Natural vs. Artificial Topologies on a Relativistic Spacetime

Abstract

Consider a set M equipped with a structure *. We call a natural topology T*, on (M,*), the topology induced by *. For example, a natural topology for a metric space (X,d) is a topology Td induced by the metric d and for a linearly ordered set (X,<) a natural topology should be the topology T< that is induced by the order <. This fundamental property, for a topology to be called "natural", has been largely ignored while studying topological properties of spacetime manifolds (M,g) where g is the Lorentz "metric", and the manifold topology TM has been used as a natural topology, ignoring the spacetime "metric" g. In this survey we review critically candidate topologies for a relativistic spacetime manifold, we pose open questions and conjectures with the aim to establish a complete guide on the latest results in the field, and give the foundations for future discussions. We discuss the criticism against the manifold topology, a criticism that was initiated by people like Zeeman, G\"obel, Hawking-King-McCarthy and others, and we examine what should be meant by the term "natural topology" for a spacetime. Since the common criticism against spacetime topologies, other than the manifold topology, claims that there has not been established yet a physical theory to justify such topologies, we give examples of seemingly physical phenomena, under the manifold topology, which are actually purely effects depending on the choice of the topology; the Limit Curve Theorem, which is linked to singularity theorems in general relativity, and the Theorem of Gao-Wald type of "time dilation" are such examples.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…