently at different gravity-centres by ]s: a same kind of emitted photon starts at different places at different frequencies affected by different gravities). A problem arised because Intrinsic redshift became then a hypothesis from various non-standard cosmologies that a significant portion of the observed redshift of extragalactic objects (e.g. quasars and galaxies) may be caused by a phenomenon other than known redshift mechanisms (cosmological redshift, Doppler redshift, gravitational redshift). A proposed ] could not be confirmed until now. Therefore also this controversial theory is widely not accepted. | |||
===]’s solution=== | |||
Einstein himself wrote - until today confusing physics - that photons have a "zero ] (remark: considered in standard cosmology) but non-zero ]". Zwicky related to the relativistic mass and the ]s because Einstein confirmed ]s view that photons are particles with a relativistic mass. ]s was utilized by him simply by another view about photons, meaning now: | |||
* Gravity influences photons in direction of its related radius or simply always centripetally in direction of its centre, meanwhile partly supported by some newer ]’s theories. | |||
* By this non-conform "relativistic mass view" about physics an increasing ] “slows” the energy of a photon by redshift by loosing its momentum. | |||
Not accccepted by the mainstream, increasing gravitational potential was recently used to declare the ]. | |||
==Exact solutions== | |||
{{section-stub}} | |||
{{main|Exact solutions}} | |||
Exact solutions are ]s that are conformable to a physically realistic stress-energy tensor and which are obtained by solving the EFE exactly in ]. | |||
==Non-exact solutions== | |||
{{section-stub}} | |||
{{main|Non-exact solutions in general relativity}} | |||
Those solutions that are not exact are called ''non-exact solutions''. Such solutions mainly arise due to the difficulty of solving the EFE in closed form and often take the form of approximations to ideal systems. Many non-exact solutions may be devoid of physical content, but serve as useful counterexamples to theoretical conjectures. | |||
==Applications== | |||
{{section-stub}} | |||
There are practical as well as theoretical reasons for studying solutions of the Einstein field equations. | |||
From a purely mathematical viewpoint, it is interesting to know the set of solutions of the Einstein field equations. Some of these solutions are parametrised by one or more parameters. | |||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Solutions Of The Einstein Field Equations}} | |||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
{{relativity-stub}} |
Latest revision as of 14:52, 11 January 2025
Aspect of general relativity Where appropriate, this article will use the abstract index notation.Solutions of the Einstein field equations are metrics of spacetimes that result from solving the Einstein field equations (EFE) of general relativity. Solving the field equations gives a Lorentz manifold. Solutions are broadly classed as exact or non-exact.
The Einstein field equations are
where is the Einstein tensor, is the cosmological constant (sometimes taken to be zero for simplicity), is the metric tensor, is a constant, and is the stress–energy tensor.
The Einstein field equations relate the Einstein tensor to the stress–energy tensor, which represents the distribution of energy, momentum and stress in the spacetime manifold. The Einstein tensor is built up from the metric tensor and its partial derivatives; thus, given the stress–energy tensor, the Einstein field equations are a system of ten partial differential equations in which the metric tensor can be solved for.
Solving the equations
It is important to realize that the Einstein field equations alone are not enough to determine the evolution of a gravitational system in many cases. They depend on the stress–energy tensor, which depends on the dynamics of matter and energy (such as trajectories of moving particles), which in turn depends on the gravitational field. If one is only interested in the weak field limit of the theory, the dynamics of matter can be computed using special relativity methods and/or Newtonian laws of gravity and the resulting stress–energy tensor can then be plugged into the Einstein field equations. But if one requires an exact solution or a solution describing strong fields, the evolution of both the metric and the stress–energy tensor must be solved for at once.
To obtain solutions, the relevant equations are the above quoted EFE (in either form) plus the continuity equation (to determine the evolution of the stress–energy tensor):
These amount to only 14 equations (10 from the field equations and 4 from the continuity equation) and are by themselves insufficient for determining the 20 unknowns (10 metric components and 10 stress–energy tensor components). The equations of state are missing. In the most general case, it's easy to see that at least 6 more equations are required, possibly more if there are internal degrees of freedom (such as temperature) which may vary throughout spacetime.
In practice, it is usually possible to simplify the problem by replacing the full set of equations of state with a simple approximation. Some common approximations are:
- where
Here is the mass–energy density measured in a momentary co-moving frame, is the fluid's 4-velocity vector field, and is the pressure.
- Non-interacting dust ( a special case of perfect fluid ):
For a perfect fluid, another equation of state relating density and pressure must be added. This equation will often depend on temperature, so a heat transfer equation is required or the postulate that heat transfer can be neglected.
Next, notice that only 10 of the original 14 equations are independent, because the continuity equation is a consequence of Einstein's equations. This reflects the fact that the system is gauge invariant (in general, absent some symmetry, any choice of a curvilinear coordinate net on the same system would correspond to a numerically different solution.) A "gauge fixing" is needed, i.e. we need to impose 4 (arbitrary) constraints on the coordinate system in order to obtain unequivocal results. These constraints are known as coordinate conditions.
A popular choice of gauge is the so-called "De Donder gauge", also known as the harmonic condition or harmonic gauge
In numerical relativity, the preferred gauge is the so-called "3+1 decomposition", based on the ADM formalism. In this decomposition, metric is written in the form
- , where
and are functions of spacetime coordinates and can be chosen arbitrarily in each point. The remaining physical degrees of freedom are contained in , which represents the Riemannian metric on 3-hypersurfaces with constant . For example, a naive choice of , , would correspond to a so-called synchronous coordinate system: one where t-coordinate coincides with proper time for any comoving observer (particle that moves along a fixed trajectory.)
Once equations of state are chosen and the gauge is fixed, the complete set of equations can be solved. Unfortunately, even in the simplest case of gravitational field in the vacuum (vanishing stress–energy tensor), the problem is too complex to be exactly solvable. To get physical results, we can either turn to numerical methods, try to find exact solutions by imposing symmetries, or try middle-ground approaches such as perturbation methods or linear approximations of the Einstein tensor.
Exact solutions
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (June 2008) |
Exact solutions are Lorentz metrics that are conformable to a physically realistic stress–energy tensor and which are obtained by solving the EFE exactly in closed form.
External reference
Scholarpedia article on the subject written by Malcolm MacCallum
Non-exact solutions
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (June 2008) |
The solutions that are not exact are called non-exact solutions. Such solutions mainly arise due to the difficulty of solving the EFE in closed form and often take the form of approximations to ideal systems. Many non-exact solutions may be devoid of physical content, but serve as useful counterexamples to theoretical conjectures.
Applications
There are practical as well as theoretical reasons for studying solutions of the Einstein field equations.
From a purely mathematical viewpoint, it is interesting to know the set of solutions of the Einstein field equations. Some of these solutions are parametrised by one or more parameters. From a physical standpoint, knowing the solutions of the Einstein Field Equations allows highly-precise modelling of astrophysical phenomena, including black holes, neutron stars, and stellar systems. Predictions can be made analytically about the system analyzed; such predictions include the perihelion precession of Mercury, the existence of a co-rotating region inside spinning black holes, and the orbits of objects around massive bodies.
See also
References
- J.A. Wheeler; C. Misner; K.S. Thorne (1973). Gravitation. W.H. Freeman & Co. ISBN 0-7167-0344-0.
- J.A. Wheeler; I. Ciufolini (1995). Gravitation and Inertia. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-03323-5.
- R.J.A. Lambourne (2010). Relativity, Gravitation and Cosmology. The Open University, Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-13138-4.