{"id":1479,"date":"2010-04-30T02:58:33","date_gmt":"2010-04-30T02:58:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/?p=1479"},"modified":"2010-04-30T02:58:33","modified_gmt":"2010-04-30T02:58:33","slug":"scalar-tensor-gravity-and-conformal-transformations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/?p=1479","title":{"rendered":"Scalar-tensor gravity and conformal transformations"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>When I started <a href=\"http:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/\">this here blog site<\/a>, my intent was to write a lot about physics. I ended up writing a lot less about physics than I wanted to, in part because a lot of the physics I&#8217;m thinking about is &#8220;work-in-progress&#8221; which would not be appropriate to write about until, well, until it is appropriate to write about it!<\/p>\n<p>But, there are a few exceptions. Lately, I&#8217;ve been <a href=\"http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/1001.1564\">thinking a lot<\/a> about scalar-tensor gravity. Indeed, as I am waiting for the completion of a virus scan (could my <a href=\"http:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/?p=1476\">recent computer troubles<\/a> have been caused by a virus? I now took out my computer&#8217;s hard drive, put it in an external enclosure, and I am scanning it using a &#8220;known good&#8221; computer) I am thinking about it now.<\/p>\n<p>Einstein&#8217;s gravity theory (tensor gravity) can be written up using the Lagrangian formalism. This is the infamous Einstein-Hilbert Lagrangian, which takes the form <em>L<\/em> = [(\u22121\/16\u03c0<em>G<\/em>)(<em>R<\/em> + 2\u039b) + <em>L<sub>M<\/sub><\/em>]\u221a\u2212<em>g<\/em>, where G is the gravitational constant, <em>R<\/em> is the so-called curvature scalar, \u039b is the cosmological constant, <em>g<\/em> is the determinant of the metric, and <em>L<sub>M<\/sub><\/em> is the Lagrangian representing matter.<\/p>\n<p>In one of the simplest modifications of Einstein&#8217;s gravity, <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Brans-Dicke_theory\">Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory<\/a>, the gravitational constant <em>G<\/em> is promoted from constant to field: it becomes variable, and a &#8220;kinetic term&#8221; is added to the Lagrangian representing the kinetic energy carried by this scalar field.<\/p>\n<p>In this theory, gravity is still determined by the geometry of space-time. However, in addition to matter, there is this scalar field (which carries mass-energy and is thus a further source of gravity in addition to matter.) Then, this scalar field also determines the strength of coupling between matter and space-time (i.e., the extent to which a unit mass of matter bends space-time.)<\/p>\n<p>Now it so happens that it is possible to transform away this variable gravitational constant and make it truly constant by a mathematical transformation called a conformal transformation. Basically, it amounts to reparameterizing space-time in such a way that the value of the gravitational constant becomes the same everywhere. (This transformation is described as switching from the <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Jordan_and_Einstein_frames\">Jordan frame to the Einstein frame<\/a>.) However, this transformation is not without cost. As we transform away the coupling between the geometry of space-time and the scalar field, we end up introducing a variable coupling between the matter Lagrangian <em>L<sub>M<\/sub><\/em> and the scalar field. The physics is now different! The geometry of space-time is now determined by a fixed coupling constant as in Einstein&#8217;s theory, but the trajectory of matter is no longer determined by geometry alone: there is an extra force, a so-called scalar force, acting on matter.<\/p>\n<p>At first sight, this might seem weird. A simple mathematical transformation should not change the physics, or should it? Well&#8230; it does yet it doesn&#8217;t. If you fire a cannonball in Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory and calculate its trajectory, it will trace the same trajectory regardless which frame, the Jordan or the Einstein frame, you use to calculate it. It&#8217;s the interpretation of this trajectory that differs between the two frames. In the Jordan frame, the cannonball is said to follow a geodesic trajectory, but that geodesic, i.e., the curvature of spacetime, is affected by a varying gravitational constant. In the Einstein frame, the cannonball&#8217;s trajectory is not a geodesic anymore; the geodesic trajectory is determined by a fixed gravitational constant, but on top of that, an extra force deflects the cannonball.<\/p>\n<p>One particular kind of scalar-tensor theory can be written in a form in which there is no variable gravitational constant and no coupling between the scalar field and matter either. This is the so-called &#8220;minimally coupled&#8221; scalar-tensor theory, in which the scalar field influences matter only indirectly: the scalar field has mass-energy, which gravitates, and this contributes to the overall gravitational field. Things can get tricky here: a scalar-tensor theory may be written in a form that does not look like a minimally coupled theory at all, yet it may be possible to transform it into one by an appropriate conformal transformation. However, this is not always the case: for instance, Jordan-Brans-Dicke theory cannot be transformed into a minimally coupled scalar-tensor theory this way, the two classes of theories are manifestly different.<\/p>\n<p>When things get really interesting is when additional fields are present in a more complex theory, such as <a href=\"http:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/?page_id=80\">scalar-tensor-vector gravity<\/a>. In that case, a conformal transformation can have surprising consequences on the coupling between these additional fields and the scalar field.<\/p>\n<fb:like href='https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/?p=1479' send='false' layout='button_count' show_faces='true' width='450' height='65' action='like' colorscheme='light' font='lucida grande'><\/fb:like>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>When I started this here blog site, my intent was to write a lot about physics. I ended up writing a lot less about physics than I wanted to, in part because a lot of the physics I&#8217;m thinking about is &#8220;work-in-progress&#8221; which would not be appropriate to write about until, well, until it is <a href='https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/?p=1479' class='excerpt-more'>[&#8230;]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1479","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-physics","category-3-id","post-seq-1","post-parity-odd","meta-position-corners","fix"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1479","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1479"}],"version-history":[{"count":18,"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1479\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1497,"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1479\/revisions\/1497"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1479"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1479"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spinor.info\/weblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1479"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}