English

Localized past stability of the subcritical Kasner-scalar field spacetimes

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology 2025-02-24 v2 Mathematical Physics Analysis of PDEs math.MP

Abstract

We prove the nonlinear stability, in the contracting direction, of the entire subcritical family of Kasner-scalar field solutions to the Einstein-scalar field equations in four spacetime dimensions. Our proof relies on a zero-shift, orthonormal frame decomposition of a conformal representation of the Einstein-scalar field equations. To synchronise the big bang singularity, we use the time coordinate τ=exp(23ϕ)\tau = \exp\bigl(\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}}\phi\bigr), where ϕ\phi is the scalar field, which coincides with a conformal harmonic time slicing. We show that the perturbed solutions are asymptotically pointwise Kasner, geodesically incomplete to the past and terminate at quiescent, crushing big bang singularities located at τ=0\tau=0, which are characterised by curvature blow up. Specifically, we establish two stability theorems. The first is a global in-space stability result where the perturbed spacetimes are of the form M=t(0,t0]τ1({t})(0,t0]×T3M =\bigcup_{t\in (0,t_0]} \tau^{-1}(\{t\}) \cong (0,t_0] \times \mathbb{T}^{3}. The second is a localised version where the perturbed spacetimes are given by M=t(0,t0]τ1({t})t(0,t0]{t}×Bρ(t)M=\bigcup_{t\in (0,t_0]}\tau^{-1}(\{t\})\cong \bigcup_{t\in (0,t_0]} \{t\}\times\mathbb{B}_{\rho(t)} with time-dependent radius function ρ(t)=ρ0+(1ϑ)ρ0((tt0)1ϵ1)\rho(t)=\rho_0+(1-\vartheta)\rho_0\bigl(\bigl(\frac{t}{t_0}\bigr)^{1-\epsilon}-1\bigr). Spatial localisation is achieved through our choice of zero-shift, harmonic time slicing that leads to hyperbolic evolution equations with a finite propagation speed.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.2502.09210,
  title  = {Localized past stability of the subcritical Kasner-scalar field spacetimes},
  author = {F. Beyer and T. A. Oliynyk and W. Zheng},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.09210},
  year   = {2025}
}

Comments

Typos corrected and the statement of Lemma 4.2 separated into two cases