Journal of Modern Physics
Vol.06 No.14(2015), Article ID:61170,10 pages
10.4236/jmp.2015.614210
On Separation between Metric Observers in Segal’s Compact Cosmos
Alexander Levichev1, Andrey Palyanov2
1Sobolev Institute of Mathematics SB RAS, Novosibirsk, Russia
2A. P. Ershov Institute of Informatics Systems SB RAS, Novosibirsk, Russia

Copyright © 2015 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/


Received 14 July 2015; accepted 14 November 2015; published 17 November 2015
ABSTRACT
A certain class K of GR homogeneous spacetimes is considered. For each pair E,
of spacetimes from K,
where conformal transformation g is from
. Each E (being
or its double cover, as a manifold) is interpreted as related to an observer in Segal’s universal cosmos. The definition of separation d between E and
is based on the integration of the conformal factor of the transformation g. The integration is carried out separately over each region where the conformal factor is no less than 1 (or no greater than 1). Certain properties of
are proven; examples are considered; and possible directions of further research are indicated.
Keywords:
Separation between Spacetimes, Segal’s Universal Cosmos, Conformal Group Action on U(2), DLF-Theory

1. Motivation and Introduction
The first author has been interested in GR (“GR” is for General Relativity) research for quite a while and he concentrated on a few most symmetric spacetimes ( [1] , [2] , and more). Later (see [3] , [4] ) he has become a strong believer in Segal’s Chronometric Theory (see [5] , electronic archive arranged by Levichev), and he is attempting to modify Segal’s Theory (see [6] , a key publication). The collaboration of the two current authors is based on their mutual interest in Penrose-Hameroff approach to consciousness (see its update in [7] , [8] ). Specifically, we are putting forward an alternative definition of separation between space-times. In [9] , the original definition was based on bringing up a Newtonian limit in GR. Our definition has been introduced in [10] , [11] , and we now present it in much more detail.
Recall the Lie group
as the totality of all two-by-two matrices z (with complex entries allowed) satisfying
(1.1)
where
is the transpose and complex conjugate of z, and
is the unit matrix. Now, define the Lie group
as consisting of all four-by-four matrices g (with complex entries allowed) satisfying
(1.2)
where S is the diagonal matrix
. Recall the well-known linear-fractional G-action on
:
(1.3)
where a matrix g from G is determined by its 
In Table I of [12] , the matrices 






The Lorentzian inner product on 










For what follows, it is instrumental to introduce a certain bi-invariant Riemannian inner product on



















Notice that, as a group, 











Here the variable t is along 



It is well-known ( [12] , [13] ) that the (above introduced) covering map is a Lorentzian isometry. Infinitesimal G-action on 


Also, it is easily verifiable that for the Riemannian metric

on 


It makes sense to mention how a suitable version of the Einstein static universe, 













More precisely, we deal with two classes of spacetimes: 



2. On the Notion of Separation between Spacetimes: The Main Definition and Related Properties
The separation (or distance) 


As mentioned, the totality of all isometries in 


G/K. Namely, each element (or coset) x of G/K is specified by an element g from G:


there exists such k from K, that














The everywhere positive function 




where 




Here the right hand side of (2.3L) is calculated in 





where the positive definite inner product in the right hand side of (2.3R) has been introduced in our Section 1.
Let us show that, given a coset x in G/K, (2.3L) correctly defines a Lorentzian metric on

Scholium 2.1. The inner product (2.3L) (respectively, the inner product (2.3R)) is independent of the choice of g which represents a coset x.
Proof. If x is represented as g1K, then 

where the right hand side of (2.4) is calculated in 






where the right hand side is calculated at

However, 


Let us notice (see [16] ) that each 

Remark 2.2. We have thus defined the class 




Given a (1.3)-transformation g of (Lorentzian)



here 


where 


To further deal with (2.8), we now proceed with more technicalities. Clearly, 





Examples of integrals 

which follows from (2.8) because in this case


Scholium 2.3. Given the (1.3)-transformation g and isometries


where
Proof. To prove (2.10), we will now show that each of the four numbers (a, b, c, and d) remain the same when we switch from 

Similarly,


Let us now use the variable 




integrand since 


Now, if two cosets are represented as



where





Corollary 2.4. In the above settings, 


A word of caution: we use the term distance but we are not sure that the corresponding triangle inequality holds (even locally) for (2.11). However, we prove (below) that (2.11) is symmetric:

for arbitrary f from G (where we have in mind the canonical action of G in G/K).
As regards G-invariance, one can think of a possible relation of our definition (2.11) to the canonical inner product in the symmetric space G/K. This we do not discuss here.
Scholium 2.5. The distance (2.11) is symmetric:
Proof. As justified by our Corollary 2.4, assume that 

where



For 








3. Concluding Remarks and Future Research Insights
Examples of integrals 



Cite this paper
Alexander Levichev,Andrey Palyanov, (2015) On Separation between Metric Observers in Segal’s Compact Cosmos. Journal of Modern Physics,06,2040-2049. doi: 10.4236/jmp.2015.614210
References
- 1. Guts, A.K. and Levichev, A.V. (1984) On the Foundations of Relativity Theory. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR, 277, 253-257. (In Russian)
- 2. Levichev, A.V. (1989) On the Causal Structure of Homogeneous Lorentzian Manifolds. General Relativity & Gravity, 21, 1027-1045.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00774087 - 3. Levichev, A.V. (1993) The Chronometric Theory by I. Segal Is the Crowning Accomplishment of Special Relativity. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii Fizika, 8, 84-89. (In Russian)
- 4. Levichev, A.V. (1995) Mathematical Foundations and Physical Applications of Chronometry. In: Hilgert, J., Hofmann, K. and Lawson, J., Eds., Semigroups in Algebra, Geometry, and Analysis, de Gryuter Expositions in Mathematics, Berlin, 77-103.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110885583.77 - 5. http://dedekind.mit.edu/segal-archive/index.php
- 6. Levichev, A.V. (2011) Pseudo-Hermitian Realization of the Minkowski World through DLF Theory. Physica Scripta, 83, 1-9.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-8949/83/01/015101 - 7. Hameroff, S. and Penrose, R. (2014) Consciousness in the Universe: A Review of the “Orch OR” Theory. Physics of Life Reviews, 11, 39-78.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2013.08.002 - 8. Hameroff, S. and Penrose, R. (2014) Reply to Criticism of the “Orch OR Qubit”—“Orchestrated Objective Reduction” Is Scientifically Justified. Physics of Life Reviews, 11, 94-100.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2013.11.013 - 9. Penrose, R. (1992) Gravity and Quantum Mechanics. In: Gleiser, R.J., Kozameh, C.N. and Moreschi, O.M., Eds., General Relativity and Gravitation 13. Part 1: Plenary Lectures 1992. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on General Relativity and Gravitation, Cordoba, 28 June-4 July 1992, 179-189.
- 10. Levichev, A. and Palyanov, A. (2014) On a Modification of the Theoretical Basis of the Penrose-Hameroff Model of Consciousness. In: International Conference MM-HPC-BBB-2014, Abstracts, Sobolev Institute of Mathematics SB RAS, Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, 49.
- 11. Levichev, V. and Palyanov, A.Yu. (2014) On a Notion of Separation between Space-Times. In: Geometry Days in Novosibirsk. Abstracts of the International Conference, Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, 110.
- 12. Segal, I.E., Hans, P.J., Bent, Ø., Paneitz, S.M. and Speh, B. (1981) Covariant Chronogeometry and Extreme Distances: Elementary Particles. PNAS, 78, 5261-5265.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.78.9.5261 - 13. Werth, J.-E. (1986) Conformal Group Actions and Segal’s Cosmology. Reports on Mathematical Physics, 23, 257-268.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0034-4877(86)90023-6 - 14. Segal, I.E. (1976) Mathematical Cosmology and Extragalactic Astronomy. Academic Press, New York.
- 15. Branson, T.P. (1987) Group Representations Arising from Lorentz Conformal Geometry. Journal of Functional Analysis, 74, 199-291.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-1236(87)90025-5 - 16. Segal, I.E. (1984) Evolution of the Inertial Frame of the Universe. Nuovo Cimento, 79B, 187-191.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02748970 - 17. Kon, M. and Levichev, A. (2015) Towards Analysis in Space-Time Bundles Based on Pseudo-Hermitian Realization of the Minkowski Space. In Preparation.
Appendix A: Parameterizations of U(2) and E(2)
The following presentation for E(2), the 2-cover of





and

Clearly, E(2) is S1 × S3, topologically. The earlier introduced 



The covering map from E(2) onto 




Given a matrix z in


and an Euclidean metric

It is known (see [14] , p. 40) that the restriction of (A5L) onto E(2) = S1 ´ S3 coincides with metric (1.4) of our Section 1. Similarly, the restriction of (A5R) onto E(2) coincides with metric (1.5).
Appendix B: The Case of a Certain One-Parameter Group of Conformal Transformations
This group consists of all (1.3)-transformations g of the form:

with
where






Theorem B.1. The image 



Proof. Notice that due to (A3) and (A4) from Appendix A, the formulas (B.2) correctly define the transformation on the level of E0 (when z and 


in terms of differentials





Remark B.2. In the case considered, there is an alternative way to determine the conformal factor (B.3). It is as follows [17] , Theorem 3: for a (1.3)-transformation g, the following equality holds for the conformal factor at z:

One can verify that (B.5), when applied in the (B.1)-case, results in (B.3).
It is of interest to determine all fixed points (that is, matrices 

Scholium B.3. The totality of all fixed points of (B.1) is a pair of circles. One of the circles is given by equations



Proof. As it follows from (B.1), the totality of all fixed points is the solution set of

equality of two matrices. Comparison of first entries in second rows results in

Since g is not an identity transformation,






Our next goal is to prove that each fixed point (of a given (B.1)―transfor-mation) is an extreme point of the conformal coefficient
Scholium B.4. If 



Proof. If 











Corollary B.5. If 


Corollary B.6. At the point of extremum for the conformal coefficient, either



Proof follows from the expression 

Corollary B.7. An extreme value of 





Appendix C: Evaluations of Integrals (2.8) for the Case of Appendix B Transformations in E(2)
We start with the form

on the torus T = S1 ´ S3, see our Theorem B.1. Now, T+ is for the part of T where



where in both cases we have in mind the volume form which has been introduced on T in Section 2.
A word of caution: the function (C.1) is the inverse of the conformal coefficient (B.3). Nevertheless, the findings (which follow) of this Appendix C are relevant to the Appendix A content since k in (C.2), (C.3) can be any integer.
The majority of these Appendix C findings are due to V. V. Ivanov (Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk, Russia).
Parameterize T as follows:

In terms of these parameters, (C.1) becomes

The integrals (C.2), (C.3) are reduced as follows:

where

Here we consider the rectangle







Our function (C.5) becomes

whereas





r being the distance between 




Introduce an (acute) angle 

Omitting a few more (straightforward) technicalities, we obtain

The upper limits


Let us conclude in terms of the following statements.
Theorem C.1. For k not equal −1, the integrals (C.2), (C.3) can be evaluated as follows:

For k = −1

Theorem C.2. For every integer k,

Theorem C.3. For a nonnegative k, each of the integrals (C.17) is a finite linear combination of integrals


Remark C.4. Each of the integrals (C.20) is an elementary one and it can be expressed as a polynomial in s and
Recall notations a, b, c, d of Section 2 (see the line prior to Formula (2.9)) for the integrals which are of our utmost interest.
Theorem C.5. The integrals a, b, c, d, are as follows:








