Paper detail

The Hawking-Penrose singularity theorem for $C^1$-Lorentzian metrics

We extend both the Hawking-Penrose Theorem and its generalisation due to Galloway and Senovilla to Lorentzian metrics of regularity $C^1$. For metrics of such low regularity, two main obstacles have to be addressed. On the one hand, the Ricci tensor now is distributional, and on the other hand, unique solvability of the geodesic equation is lost. To deal with the first issue in a consistent way, we develop a theory of tensor distributions of finite order, which also provides a framework for the recent proofs of the theorems of Hawking and of Penrose for $C^1$-metrics [7]. For the second issue, we study geodesic branching and add a further alternative to causal geodesic incompleteness to the theorem, namely a condition of maximal causal non-branching. The genericity condition is re-cast in a distributional form that applies to the current reduced regularity while still being fully compatible with the smooth and $C^{1,1}$-settings. In addition, we develop refinements of the comparison techniques used in the proof of the $C^{1,1}$-version of the theorem [8]. The necessary results from low regularity causality theory are collected in an appendix.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.