Take the 2-minute tour ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In special relativity one assume that spacetime can be locally described by 4 coordinates, so it makes sense to model it as a 4-dimensional manifold.

I had the impression that it is assumed that there is an atlas of special charts called inertial reference frames. Their transition maps are restrictions of affine maps on $\mathbb{R}^4 \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^4$. The subgroup of invertable affine maps which are allowed as transition maps is called the kinematical group.

Einstein shows in his paper, I guess, that one can choose the kinematical group to be the Poincare group and for example [Bacry Levy-Leblond] showed that there would only be a few possible choices for these kinematical groups.

In the books, I am aware of, comes now a huge step and one immediately assume one is in Minkowski space.

So my questions are the following: Given a manifold $M^4$ with an atlas such that the transition maps are all restrictions of the affine maps of the Poincare group.

  1. How can one construct a Lorentz metric (a (3,1)-semi-Riemannian metric) on $M$.

  2. Does anyone know a reference for the fact that a manifold $M^4$ with affine transition maps is covered by an affine space (i.e. A simple connected one is topologically $\mathbb{R}^4$)?

One might be tempted to consider the above as something belonging to general relativity, as one uses charts etc. But note affine transition maps are a huge restriction and at the end (maybe after taking a covering map) one talking about Minkowski space anyways.

share|improve this question
1  
I don't get the last paragraph, i.e. I don't quite see why you would be concerned with patching together subsets of $\mathbb{R}^4$ - in SR, why wouldn't an inertial frame apply to the whole of $\mathbb{R}^4$? In which case the Minkowski metric arises naturally, because that's the structure that the Poincare group is defined to preserve. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see where this is coming from. –  twistor59 Jul 19 '13 at 14:50
    
If $(\mathbb{R}^4,g)$ is the Minkowski space then consider $\mathbb{Z}^4$ acting on it. It preserves the semimetric and the quotient is a perfectly fine flat spacetime (but compact). Nevertheless you would not be able to describe it with just one chart. –  mna Jul 19 '13 at 18:52
    
OK I see what you mean. I assume the reasons for preferring "straight" $\mathbb{R}^4$ rather than a compact quotient space like that might be because of a simpler causal structure, i.e avoidance of closed timelike curves? –  twistor59 Jul 19 '13 at 19:31
    
Time orientability is also sometimes imposed as a condition for candidate spacetimes. –  twistor59 Jul 19 '13 at 19:36

1 Answer 1

up vote 0 down vote accepted

Let $\phi: U \rightarrow V\subset \mathbb{R}^4$ be an inertial reference frame and Q the standard Lorentz metric on $\mathbb{R}^4$. The pullback $\phi^* Q$ is independent of the choice of inertial reference frame as the transition maps are from the Poincare group. This way we can define a Lorentz metric on all of $M$.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

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.