There exist several reviews of the subject from different points of view, e.g. by Geroch [79
],
by Penrose [126], by Schmidt [149], by Newman and Tod [119], by Ashtekar [7
, 8], and by
Friedrich [63, 66].
A large part of the literature on null-infinity is concerned with “conserved quantities”. There exist
several ways to derive the Bondi–Sachs energy-momentum expression. It can be defined in terms of limits of
integrals, called linkages [82], over spheres that approach a cut of null-infinity
, where the integrals
are taken over certain vector fields in the physical space-time that suitably approximate the
infinitesimal generators of asymptotic symmetries. Penrose, who had earlier [127] re-expressed the
original Bondi–Sachs expressions in terms of genuine geometric quantities at
, has also
derived them from his quasi-local mass proposal [130]. They can also be obtained by “helicity
lowering” of the rescaled Weyl tensor at
using a two-index asymptotic twistor [154]. Other
approaches (see [85] for a review) start from a Hamiltonian or Lagrangian formulation of the
theory and derive the energy-momentum expressions via Noether theorems or the moment-map
of symplectic geometry (see e.g. [10, 13]). These formulations also provide a framework for
“asymptotic quantization”, a scheme that is geared towards a scattering-matrix description for
gravity. The universal structure of
provides the necessary background structure for the
definition of a phase-space of the radiative modes of the gravitational field and its subsequent
quantization [9].
While the energy-momentum expressions all coincide, there is still disagreement about the various
angular-momentum expressions (see e.g. the review article by Winicour [164]). This difficulty is caused by
the group structure of the BMS group, which does not allow one to single out a unique Lorentz subgroup (it
is obtained only as a factor group). Hopefully, these discrepancies will be resolved once the structure of the
gravitational fields at
is completely understood.
All the “conserved quantities” are associated with a (space-like) cut of null-infinity, which is used for
evaluation of the surface integrals, and an infinitesimal generator of the asymptotic symmetry group used
in defining the integrand. They are not conserved in a strict sense because they depend on
the cut. The prime example is again the Bondi–Sachs energy-momentum, which obeys the
famous Bondi–Sachs mass-loss formula (which relates the values of the energy-momentum at
two given cuts with a negative definite “flux integral” over the part of
between the two
cuts).
Furthermore, there exist the somewhat mysterious Newman–Penrose constants [118
], five complex
quantities that are also defined by surface integrals over a cut of
. In contrast to the
previous conserved quantities, the NP constants are absolutely conserved in the sense that they
do not depend on the particular cut used for the evaluation of the integrals. In space-times
that have a regular point
, the NP constants turn out to be the value of the gravitational
field at
. If
is singular, then the NP constants are still well-defined, although now
they should probably be considered as the value of the gravitational field at an ideal point
. Other interpretations relate them to certain combinations of multipole moments of the
gravitational field [118, 134
]. People have tried to give an interpretation of the NP constants in terms
of a Lagrangian or symplectic framework [84, 83, 138], but these results are still somewhat
unsatisfactory. Very recently, Friedrich and Kánnár [71
] were able to connect the NP constants
defined at null-infinity to initial data on a space-like asymptotically Euclidean (time-symmetric)
hypersurface.
Finally, we want to mention the recent formulation of general relativity as a theory of null hypersurfaces
(see [105]). This theory has its roots in the observation that one can reconstruct the points of Minkowski
space-time from structures defined on null-infinity. The future light cone emanating from an arbitrary point
in Minkowski space-time is a shear-free null hypersurface intersecting
in a cut. The shear-free
property of the light cone translates into the fact that the cut itself is given as a solution of a certain
differential equation, the “good cut equation” on
. Conversely, it was realized that in
flat space the solution space of the good cut equation is isometric to Minkowski space-time
(in particular, it carries a flat metric). Attempts to generalize this property led to Newman’s
-space construction [115], which associates with each (complexified) asymptotically flat and
(anti-)self-dual space-time a certain complex four-dimensional manifold that carries a Ricci-flat
metric. It is obtained as the solution space of the complex good cut equation. Trying to avoid the
unphysical complexification has finally led to the above-mentioned null surface formulation of general
relativity.
At this point the connection to Penrose’s theory of twistors is closest. Newman’s
-spaces were the
motivation for the “non-linear graviton” construction [128], which associates with each anti-self-dual
vacuum space-time a certain three-dimensional complex manifold. The interpretation of these manifolds at
the time was that they should provide the one-particle states of the gravitational field in a future quantum
theory of gravity. For a recent review of twistor theory, we refer to [131]. The non-linear gravitons
themselves have led to remarkable developments in pure mathematics (see e.g. the contributions
in [96]).
| http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-2004-1 |
© Max Planck Society and the author(s)
Problems/comments to |