Sign up ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free.

Can anyone please explain Hawking-Penrose Singularity Theorems and geodesic incompleteness?

In easy to understand plain English please.

share|cite|improve this question
3 The first lecture. – MBN May 27 '13 at 12:01
The reference given by MBN is about as readable as you can get. – twistor59 May 27 '13 at 13:35
related: – Ben Crowell May 27 '13 at 14:19

2 Answers 2

One of the biggest surprises that General Relativity (GR) has given us is that under certain circumstances the theory predicts its own limitations. There are two physical situations where we expect for General Relativity to break down. The first is the gravitational collapse of certain massive stars when their nuclear fuel is spent. The second one is the far past of the universe when the density and temperature were extreme. In both cases we expect that the geometry of spacetime will show some pathological behaviour.

The first step towards a mathematical characterisation under which circumstances GR breaks down was achieved in the seminal work of Penrose and Hawking in their singularity theorems). The general structure of the theorems establish that if on a spacetime (${\cal{M}}, g_{ab}$):

  • the matter content satisfies an energy condition
  • gravity is strong enough in some region
  • and a global causal condition is met

then (${\cal{M}}, g_{ab}$) must be geodesically incomplete.

The energy conditions are general inequalities that relate the energy momentum tensor of matter, $T_{ab}$, with a certain class of vector fields. For example: the weak energy condition establishes that $T_{ab}u^{a}u^{b}\ge0$ for any timelike vector $u_{a}$ (by continuity this will then also be true for any null vector $v^{a}$); the dominant energy condition requires that in any orthonormal basis the energy density dominates all the other terms, $T^{00}\ge |T^{\alpha\beta}|$; and the strong energy condition states that $T_{ab}u^{a}u^{b}\ge u^{a}u_{a}g^{cb}T_{cb}$ for any timelike vector $u_{a}$.

The second requirement of the theorem is the existence of a closed trapped surface, $\cal{T}$. By this is meant a $C^{2}$ closed spacelike 2-surface such that the two families of null geodesics orthogonal to ${\cal{T}}$ are converging. This is the formal description of the intuitive idea that the gravitational field becoming so strong in some region that light rays (and so all the other forms of matter) are trapped inside a succession of 2-surfaces of smaller and smaller area.

The global causal conditions come in different forms. The idea of chronological spacetime is that there are no closed timelike curves. In the other hand, a strongly causal satisfies that for every point $p\in{\cal{M}}$ there is a neighbourhood $\cal{V}$ of $p$ which no non-spacelike curve intersects more than once. Finally, one can require that there is surface $S$ which is any subset of spacetime which is intersected by every non-spacelike, inextensible curve, i.e. any causal curve, exactly once. This surface then is called a Cauchy Surface.

The notion of geodesic incompleteness can be better understood by defining what we mean by geodesic completeness. A geodesic complete spacetime is one where any geodesic admits an extension to arbitrarily large parameter values. Then, a spacetime that is not geodesically complete, must be geodesically incomplete. Geodesic incompleteness describes intuitively that there is an obstruction to free falling observers to continue travelling through spacetime. In some sense, they have reached the edge of spacetime in a finite amount of time; they have encountered a singularity.

As a note this theorems do not prove that the curvature blow-up. This is the usual method to show that Black holes or the Big bang has a 'true' gravitational singularity and not just a lose in differentiability (as in shock waves or the tip of a cone).

share|cite|improve this answer

This is something that is difficult to answer easily. However, I wil give you the low-technical answer and hopefully by doing so I dont end up missing something necessary to complete your understanding. In 1988 Hawking published where he and Penrose equations in the case of the universe, space is approximately uniform yet quantifly not. It can be shown that the negative gravitational energy exactly cancels positive energy represented by matter. In other words, the total output energy produced by all the stars in all of the universe is enourmous but equal zero due to the negative absorbtion of space. The implications of this. Since the big bang happenrd 13.72 biklion years ago the universe has been able to expand for that amount of time, therfore it has boundries. There is an estimated amount of total mass in expanding space that can be shown with Einsteins constant for the total distance expanded in 13.72 billion years. Specifically the energy density of the universe is exactly what it should be if it came from an initial state of zero energy. The total amount of energy in the universe equals zero and admittetly within quantum uncertainly. And of course you are aware of the heisenburg uncertainty principle so you can fill in yourself the conclusion. Hopefully i didnt destroy this totally and you find this acceptable.

share|cite|improve this answer
Sorry, but this is completely wrong. Every sentence is wrong. – Ben Crowell Jul 14 '13 at 1:25

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.