As is well known, the solution of the vacuum Einstein equations with a non-zero cosmological constant, $G_{\mu\nu}+\Lambda g_{\mu\nu}=0$, is an asymptotically (anti) de Sitter space based on the sign of the cosmological constant.

Now, taking the trace of these vacuum Einstein equations, one reads $R - \dfrac{1}{2}RD + \Lambda D = 0$. Or, equivalently, $R=\dfrac{2\Lambda D}{D-2}$. Now, thus, in the large $D$ limit, $R=2\Lambda$. Thus, the Einstein equations read as $R_{\mu \nu} - \dfrac{1}{2}(2\Lambda) g_{\mu\nu} + \Lambda g_{\mu \nu} = 0$ in this large $D$ limit. Or, $R_{\mu \nu}=0$. Thus, $R=0$ and, consequently, $\Lambda=0$. This means that the Schwarzschild (anti)de Sitter metric (a solution of $G_{\mu\nu}+\Lambda g_{\mu\nu}=0$) which is asymptotically (anti) de Sitter approaches a Schwarzschild metric which is asymptotically Minkowskian in the large $D$ limit - because the cosmological constant approaches zero in this limit. In this sense, the large $D$ limit of an (anti) de Sitter space appears to be a Minkowskian space.

Is this result true? If it is then can someone mathematically show (without reference to the physical arguments presented here) how an (anti) de Sitter space can approach a Minkowskian one as the number of spacetime dimensions approaches infinity?

  • $\begingroup$ As Jerry pointed out in his answer, $R_{\mu \nu}$ being equal to zero does not imply that flat spacetime is its unique solution. For flat spacetime, you need all the components of the Riemann tensor $R^{\mu}_{\ \nu \lambda \sigma}$ to be zero. $\endgroup$ – Avantgarde Jun 6 '17 at 23:54
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I was mistaken about that. But I think it is in some sense not all that core of my question. I have edited the question to circumvent this issue. Kindly have a look. $\endgroup$ – Dvij D.C. Jun 7 '17 at 5:25
  • $\begingroup$ This still has the problem of it not being clear how any of your variables go to zero, which is going to affect the problem. I don't think there's a way around calculating $g_{ab}$ for arbitrary $D$, and then taking the $D\rightarrow\infty$ limit. $\endgroup$ – Jerry Schirmer Jun 7 '17 at 14:10
  • $\begingroup$ In particular, setting $\Lambda = 0$ feels deeply wrong, because it is a free parameter of your theory. If anything, this feels more like a proof that anti-de Sitter spaces are necessarily finite dimensional $\endgroup$ – Jerry Schirmer Jun 7 '17 at 14:23
  • $\begingroup$ @JerrySchirmer It seems to me that I am not setting $\Lambda=0$ by hand. Rather, the large $D$ limit forces it upon us that $\Lambda$ must go to zero. Regarding your suggestion that rather than saying that (anti) de Sitter spaces tend to Minkowskian in the large $D$ limit, we should say that (anti) de Sitter spaces must be finite dimensional seems quite appropriate - but still, I am a bit confused. $\endgroup$ – Dvij D.C. Jun 8 '17 at 4:57

The illusion of a vanishing cosmological constant is created because of the erred approximation procedure. Since $R=\dfrac{2\Lambda D}{D-2}$, what one should (and can at best) claim in the large $D$ limit is that $R= 2\Lambda \bigg( 1+ \mathcal{O} \bigg(\dfrac{1}{D}\bigg)\bigg)$.

Thus, the Einstein equations give $R_{\mu\nu} - \Lambda g_{\mu\nu} \bigg( 1+ \mathcal{O} \bigg(\dfrac{1}{D}\bigg)\bigg)+\Lambda g_{\mu\nu}=0$.

Thus, $R_{\mu\nu}=\Lambda g_{\mu\nu} \bigg(\mathcal{O}\bigg(\dfrac{1}{D}\bigg)\bigg)$.

Now, we don't know how $\Lambda$ scales with $D$ (or even $g_{\mu\nu}$ for that matter) and thus, it is inappropriate to claim that $R_{\mu\nu}$ goes to zero in the large $D$ limit. What one can claim is that $R_{\mu\nu}$ goes as $\dfrac{1}{D}$ times $\Lambda g_{\mu\nu}$ in the large $D$ limit. Without $R_{\mu\nu}$ going to zero, neither $R$ can be claimed to go to zero nor the $\Lambda$.


$R_{\mu\nu} = 0$ does not give the Minkowski spacetime as a unique solution. In particular, it tells you nothing about the value of the Weyl tensor $C_{\mu \nu \alpha \beta}$. Also, more concretely, Schwarzschild spacetimes are Ricci flat (and you can find some parallels between cosmologies and schwarzschild spacetimes)

I haven't particularly studied anti-de Sitter spaces in the case of infinite dimensions, but the above does not prove that they are identically Minkowski.

  • $\begingroup$ Aren't all spaces with Ricci tensor zero asymptotically Minkowskian? $\endgroup$ – Dvij D.C. Jun 6 '17 at 20:24
  • $\begingroup$ @Dvij: no. The obvious counterexample is a non-asymptotically flat universe containing only a plane gravitational wave. $\endgroup$ – Jerry Schirmer Jun 6 '17 at 20:39
  • $\begingroup$ What about non-compact Calabi-Yaus? $\endgroup$ – Kosm Jun 7 '17 at 2:56
  • $\begingroup$ @JerrySchirmer Yes, I realize I was mistaken about that. But I think it is in some sense not all that core of my question. I have edited the question to circumvent this issue. Kindly have a look. $\endgroup$ – Dvij D.C. Jun 7 '17 at 5:26

Asymptotic flatness / Asymptotic Minkowskian is a bit of a tricky issue in terms of how one defines it. The general criteria more/less are:

  1. The existence of a global timelike Killing vector field.

Now, consider a spacetime $(\hat{M}, \hat{g}_{ab})$, where $\hat{M}$ is some spacetime manifold. Then, a spacetime is called asymptotically simple if: 2. There exists a function $\omega \geq 0$ such that $g_{ab} = \omega^2 \hat{g}_{ab}$, 3. On the boundary of the spacetime, $\omega = 0$, and $\omega_{,a} \neq 0$, 4. Every null geodesic intersects this boundary at two points.

Now, if we associate the metric $g_{ab}$ with the Einstein field equations, the existence of these conditions implies that the spacetime is asymptotically flat / asymptotically Minkowskian. The Schwarzschild metric for example obeys such properties and is asymptotically flat. Related to your question, I don't think the adS metric even in the asymptotic sense behaves the same way as asymptotically flat spacetimes, because the conformal boundary is quite different than typical asymptotically flat spacetimes.

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your answer! I have edited my question to circumvent the issues of in what case $R_{\mu\nu}=0$ suggests asymptotically Minkowskian spacetime. Kindly have a look. $\endgroup$ – Dvij D.C. Jun 7 '17 at 5:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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