Planck's constant and the theory of the red shift

This paper deals with problems on the threshold between General Relativity Theory and Quantum Theory. It contains some simple reasoning from which it follows that the so-called constanth cannot, in fact, be regarded as constant in General Relativity Theory.     

Boundary Conditions from Boundary Terms, Noether Charges and the Trace K Lagrangian in General Relativity

We present the Lagrangian whose corresponding action is the trace K action for General Relativity. Although this Lagrangian is second order in the derivatives, it has no second order time derivatives and its behavior at space infinity in the asymptotically flat case is identical to other alternative Lagrangians for General Relativity, like the gamma-gamma Lagrangian used by Einstein. We develop some elements of the variational principle for field theories with boundaries, and apply them to second order Lagrangians, where we establish the conditions—proposition 1—for the conservation of the Noether charges. From this general approach a pre-symplectic form is naturally obtained that features two terms, one from the bulk and another from the boundary. When applied to the trace K Lagrangian, we recover a pre-symplectic form first introduced using a different approach. We prove that all diffeomorphisms satisfying certain restrictions at the boundary —that leaves room for a realization of the Poincarè group— will yield Noether conserved charges. In particular, the computation of the total energy gives, in the asymptotically flat case, the ADM result.     

Mass and energy in General Relativity

We consider the Denisov-Solov'ov example which shows that the inertial mass is not well defined in General Relativity. It is shown that the mathematical reason why this is true is a wrong application of the Stokes theorem. Then we discuss the role of the order of asymptotically flatness in the definition of the mass. In conclusion some comments on conservation laws in General Relativity are presented.     

Fantappié-Arcidiacono Spacetime and Its Consequences in Quantum Cosmology

Einstein’s gravitational theory gave rise to a new conception of the Universe and Cosmology has been enclosed in the realm of Science and not only of Philosophy as before the Einstein work. Despite this, the presence of the Big Bang singularity, flatness and horizon problems led to the statement that Standard Cosmological Model, based on General Relativity and Standard Model of particle physics, is inadequate to describe the Universe in extreme regimes. Due to this facts, alternative gravitational theories and alternative approaches to cosmology have been proposed during the years. One of the most fruitful approach has been that of Projective Relativity and, in this paper, we analyze the developments of this theory. Projective Relativity, initially proposed by Fantappié and subsequently developed by Arcidiacono, has been recently revisited by prof. Ignazio Licata and other authors. The cosmological consequences of such extension appear relevant. In the following, we analyze the effects of the group approach on the metrics and on the dynamics and we will consider its properties in connection with varying speed of light.     

Remarks on the Formulation of the Cosmological Constant/Dark Energy Problems

Associated with the cosmic acceleration are the old and new cosmological constant problems, recently put into the more general context of the dark energy problem. In broad terms, the old problem is related to an unexpected order of magnitude of this component while the new problem is related to this magnitude being of the same order of the matter energy density during the present epoch of cosmic evolution. Current plans to measure the equation of state or density parameters certainly constitute an important approach; however, as we discuss, this approach is faced with serious feasibility challenges and is limited in the type of conclusive answers it could provide. Therefore, is it really too early to seek actively for new tests and approaches to these problems? In view of the difficulty of this endeavor, we argue in this work that a good place to start is by questioning some of the assumptions underlying the formulation of these problems and finding new ways to put this questioning to the test. First, we calculate how much fine tuning the cosmic coincidence problem represents. Next, we discuss the potential of some cosmological probes such as weak gravitational lensing to identify novel tests to probe dark energy questions and assumptions and provide an example of consistency tests. Then, motivated by some theorems in General Relativity, we discuss if the full identification of the cosmological constant with vacuum energy is unquestionable. We discuss some implications of the simplest solution for the principles of General Relativity. Also, we point out the relevance of experiments at the interface of astrophysics and quantum field theory, such as the Casimir effect in gravitational and cosmological contexts. We conclude that challenging some of the assumptions underlying the cosmological constant problems and putting them to the test may prove useful and necessary to make progress on these questions.     

Covariance,invariance, and equivalence: A viewpoint

General Relativity and Gravitation - We have given what, we hope, are precise statements of the main principles that underly general relativity. It is not our intention to argue that these...     

Is the Regge Calculus a Consistent Approximation to General Relativity?

We will ask the question of whether or not the Regge calculus (and two related simplicial formulations) is a consistent approximation to General Relativity. Our criteria will be based on the behaviour of residual errors in the discrete equations when evaluated on solutions of the Einstein equations. We will show that for generic simplicial lattices the residual errors cannot be used to distinguish metrics which are solutions of Einstein's equations from those that are not. We will conclude that either the Regge calculus is an inconsistent approximation to General Relativity or that it is incorrect to use residual errors in the discrete equations as a criteria to judge the discrete equations.     

Metric-affine f(R) theories of gravity

General Relativity assumes that spacetime is fully described by the metric alone. An alternative is the so called Palatini formalism where the metric and the connections are taken as independent quantities. The metric-affine theory of gravity has attracted considerable attention recently, since it was shown that within this framework some cosmological models, based on some generalized gravitational actions, can account for the current accelerated expansion of the universe. However we think that metric-affine gravity deserves much more attention than that related to cosmological applications and so we consider here metric-affine gravity theories in which the gravitational action is a general function of the scalar curvature while the matter action is allowed to depend also on the connection which is not a priori symmetric. This general treatment will allow us to address several open issues such as: the relation between metric-affine f(R) gravity and General Relativity (in vacuum as well as in the presence of matter), the implications of the dependence (or independence) of the matter action on the connections, the origin and role of torsion and the viability of the minimal-coupling principle.     

On Metric and Matter in Unconnected, Connected, and Metrically Connected Manifolds

From Einstein's point of view, his General Relativity Theory had strengths as well as failings. For him, its shortcoming mainly was that it did not unify gravitation and electromagnetism and did not provide solutions to field equations which can be interpreted as particle models with discrete mass and charge spectra, As a consequence, General Relativity did (and does) not solve the quantum problem, either. Einstein tried to get rid of the shortcomings without losing the achievements of General Relativity Theory. Stimulated by papers of Weyl (Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss (1918) 465) and Eddington (Proc. R. Soc. Hond. 99 (1921) 194), from 1923 onward, he believed that, to reach this goal, one has to transit to space–times which possess more comprehensive geometrical structures than the Riemann space–time. This was the beginning of a decade's lasting search for a unitary field theory. We describe this exciting part of the history of physics, discuss achievements and failures of this development, and ask how these early attempts of a unified theory strike us today. Taking into account the fact that the Equivalence Principle only speaks for a geometrization of gravitation, we consider an alternative way to give those non-Riemannian structures which were introduced by the unitary field approach a physical meaning, namely the meaning of a generalized gravitational field. This is interesting since there are arguments in favor of such a generalization of General Relativity Theory, e.g., the problems the latter theory meets with if one tries to quantize it and to unify gravitation with other interactions.     

Strains and rigidity in black-hole fields

In General Relativity a body is said to be rigid when it suffers no deformations, namely when the relative acceleration of any pair of its neighbouring elements vanishes identically. Here we apply this criterion to a system orbiting a Schwarzschild and Kerr black hole and calculate the strains which the body has to sustain in order to avoid deformation. We then discuss the relations between our results and the physical measurements which can be performed in orbiting frames and find that the only measurement of strains leads to ambiguous information.     

Optical Definition of Gravity Under Static Conditions

The experiment of Pound & Repka shows that light undergoes a frequency shift in the gravitational field of the earth in accordance with General Relativity. Conversely, in the static case, we can use only the observed frequency shifts to define the gravitational field, presupposing the (constant) 3-geometry of the 3-space slices is known. The latter can be probed in principle by rigid rods, but more elegantly by the light geometry as developed by Abramowicz, shortly reviewed here. Our optical definition is independent of the theory of relativity. However, in the second part, we show that, in the static case, it coincides with the predictions for the acceleration of test particles in General Relativity. For the non-static case, our definition of gravity is no substitute for that one given in General Relativity. However, the static case is sufficient for certain discussions about the validity of the Principle of Equivalence.     

Algebraic computing in general relativity

The purpose of this paper is to bring to the attention of potential users the existence of algebraic computing systems, and to illustrate their use by reviewing a number of problems for which such a system has been successfully used in General Relativity. In addition, some remarks are included which may be of help in the future design of these systems.     

Vacuum decay and quadratic gravity: the massive case

General Relativity and Gravitation - In this article we discuss some aspects of double field theory cosmology with an emphasis on the role played by the dilaton. The cosmological solutions of...     

Rigid motions and generalized Newtonian gravitation

In an effort to contribute to a better understanding of General Relativity, here we lay the foundations of generalized Newtonian gravity, which unifies inertial forces and gravitational fields. We also formulate a kind of equivalence principle for this generalized Newtonian theory. Finally, we prove that the theory we propose here can be obtained as the non-relativistic limit of General Relativity.     

On the cosmological constant problem and brane-world geometry

The cosmological constant problem is examined within the context of the covariant brane-world gravity, based on Nash’s embedding theorem for Riemannian geometries. We show that the vacuum structure of the brane-world is more complex than General Relativity’s because it involves extrinsic elements, in specific, the extrinsic curvature. In other words, the shape (or local curvature) of an object becomes a relative concept, instead of the “absolute shape” of General Relativity. We point out that the immediate consequence is that the cosmological constant and the energy density of the vacuum quantum fluctuations have different physical meanings: while the vacuum energy density remains confined to the four-dimensional brane-world, the cosmological constant is a property of the bulk’s gravitational field that leads to the conclusion that these quantities cannot be compared, as it is usually done in General Relativity. Instead, the vacuum energy density contributes to the extrinsic curvature, which in turn generates Nash’s perturbation of the gravitational field. On the other hand, the cosmological constant problem ceases to be in the brane-world geometry, reappearing only in the limit where the extrinsic curvature vanishes.     

Letter: Gravitational Potential in the Palatini Formulation of Modified Gravity

General Relativity has so far passed almost all the ground-based and solar-system experiments. Any reasonable extended gravity models should consistently reduce to it at least in the weak field approximation. In this work we derive the gravitational potential for the Palatini formulation of the modified gravity of the L(R) type which admits a de Sitter vacuum solution. We argue that the Newtonian limit is always obtained in those class of models and the deviations from General Relativity are very small for a slowly moving source.     

A Brief Remark on Energy Conditions and the Geroch-Jang Theorem

The status of the geodesic principle in General Relativity has been a topic of some interest in the recent literature on the foundations of spacetime theories. Part of this discussion has focused on the role that a certain energy condition plays in the proof of a theorem due to Bob Geroch and Pong-Soo Jang [“Motion of a Body in General Relativity.” Journal of Mathematical Physics 16(1) (1975)] that can be taken to make precise the claim that the geodesic principle is a theorem, rather than a postulate, of General Relativity. In this brief note, I show, by explicit counterexample, that not only is a weaker energy condition than the one Geroch and Jang state insufficient to prove the theorem, but in fact a condition still stronger than the one that they assume is necessary.     

A Solution to Einstein's Equations for the Mixmaster Universe in Complex General Relativity

Starting from Einstein's equations of the Classical General Relativity, new kinds of solutions for the Mixmaster model are explored. By dispensing with the extension to the complex variable field, which is usual in problems such as the Laplace equation or the harmonic oscillator, in a similar manner to that of Quantum Mechanics, the equations appear to have solutions that belong to the complex General Relativity. A first integral is performed by establishing a separation of the first derivatives. Then a second integral is obtained once the respective equations with separate variables are found and whose integrals provide a family of complex solutions. However, reality conditions do not seem to be easily imposed at this stage. Above all, it is significant that the classical Einstein's equations for the debatably integrable Mixmaster model present complex solutions.     

Equivalence Principle and the Principle of Local Lorentz Invariance

In this paper we scrutinize the so called Principle of Local Lorentz Invariance (PLLI) that many authors claim to follow from the Equivalence Principle. Using rigourous mathematics, we introduce in the General Theory of Relativity two classes of reference frames (PIRFs and LLRFs) which as natural generalizations of the concept of the inertial reference frames of the Special Relativity Theory. We show that it is the class of the LLRFs that is associated with the PLLI. Next we give a definition of physically equivalent reference frames. Then, we prove that there are models of General Relativity Theory (in particular on a Friedmann universe) where the PLLI is false. However our finding is not in contradiction with the many experimental claims vindicating the PLLI, because theses experiments do not have enough accuracy to detect the effect we found. We prove moreover that PIRFs are not physically equivalent.