text:
# Centrifugal (centripetal), Coriolis’ velocities, accelerations and Hubble’s law in spaces with affine connections and metrics

## 1 Introduction

1. The relative velocity and the relative acceleration between particles or mass elements of a flow are important characteristics for describing the evolution and the motion of a dynamic system. On the other side, the kinematic characteristics related to the relative velocity and the relative acceleration (such as deformation velocity and acceleration, shear velocity and acceleration, rotation velocity and acceleration, and expansion velocity and acceleration) characterize specific relative motions of particles and /or mass elements in a flow $`÷`$. On the basis of the links between the kinematic characteristics related to the relative velocity and these related to the relative acceleration the evolution of a system of particles or mass elements of a flow could be connected to the geometric properties of the corresponding mathematical model of a space or space-time . Many of the notions of classical mechanics or of classical mechanics of continuous media preserve their physical interpretation in more comprehensive spaces than the Euclidean or Minkowskian spaces, considered as mathematical models of space or space-time . On this background, the generalizations of the notions of Coriolis’ and centrifugal (centripetal) accelerations  from classical mechanics in Euclidean spaces are worth to be investigated in spaces with affine connections and metrics \[$`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-spaces\]  $`÷`$ .

2. Usually, the Coriolis’ and centrifugal (centripetal) accelerations are considered as apparent accelerations, generated by the non-inertial motion of the basic vector fields determining a co-ordinate system or a frame of reference in an Euclidean space. In Einstein’s theory of gravitation (ETG) these types of accelerations are considered to be generated by a symmetric affine connection (Riemannian connection) compatible with the corresponding Riemannian metric . In both cases they are considered as corollaries of the non-inertial motion of particles (i.e. of the motion of particles in non-inertial co-ordinate system).

3. In the present paper the notions of Coriolis’ and centrifugal (centripetal) accelerations are considered with respect to their relations with the geometric characteristics of the corresponding models of space or space-time. It appears that accelerations of these types are closely related to the kinematic characteristics of the relative velocity and of the relative acceleration. The main idea is to be found out how a Coriolis’ or centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration acts on a mass element of a flow or on a single particle during its motion in space or space-time described by a space of affine connections and metrics. In Section 1 the notions of centrifugal (centripetal) and Coriolis’ velocities are introduced and considered in $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-spaces. The relations between the kinematic characteristics of the relative velocity and the introduced notions are established. The null (isotropic) vector fields are considered and their relations with the centrifugal (centripetal) velocity are established. The centrifugal (centripetal) velocity is found to be in connection with the Hubble law and the generalized Doppler effect in spaces with affine connections and metrics. In Section 2 the notions of centrifugal (centripetal) and Coriolis’ accelerations are introduced and their relations to the kinematic characteristics of the relative acceleration are found. In Section 3 the interpretation of the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration as gravitational acceleration is given and illustrated on the basis of the Einstein theory of gravitation and especially on the basis of the Schwarzschild metric in vacuum.

4. The main results in the paper are given in details (even in full details) for these readers who are not familiar with the considered problems. The definitions and abbreviations are identical to those used in , , . The reader is kindly asked to refer to them for more details and explanations of the statements and results only cited in this paper.

## 2 Centrifugal (centripetal) and Coriolis’ velocities

Let us now recall some well known facts from kinematics of vector fields over spaces with affine connections and metrics \[$`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$ \- spaces\], considered as models of space or space-time $`÷`$.

Every vector field $`\xi `$ could be represented by the use of a non-isotropic (non-null) vector field $`u`$ and its corresponding contravariant and covariant projective metrics $`h^u`$ and $`h_u`$ in the form

$$\xi =\frac{1}{e}g(u,\xi )u+\overline{g}[h_u(\xi )]\text{ ,}$$
(1)
where

$`h^u`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}uu\text{ , }h_u=g{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}g(u)g(u)\text{ ,}`$ (2)
$`\overline{g}`$ $`=`$ $`g^{ij}e_i.e_j\text{ , }g^{ij}=g^{ji}\text{ , }e_i.e_j={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(e_ie_j+e_je_i)\text{ ,}`$
$`g`$ $`=`$ $`g_{ij}e^i.e^j\text{ , }g_{ij}=g_{ji}\text{ , }e^i.e^j={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(e^ie^j+e^je^i)\text{ ,}`$
$`e`$ $`=`$ $`g(u,u)=g_{\overline{k}\overline{l}}u^ku^l=u_{\overline{k}}u^k=u_ku^{\overline{k}}:0\text{ ,}`$ (3)
$`g(u,\xi )`$ $`=`$ $`g_{\overline{i}\overline{j}}u^i\xi ^j\text{ , }e_i=_i\text{ , }e^j=dx^j\text{ in a co-ordinate basis.}`$ (4)
By means of the representation of $`\xi `$ the notions of relative velocity and relative acceleration are introduced ,  in $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$ \- spaces. By that, the vector field $`\xi `$ has been considered as vector field orthogonal to the vector field $`u`$, i.e. $`g(u,\xi )=0`$, $`\xi =\xi _{}=\overline{g}[h_u(\xi )]`$. Both the fields are considered as tangent vector fields to the corresponding co-ordinates, i.e. they fulfil the condition  $`\mathrm{\pounds }_\xi u=\mathrm{\pounds }_u\xi =[u,\xi ]=0`$, where $`[u,\xi ]=u\xi \xi u`$. Under these preliminary conditions the relative velocity $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v`$ could be found in the form ,

$${}_{rel}{}^{}v=\overline{g}[d(\xi _{})]\text{ ,}$$
(5)
where

$$d=\sigma +\omega +\frac{1}{n1}\theta h_u\text{ .}$$
(6)
The tensor $`d`$ is the deformation velocity tensor; the tensor $`\sigma `$ is the shear velocity tensor; the tensor $`\omega `$ is the rotation velocity tensor; the invariant $`\theta `$ is the expansion velocity invariant. The vector field $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v`$ is interpreted as the relative velocity of two points (mass elements, particles) moving in a space or space-time and having equal proper times $`÷`$. The vector field $`\xi _{}`$ is orthogonal to $`u`$ and is interpreted as deviation vector connecting the two mass elements (particles) (if considered as an infinitesimal vector field).

Let us now consider the representation of the relative velocity by the use of a non-isotropic (non-null) vector field $`\xi _{}`$ (orthogonal to $`u`$) and its corresponding projective metrics

$`h^\xi _{}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{}\xi _{}\text{ ,}`$ (7)
$`h_\xi _{}`$ $`=`$ $`g{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}g(\xi _{})g(\xi _{})\text{ .}`$ (8)
Then a vector field $`v`$ could be represented in the form

$$v=\frac{g(v,\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}+\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(v)]\text{ .}$$
(9)
Therefore, the relative velocity $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v`$ could be now written in the form

$${}_{rel}{}^{}v=\frac{g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}+\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v)]=v_z+v_c\text{ ,}$$
(10)
where

$$v_z=\frac{g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}\text{ , }v_c=\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v)]\text{ .}$$
(11)
The vector field $`v_z`$ is collinear to the vector field $`\xi _{}`$. If the factor (invariant) before $`\xi _{}`$ is positive, i.e. if

$$\frac{g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}>0\text{ }$$
(12)
the vector field $`v_z`$ is called centrifugal velocity. If the factor (invariant) before $`\xi _{}`$ is negative, i.e. if

$$\frac{g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}<0$$
(13)
the vector field $`v_z`$ is called centripetal velocity.

The vector field $`v_c`$ is called Coriolis’ velocity.

### 2.1 Centrifugal (centripetal) velocity

##### Properties of the centrifugal (centripetal) velocity

(a) Since $`v_z`$ is collinear to $`\xi _{}`$, it is orthogonal to the vector field $`u`$, i.e.

$$g(u,v_z)=0\text{ .}$$
(14)
(b) The centrifugal (centripetal) velocity $`v_z`$ is orthogonal to the Coriolis velocity $`v_c`$

$$g(v_z,v_c)=0\text{ .}$$
(15)
(c) The length of the vector $`v_z`$ could be found by means of the relation

$`g(v_z,v_z)`$ $`=`$ $`v_z^2=g({\displaystyle \frac{g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{},{\displaystyle \frac{g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{})=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})^2}}g(\xi _{},\xi _{})={\displaystyle \frac{[g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}={\displaystyle \frac{[g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})]^2}{\xi _{}^2}}\text{ .}`$
From the last expression we can conclude that the square of the length of the centrifugal (centripetal) velocity is in general in inverse proportion to the length of the vector field $`\xi _{}`$.

Special case: $`M_n:=E_n`$, $`n=3`$ (3-dimensional Euclidean space): $`\xi _{}=\stackrel{}{r}`$, $`g(\xi _{},\xi _{})=r^2`$

$$v_z^2=\frac{[g(\stackrel{}{r},_{rel}\stackrel{}{v})]^2}{r^2}\text{ , }l_{v_z}=\sqrt{v_z^2}=\frac{g(\stackrel{}{r},_{rel}\stackrel{}{v})}{r}\text{ .}$$
(17)
If the relative velocity $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v`$ is equal to zero then $`v_z=0`$.

(d) The scalar product between $`v_z`$ and $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v`$ could be found in its explicit form by the use of the explicit form of the relative velocity $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v`$

$${}_{rel}{}^{}v=\overline{g}[d(\xi _{})]=\overline{g}[\sigma (\xi _{})]+\overline{g}[\omega (\xi _{})]+\frac{1}{n1}\theta \xi _{}\text{ ,}$$
(18)
and the relations

$$g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)=g(\xi _{},\overline{g}[\sigma (\xi _{})])+\overline{g}(\xi _{},\overline{g}[\omega (\xi _{})])+\frac{1}{n1}\theta g(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ ,}$$
(19)
$`g(\xi _{},\overline{g}[\sigma (\xi _{})])`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ ,}`$ (20)
$`\overline{g}(\xi _{},\overline{g}[\omega (\xi _{})])`$ $`=`$ $`\omega (\xi _{},\xi _{})=0\text{ ,}`$ (21)
$`g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta g(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}`$ (22)
For

$`g(v_z,_{rel}v)`$ $`=`$ $`g({\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}.\xi _{},_{rel}v)={\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)=`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}=v_z^2\text{ ,}`$
it follows that

$$g(v_z,_{rel}v)=g(v_z,v_z)=v_z^2\text{ .}$$
(24)
Remark. $`g(v_z,_{rel}v)=g(v_z,v_z)=v_z^2`$ because of $`g(v_z,_{rel}v)=g(v_z,v_z+v_c)=g(v_z,v_z)+g(v_z,v_c)=g(v_z,v_z)`$.

On the other side, we can express $`v_z^2`$ by the use of the kinematic characteristics of the relative velocity $`\sigma `$, $`\omega `$, and $`\theta `$

$`v_z^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}[\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta g(\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\{[\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n1)^2}}\theta ^2[g(\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n1}}\theta \sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})g(\xi _{},\xi _{})\}\text{ ,}`$
$`v_z^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n1)^2}}\theta ^2g(\xi _{},\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n1}}\theta \sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}`$ (25)
Special case: $`\theta :=0`$ (expansion-free relative velocity)

$$v_z^2=\frac{[\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}=\frac{[\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{\xi _{}^2}=\frac{[\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{l_\xi _{}^2}\text{ ,}$$
(26)
$`g(\xi _{},\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`l_\xi _{}^2\text{ ,}`$ (27)
$`g(\xi _{},\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`l_\xi _{}^2\text{ }\text{if }g(u,u)=e=+l_u^2\text{ ,}`$ (28)
$`g(\xi _{},\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`+l_\xi _{}^2\text{ }\text{if }g(u,u)=e=l_u^2\text{ .}`$ (29)
Special case: $`\sigma :=0`$ (shear-free relative velocity)

$$v_z^2=\frac{1}{(n1)^2}\theta ^2g(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}$$
(30)
(e) The explicit form of $`v_z`$ could be found as

$`v_z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}[\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta g(\xi _{},\xi _{})]\xi _{}=`$
$`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta ]\xi _{}\text{ ,}`$
$`v_z`$ $`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta +{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}]\xi _{}\text{ .}`$ (31)
If

$$\frac{1}{n1}\theta +\frac{\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}>0\text{ , }\xi _{}^2=g(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ ,}$$
(32)
we have a centrifugal (relative) velocity.

If

$$\frac{1}{n1}\theta +\frac{\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}<0\text{ ,}$$
(33)
we have a centripetal (relative) velocity.

Special case: $`\theta :=0`$ (expansion-free relative velocity)

$$v_z=\frac{\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}\text{ .}$$
(34)
Special case: $`\sigma :=0`$ (shear-free relative velocity)

$$v_z=\frac{1}{n1}\theta \xi _{}\text{ .}$$
(35)
If the expansion invariant $`\theta >0`$ we have centrifugal (or expansion) (relative) velocity. If the expansion invariant $`\theta <0`$ we have centripetal (or contraction) (relative) velocity. Therefore, in the case of a shear-free relative velocity $`v_z`$ is proportional to the expansion velocity invariant $`\theta `$.

If we introduce the vector field $`n_{}`$, normal to $`u`$ and normalized, as

$`n_{}`$ $`:`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{}}{l_\xi _{}}}\text{ , }g(\xi _{},\xi _{})=l_\xi _{}^2\text{ , }\xi _{}=l_\xi _{}n_{}\text{ ,}`$ (36)
$`l_\xi _{}`$ $`=`$ $`g(\xi _{},\xi _{})^{1/2}\text{ , }g(n_{},n_{})=1\text{ .}`$ (37)
then the above expressions with $`\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})/`$ $`g(\xi _{},\xi _{})`$ could be written in the forms:

$$v_z=[\frac{1}{n1}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})]\xi _{}\text{ ,}$$
(38)
$$\theta :=0:v_z=\sigma (n_{},n_{})\xi _{}\text{ ,}$$
(39)
The centrifugal (centripetal) relative velocity $`v_z`$ could be also written in the form

$`v_z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g(_{rel}v,\xi _)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{}={\displaystyle \frac{g(_{rel}v,\xi _)}{l_\xi _{}^2}}\xi _{}=`$ (40)
$`=`$ $`g(_{rel}v,{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{}}{l_\xi _{}}}){\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{}}{l_\xi _{}}}=g(_{rel}v,n_{})n_{}\text{ .}`$
On the other side, on the basis of the relations

$`{}_{rel}{}^{}v`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}[d(\xi _{})]=\overline{g}[\sigma (\xi _{})]+\overline{g}[\omega (\xi _{})]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta \xi _{}\text{ ,}`$
$`\overline{g}[h_u(\xi )]`$ $`=`$ $`\xi _{}\text{ , }\overline{g}[h_u(\xi _{})]=\overline{g}[h_u(\overline{g}[h_u(\xi )])]=\overline{g}[h_u(\xi )]=\xi _{}\text{ ,}`$
$`g(\overline{g}[\sigma (\xi _{})],n_{})`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma (n_{},\xi _{})=\sigma (n_{},l_\xi _{}n_{})=l_\xi _{}\sigma (n_{},n_{})\text{ ,}`$
$`g(\overline{g}[\omega (\xi _{})],n_{})`$ $`=`$ $`\omega (n_{},\xi _{})=\omega (n_{},l_\xi _{}n_{})=l_\xi _{}\omega (n_{},n_{})=0\text{ ,}`$
$`g(\xi _{},n_{})`$ $`=`$ $`l_\xi _{}g(n_{},n_{})=l_\xi _{}\text{ ,}`$
it follows for $`g(_{rel}v,n_{})`$

$$g(_{rel}v,n_{})=[\sigma (n_{},n_{})\frac{1}{n1}\theta ]l_\xi _{}\text{ ,}$$
(41)
and for $`v_z`$

$`v_z`$ $`=`$ $`g(_{rel}v,n_{})n_{}=[\sigma (n_{},n_{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta ]l_\xi _{}n_{}\text{ ,}`$
$`v_z`$ $`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})]l_\xi _{}n_{}\text{ .}`$ (42)
Since $`l_\xi _{}>0`$, we have three different cases:

(a)

$`v_z`$ $`>`$ $`0:\sigma (n_{},n_{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta >0:`$
$`\theta `$ $`>`$ $`\pm (n1)\sigma (n_{},n_{})\text{ , }n1>0\text{ .}`$
(b)

$`v_z`$ $`<`$ $`0:\sigma (n_{},n_{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta <0:`$
$`\theta `$ $`<`$ $`\pm (n1)\sigma (n_{},n_{})\text{ , }n1>0\text{ .}`$
(c)

$`v_z`$ $`=`$ $`0:\sigma (n_{},n_{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta =0:`$
$`\theta `$ $`=`$ $`\pm (n1)\sigma (n_{},n_{})\text{ , }n1>0\text{ .}`$
Special case: $`\sigma :=0`$ (shear-free relative velocity)

$$v_z=\frac{1}{n1}\theta l_\xi _{}n_{}\text{ .}$$

For $`v_z>0:\theta >0`$ we have an expansion, for $`v_z<0:\theta <0`$ we have a contraction, and for $`v_z=0:\theta =0`$ we have a stationary case.

Special case: $`\theta :=0`$ (expansion-free relative velocity)

$$v_z=\sigma (n_{},n_{})l_\xi _{}n_{}\text{ .}$$

For $`v_z>0:\sigma (n_{},n_{})>0`$ we have an expansion, for $`v_z<0:\sigma (n_{},n_{})<0`$ we have a contraction, and for $`v_z=0:\sigma (n_{},n_{})=0`$ we have a stationary case.

In an analogous way we can find the explicit form of $`v_z^2`$ as

$`v_z^2`$ $`=`$ $`\{[\sigma (n_{},n_{})]^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n1)^2}}\theta ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n1}}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})\}l_\xi _{}^2=`$ (43)
$`=`$ $`[\sigma (n_{},n_{}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta ]^2l_\xi _{}^2\text{ .}`$ (44)
The expression for $`v_z^2`$ could be now written in the form

$$v_z^2=H^2l_\xi _{}^2=l_{v_z}^2\text{ ,}$$
(45)
where

$$H^2=[\sigma (n_{},n_{})\frac{1}{n1}\theta ]^2\text{ .}$$
(46)
Then

$`l_{v_z}^2`$ $`=`$ $`H^2l_\xi _{}^2\text{ , }l_{v_z}=Hl_\xi _{}\text{ , }l_{v_z}>0\text{ .}`$ (47)
$`H`$ $`=`$ $`[\sigma (n_{},n_{}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta ]=`$ (48)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})\text{.}`$ (49)
and

$$v_z=\pm l_{v_z}n_{}=\pm Hl_\xi _{}n_{}=Hl_\xi _{}n_{}=H\xi _{}\text{ .}$$
(50)
It follows from the last expression that the centrifugal (centripetal) relative velocity $`v_z`$ is collinear to the vector field $`\xi _{}`$. Its absolute value $`l_{v_z}=Hl_\xi _{}`$ and the expression for the centrifugal (centripetal) relative velocity $`v_z=Hl_\xi _{}n_{}=H\xi _{}`$ represent generalizations of the Hubble law . The function $`H`$ could be called Hubble function (some authors call it Hubble coefficient ). Since $`H=H(x^k(\tau ))=H(\tau )`$, for a given proper time $`\tau =\tau _0`$ the function $`H`$ has at the time $`\tau _0`$ the value $`H(\tau _0)=H(\tau =\tau _0)=`$const. The Hubble function $`H`$ is usually called Hubble constant.

Remark. The Hubble coefficient $`H`$ has dimension $`sec^1`$. The function $`H^1`$ with dimension $`sec`$ is usually denoted in astrophysics as Hubble’s time .

The Hubble function $`H`$ could also be represented in the forms

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})=`$ (51)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[(n_{})(h_u)(_u\overline{g}\mathrm{\pounds }_u\overline{g})(h_u)(n_{})]\text{ .}`$
In the Einstein theory of gravitation (ETG) the Hubble coefficient is considered under the condition that the centrifugal relative velocity is generated by a shear-free relative velocity in a cosmological model of the type of Robertson-Walker , i.e.

$$v_z=Hl_\xi _{}n_{}=H\xi _{}\text{ with }H=\frac{1}{n1}\theta \text{ and }\sigma =0\text{ .}$$
(52)
Special case: $`U_n`$ \- or $`V_n`$-space: $`_u\overline{g}=0`$, $`\mathrm{\pounds }_u\overline{g}:=0`$ (the vector field $`u`$ is a Killing vector field in the corresponding space)

$$H=0\text{ .}$$

Therefore, in a (pseudo) Riemannian space with or without torsion ($`U_n`$\- or $`V_n`$\- space) the Hubble function $`H`$ is equal to zero if the velocity vector field $`u`$ ($`n=4`$) of an observer is a Killing vector field fulfilling the Killing equation $`\mathrm{\pounds }_u\overline{g}=0`$. This means that the condition $`\mathrm{\pounds }_u\overline{g}=0`$ is a sufficient condition for the Hubble function to be equal to zero.

Special case: $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-space with $`_u\overline{g}\mathrm{\pounds }_u\overline{g}:=0`$ . For this case, the last expression appears as a sufficient condition for the vanishing of the Hubble function $`H`$, i.e. $`H=0`$ if $`_u\overline{g}=\mathrm{\pounds }_u\overline{g}`$.

Special case: $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-spaces with vanishing centrifugal (centripetal) velocity: $`v_z:=0`$.

$`v_z`$ $`:`$ $`=0:H=0:{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})=0\text{ ,}`$
$`\theta `$ $`=`$ $`\pm (n1)\sigma (n_{},n_{})\text{ .}`$
Remark. The Hubble function $`H`$ is introduced in the above considerations only on a purely kinematic basis related to the notions of relative velocity and centrifugal (centripetal) relative velocity. Its dynamic interpretation in a theory of gravitation depends on the structure of the theory and the relations between the field equations and the Hubble function.

### 2.2 Generalized Hubble’s law and centrifugal (centripetal) relative velocity

#### 2.2.1 Null (isotropic) vector fields in spaces with affine connections and metrics

The null (isotropic) vector fields are used in all cases where a radiation process and its corresponding radiation has to be described in relativistic mechanics and electrodynamics as well as in Einstein’s theory of gravitation . The null (isotropic) vector fields are related to the wave vector of the classical electrodynamics and used for an invariant description of wave propagation in different types of spaces or space-times.

Definition. A null (isotropic) vector filed is a contravariant vector field $`k:\mathrm{𝟎}T(M)`$ with zero length $`l_k=g(k,k)^{1/2}=0`$.

Remark. Since

$$k^2=g(k,k)=0=\pm l_k^2\text{ }$$

we have $`l_k=k=g(k,k)^{1/2}=0`$.

As a contravariant vector field the null vector field $`k`$ could be represented by its projections along and orthogonal to a given non-isotropic (non-null) vector field $`u`$

$$k=\frac{1}{e}g(u,k)u+\overline{g}[h_u(k)]\text{ ,}$$

where

$$e=g(u,u)=\pm l_u^2:0\text{ .}$$

The invariant (scalar product of $`u`$ and $`k`$) $`g(u,k):=\omega `$ is interpreted as the frequency $`\omega `$ of the radiation related to the null vector $`k`$ and detected by an observer with velocity $`u`$

$$g(u,k)=\omega :=2\pi \nu \text{ .}$$
(53)
The contravariant non-isotropic (non-null) vector field $`u`$ and its corresponding vector field $`\xi _{}`$, orthogonal to $`u`$ \[$`g(u,\xi _{})=0`$\], could be written in the forms

$`u`$ $`=`$ $`l_un_{}\text{ , }l_u>0\text{ ,}`$ (54)
$`\text{ }g(u,u)`$ $`=`$ $`l_u^2g(n_{},n_{})=\pm l_u^2\text{ ,}`$ (55)
$`g(n_{},n_{})`$ $`=`$ $`\pm 1\text{ ,}`$ (56)
$`\xi _{}`$ $`=`$ $`l_\xi _{}n_{}\text{ , }l_\xi _{}>0\text{ ,}`$ (57)
$`g(\xi _{},\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`l_\xi _{}^2g(n_{},n_{})=l_\xi _{}^2\text{ ,}`$ (58)
$`g(n_{},n_{})`$ $`=`$ $`1\text{ .}`$ (59)
The vector fields $`n_{}`$ and $`n_{}`$ are normalized unit vector fields orthogonal to each other, i.e.

$$g(n_{},n_{})=0\text{ .}$$
(60)
Proof. From $`g(u,\xi _{})=0=g(l_un_{},l_\xi _{}n_{})=l_ul_\xi _{}g(n_{},n_{})`$ and $`l_u0`$, $`l_\xi _{}0`$, it follows that $`g(n_{},n_{})=0`$.

By the use of the unit vector fields $`n_{}`$ and $`n_{}`$ the null vector field $`k`$ could be written in the form

$$k=k_{}+k_{}\text{ , }g(k_{},k_{})=0\text{ ,}$$
(61)
where

$$k_{}=\frac{\omega }{e}u=\pm \frac{\omega }{l_u^2}l_un_{}=\pm \frac{\omega }{l_u}n_{}\text{ .}$$
(62)
$`k_{}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}[h_u(k)]=k{\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{l_u}}n_{}=l_k_{}n_{}\text{ ,}`$ (63)
$`g(k_{},k_{})`$ $`=`$ $`l_k_{}^2=l_k_{}^2g(n_{},n_{})\text{ ,}`$ (64)
$`g(k,k)`$ $`=`$ $`g(k_{},k_{})+g(k_{},k_{})=`$ (65)
$`=`$ $`g(k_{},k_{})+g(\pm {\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{l_u}}n_{},\pm {\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{l_u}}n_{})=`$
$`=`$ $`l_k_{}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2}{l_u^2}}g(n_{},n_{})=l_k_{}^2\pm {\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2}{l_u^2}}=0\text{ ,}`$
$$l_k_{}^2=\frac{\omega ^2}{l_u^2}\text{ , }l_k_{}^2=\text{ }\frac{\omega ^2}{l_u^2}\text{ , }l_k_{}=\frac{\omega }{l_u}\text{ , }$$
(66)
$$k_{}=\frac{\omega }{l_u}n_{}\text{,}$$
(67)
$$k=\frac{\omega }{l_u}(\pm n_{}n_{})\text{ , }g(k,k)=0\text{ .}$$
(68)
#### 2.2.2 Centrifugal (centripetal) relative velocity and null vector fields

The frequency $`\omega `$ of the radiation related to the null vector field $`k`$ and detected by an observer with velocity vector field $`u`$ has been determined as the projection of the non-isotropic (non-null) velocity vector field $`u`$ at the vector field $`k`$ (or vice versa): $`\omega =g(u,k)`$. In an analogous way, the projection of the centrifugal (centripetal) relative velocity $`v_z`$ at the part of $`k`$, orthogonal to $`u`$, (or vice versa) could be interpreted as the change $`{}_{rel}{}^{}\omega :=g(v_z,k_{})`$ of the frequency $`\overline{\omega }`$ of the emitter under the motion of the observer described by the centrifugal (centripetal) relative velocity $`v_z`$. By the use of the relations

$`g(u,k)`$ $`=`$ $`\omega \text{ , }g(n_{},k_{})={\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{l_u}}\text{ ,}`$
$`v_z`$ $`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})]l_\xi _{}n_{}\text{ ,}`$
the projection $`g(v_z,k_{})`$ of $`v_z`$ at $`k_{}`$ could be found in the form

$`{}_{rel}{}^{}\omega `$ $`=`$ $`g(v_z,k_{})=[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})]l_\xi _{}g(n_{},k_{})=`$ (69)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{l_u}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})]l_\xi _{}\text{ .}`$ (70)
If we introduce the abbreviation for the Hubble function

$$H=\frac{1}{n1}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})$$
(71)
then the expression for $`{}_{rel}{}^{}\omega `$ could be written in the form

$${}_{rel}{}^{}\omega =H\frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u}\omega \text{ .}$$
(72)
As mentioned above, the frequency $`\omega `$ is the frequency detected by the observer with the velocity vector field $`u`$. The frequency of the emitter $`\overline{\omega }`$ could be find by the use of the relation between $`\omega `$ and $`\overline{\omega }`$ on the basis of the expression of the change of $`\omega `$ under the centrifugal (centripetal) motion \[described by the centrifugal (centripetal) velocity $`v_z`$\] as

$$\overline{\omega }=\omega +_{rel}\omega \text{ , }\omega =\overline{\omega }_{rel}\omega \text{ .}$$
(73)
Therefore, the radiation with frequency $`\overline{\omega }`$ by the emitter could be expressed as

$$\overline{\omega }=\omega +_{rel}\omega =\omega +H\frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u}\omega =(1+H\frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u})\omega $$
(74)
and it will be detected by the observer as the frequency $`\omega `$. The relative difference between both the frequencies (emitted $`\overline{\omega }`$ and detected $`\omega `$)

$$\frac{\overline{\omega }\omega }{\omega }:=\frac{\omega }{\omega }$$

appears in the form

$$\frac{\omega }{\omega }=\frac{\overline{\omega }\omega }{\omega }=H\frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u}\text{.}$$
(75)
If we introduce the abbreviation

$$z:=H\frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u}\text{ }$$
(76)
we obtain the relation between the emitted frequency $`\overline{\omega }`$ and the frequency detected by the observer in the form

$$\frac{\overline{\omega }\omega }{\omega }=z\text{}\overline{\omega }=(1+z)\omega \text{ .}$$
(77)
The quantity $`z`$ could be denoted as observed shift frequency parameter.

If $`z=0`$ then $`H=0`$ and there will be no difference between the emitted and detected frequencies: $`\overline{\omega }=\omega `$, i.e. for $`z=0`$ $`\overline{\omega }=\omega `$. This will be the case if

$$\theta =\pm (n1)\sigma (n_{},n_{})\text{.}$$
(78)
If $`z>0`$ the observed shift frequency parameter is called red shift. If $`z<0`$ the observed shift frequency parameter is called blue shift. If $`\overline{\omega }`$ and $`\omega `$ are known the observed shift frequency parameter $`z`$ could be found. If $`w`$ and $`z`$ are given then the corresponding $`\overline{\omega }`$ could be estimated.

On the other side, from the explicit form of $`z`$

$$z=H\frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u}=[\frac{1}{n1}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})]\frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u}$$
(79)
we could find the relation between the observed shift frequency parameter $`z`$ and the kinematic characteristics of the relative velocity such as the expansion and shear velocities.

Special case: $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-spaces with shear-free relative velocity: $`\sigma :=0`$.

$$z=\frac{1}{n1}\theta \frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u}\text{ , }H=\frac{1}{n1}\theta \text{.}$$
(80)
Special case: $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-spaces with expansion-free relative velocity: $`\theta :=0`$.

$$z=\sigma (n_{},n_{})\frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u}\text{}H=\sigma (n_{},n_{})\text{.}$$
(81)
On the grounds of the observed shift frequency parameter $`z`$ the distance (the length $`l_\xi _{}`$ of $`\xi _{}`$) between the observer \[with the world line $`x^i(\tau )`$ and velocity vector field $`u=\frac{d}{d\tau }`$\] and the observed object (at a distance $`l_\xi _{}`$ from the observer) emitted radiation with null vector field $`k`$ could be found as

$$l_\xi _{}=z\frac{l_u}{H}=\frac{\overline{\omega }\omega }{\omega }\frac{l_u}{H}\text{.}$$
(82)
On the other side, if $`z`$, $`H`$, and $`l_\xi _{}`$ are known the absolute value $`l_u`$ of the velocity vector $`u`$ could be found as

$$l_u=\frac{H}{z}l_\xi _{}=\frac{H\omega }{\overline{\omega }\omega }l_\xi _{}\text{ .}$$
(83)
Remark. In the Einstein theory of gravitation (ETG) the absolute value of $`u`$ is usually normalized to $`1`$ or $`c`$, i.e. $`l_u=1,c`$. Then the last expression could be used for experimental check up of the velocity $`c`$ of light in vacuum if $`z`$, $`H`$, and $`l_\xi _{}`$ are known

$$c=\frac{H}{z}l_\xi _{}=\frac{H\omega }{\overline{\omega }\omega }l_\xi _{}\text{.}$$
(84)
Since

$$z=[\frac{1}{n1}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})]\frac{l_\xi _{}}{l_u}=\frac{\overline{\omega }\omega }{\omega }$$

it follows that

$$l_u=\frac{\omega }{\overline{\omega }\omega }[\frac{1}{n1}\theta \sigma (n_{},n_{})]l_\xi _{}\text{.}$$
(85)
Analogous expression we can find for the length $`l_\xi _{}`$ of the vector field $`\xi _{}`$

$$l_\xi _{}=(n1)(\frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }1)\frac{l_u}{\theta (n1)\sigma (n_{},n_{})}\text{.}$$
(86)
Special case: $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-space with shear-free relative velocity: $`\sigma :=0`$.

$$l_u=\frac{\omega }{\overline{\omega }\omega }\frac{1}{n1}\theta l_\xi _{}\text{,}$$
(87)
$$l_\xi _{}=(n1)(\frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }1)\frac{l_u}{\theta }\text{.}$$
(88)
Special case: $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-space with expansion-free relative velocity: $`\theta :=0`$.

$$l_u=\frac{\omega }{\overline{\omega }\omega }\sigma (n_{},n_{})l_\xi _{}\text{,}$$
(89)
$$l_\xi _{}=(\frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }1)\frac{l_u}{\sigma (n_{},n_{})}\text{.}$$
(90)
By the use of the relation between the Hubble function $`H`$ and the observed shift parameter $`z`$ we can express the centrifugal (centripetal) velocity by means of the frequencies $`\overline{\omega }`$ and $`\omega `$. From

$$v_z=Hl_\xi _{}n_{}\text{ , }H=z\frac{l_u}{l_\xi _{}}=(\frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }1)\frac{l_u}{l_\xi _{}}\text{ ,}$$

it follows that

$$v_z=zl_un_{}=(\frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }1)l_un_{}\text{.}$$
(91)
Then

$$g(v_z,v_z)=(\frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }1)^2l_u^2=l_{v_z}^2\text{ ,}$$

$`l_{v_z}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm ({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }}1)l_u\text{ , }\pm l_{v_z}=({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }}1)l_u\text{,}`$ (92)
$`l_{v_z}`$ $`>`$ $`0\text{ , }l_u>0\text{}l_\xi _{}>0\text{,}`$ (93)
where (since $`l_{v_z}>0`$)

$`\overline{\omega }`$ $`>`$ $`\omega :l_{v_z}=({\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }}1)l_u\text{ ,}`$ (94)
$`\overline{\omega }`$ $`<`$ $`\omega :l_{v_z}=(1{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }})l_u\text{.}`$ (95)
On the other side, we can express the relation between $`\overline{\omega }`$ and $`\omega `$ by means of the last relations:

$$\frac{\overline{\omega }}{\omega }=1\pm \frac{l_{v_z}}{l_u}\text{ , }\overline{\omega }=(1\pm \frac{l_{v_z}}{l_u})\omega \text{,}$$
(96)
$`\overline{\omega }`$ $`>`$ $`\omega :\text{ }\overline{\omega }=(1+{\displaystyle \frac{l_{v_z}}{l_u}})\omega \text{,}`$ (97)
$`\overline{\omega }`$ $`<`$ $`\omega :\overline{\omega }=(1{\displaystyle \frac{l_{v_z}}{l_u}})\omega \text{.}`$ (98)
If we express the frequencies as $`\overline{\omega }=2\pi \overline{\nu }`$ and $`\omega =2\pi \nu `$ we obtain

$`\overline{\nu }`$ $`>`$ $`\nu :\text{ }\overline{\nu }=(1+{\displaystyle \frac{l_{v_z}}{l_u}})\nu \text{,}`$ (99)
$`\overline{\nu }`$ $`<`$ $`\omega :\overline{\nu }=(1{\displaystyle \frac{l_{v_z}}{l_u}})\nu \text{.}`$ (100)
The last relations represent a generalization of the Doppler effect in $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-spaces.

It should be stressed that the generalized Doppler effect is a result of pure kinematic considerations of the properties of a null (isotropic) vector field by means of the kinematic characteristics of the relative velocity in spaces with affine connections and metrics. The Hubble function $`H`$, the observed shift frequency parameter $`z`$ are kinematic characteristics related to the centrifugal (centripetal) relative velocity. For different classic field theories they could have different relations to the dynamic variables of the corresponding theory.

### 2.3 Coriolis’ velocity

The vector field

$$v_c=\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v)]=g^{ij}(h_\xi _{})_{\overline{j}\overline{k}}{}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{k}_i\text{ }$$
(101)
is called Coriolis’ velocity.

##### Properties of the Coriolis’ velocity

(a) The Coriolis velocity is orthogonal to the vector field $`u`$, interpreted as velocity of a mass element (particle), i.e.

$$g(u,v_c)=0\text{ .}$$
(102)
Proof: From the definition of the Coriolis velocity, it follows

$`g(u,v_c)`$ $`=`$ $`g(u,\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v)]=g_{\overline{i}\overline{j}}u^ig^{jk}(h_\xi _{})_{\overline{k}\overline{l}}{}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{l}=`$
$`=`$ $`g_{\overline{i}\overline{j}}g^{jk}u^i(h_\xi _{})_{\overline{k}\overline{l}}{}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{l}=g_i^ku^i(h_\xi _{})_{\overline{k}\overline{l}}{}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{l}=`$
$`=`$ $`(h_\xi _{})_{\overline{k}\overline{l}}u^k{}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{l}=(u)(h_\xi _{})(_{rel}v)\text{ .}`$
Since

$`(u)(h_\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`(h_\xi _{})_{\overline{k}\overline{l}}u^kdx^l=(u)(g){\displaystyle \frac{1}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}(u)[g(\xi _{})]g(\xi _{})=`$ (104)
$`=`$ $`g(u){\displaystyle \frac{1}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}g(u,\xi _{})g(\xi _{})=g(u)\text{ ,}`$
$`\text{ }g(u,\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`0\text{ ,}`$
then $`(u)(h_\xi _{})(_{rel}v)=[g(u)](_{rel}v)=g(u,_{rel}v)=0`$. Because of $`g(u,_{rel}v)=0`$, it follows that $`g(u,v_c)=0`$.

(b) The Coriolis velocity $`v_c`$ is orthogonal to the centrifugal (centripetal) velocity $`v_z`$

$$g(v_c,v_z)=0\text{ .}$$
(105)
(c) The length of the vector $`v_c`$ could be found by the use of the relations:

$`v_c`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v)]\text{,}`$
$`h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v)`$ $`=`$ $`g(_{rel}v){\displaystyle \frac{1}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}[g(\xi _{})](_{rel}v)g(\xi _{})=`$ (106)
$`=`$ $`g(_{rel}v){\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}g(\xi _{})\text{ ,}`$
$`[g(\xi _{})](_{rel}v)`$ $`=`$ $`g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)\text{ ,}`$
$$v_c=\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v)]={}_{rel}{}^{}v\frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}\text{ ,}$$
(107)
$`g(v_c,v_c)`$ $`=`$ $`v_c^2=g(_{rel}v{\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{},_{rel}v{\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{})=`$
$`=`$ $`g(_{rel}v,_{rel}v){\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}g(\xi _{},_{rel}v){\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}g(_{rel}v,\xi _{})+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{[g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\text{ ,}`$
$$g(v_c,v_c)=v_c^2=g(_{rel}v,_{rel}v)\frac{[g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\text{ .}$$
(108)
On the other side, because of $`(u)(h_u)=h_u(u)=0`$, and $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v=\overline{g}[h_u(_u\xi _{})]`$, it follows that

$$g(u,_{rel}v)=h_u(u,_u\xi _{})=(u)(h_u)(_u\xi _{})\text{ ,}$$

$$g(u,_{rel}v)=(u)(h_u)(_u\xi _{})=0\text{ .}$$
(109)
Since

$`g(_{rel}v,_{rel}v)`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}=g(\overline{g}[d(\xi _{})],\overline{g}[d(\xi _{})])\text{=}`$ (110)
$`=`$ $`\overline{g}(d(\xi _{}),d(\xi _{}))\text{ , }\mathrm{\pounds }_u\xi _{}=0\text{ ,}`$
$`\overline{g}(d(\xi _{}),d(\xi _{}))`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{})+\omega (\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta g(\xi _{}),`$
$`\sigma (\xi _{})+\omega (\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta g(\xi _{}))`$
we obtain

$`g(_{rel}v,_{rel}v)`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}=\overline{g}(d(\xi _{}),d(\xi _{}))=`$ (111)
$`=`$ $`\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{}),\sigma (\xi _{}))+\overline{g}(\omega (\xi _{}),\omega (\xi _{}))+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n1)^2}}\theta ^2g(\xi _{},\xi _{})+`$
$`+2\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{}),\omega (\xi _{}))+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n1}}\theta \sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}`$
Special case: $`\sigma :=0`$, $`\theta :=0`$ (shear-free and expansion-free velocity).

$${}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}=\overline{g}(\omega (\xi _{}),\omega (\xi _{}))\text{ .}$$
(112)
Special case: $`\omega :=0`$ (rotation-free velocity).

$${}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}=\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{}),\sigma (\xi _{}))+\frac{1}{(n1)^2}\theta ^2g(\xi _{},\xi _{})+\frac{2}{n1}\theta \sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}$$
(113)
Special case: $`\theta :=0`$, $`\omega :=0`$ (expansion-free and rotation-free velocity).

$${}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}=\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{}),\sigma (\xi _{}))\text{ .}$$
(114)
Special case: $`\sigma :=0`$, $`\omega :=0`$ (shear-free and rotation-free velocity).

$${}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}=\frac{1}{(n1)^2}\theta ^2g(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}$$
(115)
Special case: $`\theta :=0`$ (expansion-free velocity).

$${}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}=\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{}),\sigma (\xi _{}))+\overline{g}(\omega (\xi _{}),\omega (\xi _{}))+2\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{}),\omega (\xi _{}))\text{ .}$$
(116)
The square $`v_c^2`$ of $`v_c`$ could be found on the basis of the relation $`v_c^2={}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}v_z^2`$

$`v_c^2`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}v_z^2=\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{}),\sigma (\xi _{})){\displaystyle \frac{[\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}+`$ (117)
$`+\overline{g}(\omega (\xi _{}),\omega (\xi _{}))+2\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{}),\omega (\xi _{}))\text{ .}`$
Therefore, the length of $`v_c`$ does not depend on the expansion velocity invariant $`\theta `$.

Special case: $`\sigma :=0`$ (shear-free velocity).

$$v_c^2=\overline{g}(\omega (\xi _{}),\omega (\xi _{}))\text{ .}$$
(118)
Special case: $`\omega :=0`$ (rotation-free velocity).

$$v_c^2=\overline{g}(\sigma (\xi _{}),\sigma (\xi _{}))\frac{[\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\text{ .}$$
(119)
Therefore, even if the rotation velocity tensor $`\omega `$ is equal to zero $`(\omega =0)`$, the Coriolis (relative) velocity $`v_c`$ is not equal to zero if $`\sigma 0`$.

(d) The scalar product between $`v_c`$ and $`{}_{rel}{}^{}v`$ could be found in its explicit form by the use of the relations:

$$g(v_c,_{rel}v)=h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v,_{rel}v)={}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}\frac{[g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}={}_{rel}{}^{}v_{}^{2}v_z^2=v_c^2\text{ .}$$
(120)
(e) The explicit form of $`v_c`$ could be found by the use of the relations

$$v_c=\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v)]={}_{rel}{}^{}v\frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}v)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}={}_{rel}{}^{}vv_z\text{ ,}$$

$$v_c=\overline{g}[\sigma (\xi _{})]\frac{\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}+\overline{g}[\omega (\xi _{})]\text{ .}$$
(121)
Therefore, the Coriolis velocity does not depend on the expansion velocity invariant $`\theta `$.

Special case: $`\sigma :=0`$ (shear-free velocity).

$$v_c=\overline{g}[\omega (\xi _{})]\text{ .}$$
(122)
Special case: $`\omega :=0`$ (rotation-free velocity).

$$v_c=\overline{g}[\sigma (\xi _{})]\frac{\sigma (\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}\text{ .}$$
(123)
(f) The Coriolis velocity $`v_c`$ is orthogonal to the deviation vector $`\xi _{}`$, i.e. $`g(v_c,\xi _{})=0`$.

Proof: From $`g(v_c,\xi _{})=g(\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}v)],\xi _{})=h_\xi _{}(\xi _{},_{rel}v)=(\xi _{})(h_\xi _{})(_{rel}v)`$ and $`(\xi _{})(h_\xi _{})=0`$, it follows that

$$g(v_c,\xi _{})=0.$$
(124)
## 3 Centrifugal (centripetal) and Coriolis’ accelerations

In analogous way as in the case of centrifugal (centripetal) and Coriolis’ velocities, the corresponding accelerations could be defined by the use of the projections of the relative acceleration $`{}_{rel}{}^{}a=\overline{g}[h_u(_u_u\xi _{})]`$ along or orthogonal to the vector field $`\xi _{}`$

$${}_{rel}{}^{}a=\frac{g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}+\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)]=a_z+a_c\text{ ,}$$
(125)
where

$$a_z=\frac{g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{}\text{ ,}$$
(126)
$$a_c=\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)]\text{ .}$$
(127)
If

$$\frac{g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}>0$$
(128)
the vector field $`a_z`$ is called (relative) centrifugal acceleration. If

$$\frac{g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}<0$$
(129)
the vector field $`a_z`$ is called (relative) centripetal acceleration.

The vector field $`a_c`$ is called (relative) Coriolis’ acceleration.

### 3.1 Centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration

The relative acceleration $`{}_{rel}{}^{}a`$ is orthogonal to the vector field $`u.`$

Proof: From $`g(u,_{rel}a)=g(u,\overline{g}[h_u(_u_u\xi _{})])=(u)(h_u)(_u_u\xi _{})`$ and $`(u)(h_u)=h_u(u)=0`$, it follows that

$$g(u,_{rel}a)=0\text{ .}$$
(130)
(a) The centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration $`a_z`$ is orthogonal to the vector field $`u`$, i.e.

$$g(u,a_z)=0.$$
(131)
Proof: From

$`g(u,a_z)`$ $`=`$ $`g(u,{\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{})=`$ (132)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}g(u,\xi _{})\text{ ,}`$
$`\text{ }g(u,\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`0\text{ ,}`$
it follows that $`g(u,a_z)=0`$.

(b) The centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration $`a_z`$ is orthogonal to the Coriolis acceleration $`a_c`$, i.e.

$$g(a_z,a_c)=0\text{ .}$$
(133)
Proof: From

$$g(\frac{g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\xi _{},\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)])=\frac{g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}g(\xi _{},\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)])\text{ ,}$$

$`g(\xi _{},\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)])`$ $`=`$ $`(\xi _{})(h_\xi _{})(_{rel}a)\text{ ,}`$ (134)
$`(\xi _{})(h_\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`(h_\xi _{})(\xi _{})=0\text{ ,}`$ (135)
it follows that $`g(a_z,a_c)=0`$.

(c) The length of the vector $`a_z`$ could be found on the basis of the relations

$$a_z^2=g(a_z,a_z)=\frac{[g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\text{ .}$$
(136)
Therefore, in general, the square $`a_z^2`$ of the length of the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration $`a_z`$ is reverse proportional to $`\xi _{}^2=g(\xi _{},\xi _{})`$.

Special case: $`M_n=E_n`$, $`n=3`$ (3-dimensional Euclidean space).

$`\xi _{}`$ $`:`$ $`=\stackrel{}{r}\text{ , }g(\xi _{},\xi _{})=r^2\text{ , }_{rel}a={}_{rel}{}^{}\stackrel{}{a}\text{ },`$
$`a_z^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[g(\stackrel{}{r},{}_{rel}{}^{}\stackrel{}{a})]^2}{r^2}}\text{ , }l_{a_z}={\displaystyle \frac{g(\stackrel{}{r},_{rel}\stackrel{}{a})}{r}}=g(n_{},_{rel}\stackrel{}{a})\text{ ,}`$ (137)
$`n_{}`$ $`:`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{r}}{r}}\text{ , }g(n_{},n_{})={\displaystyle \frac{g(\stackrel{}{r},\stackrel{}{r})}{r^2}}=n_{}^2=1\text{ .}`$ (138)
The length $`l_{a_z}=g(a_z,a_z)^{1/2}`$ of the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration $`a_z`$ is equal to the projection of the relative acceleration $`{}_{rel}{}^{}\stackrel{}{a}`$ at the unit vector field $`n_{}`$ along the vector field $`\xi _{}`$. If $`l_{a_z}=g(n_{},_{rel}\stackrel{}{a})=0`$, i.e. if the relative acceleration $`{}_{rel}{}^{}\stackrel{}{a}`$ is orthogonal to the radius vector $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ \[$`{}_{rel}{}^{}\stackrel{}{a}\stackrel{}{r}`$\], then $`a_z=0`$.

If the relative acceleration $`{}_{rel}{}^{}a`$ is equal to zero then the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration $`a_z`$ is also equal to zero.

(d) The scalar product $`g(\xi _{},_{rel}a)`$ could be found in its explicit form by the use of the explicit form of $`{}_{rel}{}^{}a`$

$${}_{rel}{}^{}a=\overline{g}[A(\xi _{})]=\overline{g}[_sD(\xi _{})]+\overline{g}[W(\xi _{})]+\frac{1}{n1}U\xi _{}\text{ .}$$
(139)
Then

$`g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}Ug(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ ,}`$ (140)
$`a_z^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}=`$ (141)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}[_sD(\xi _{},\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}Ug(\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{[_sD(\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n1)^2}}U^2g(\xi _{},\xi _{})+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n1}}U{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}`$
Special case: $`{}_{s}{}^{}D:=0`$ (shear-free acceleration).

$$a_z^2=\frac{1}{(n1)^2}U^2g(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}$$
(142)
Special case: $`U:=0`$ (expansion-free acceleration).

$$a_z^2=\frac{[_sD(\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\text{ .}$$
(143)
(e) The explicit form of $`a_z`$ could be found in the form

$`a_z`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},{}_{rel}{}^{}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{}={\displaystyle \frac{{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}U\xi _{}=`$ (144)
$`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}U+{\displaystyle \frac{{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}]\xi _{}=`$
$`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}U\pm _sD(n_{},n_{})]\xi _{}\text{ .}`$ (145)
If

$$\frac{1}{n1}U+\frac{{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}>0\text{ }$$
(146)
$`a_z`$ is a centrifugal (relative) acceleration. If

$$\frac{1}{n1}U+\frac{{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}<0$$
(147)
$`a_z`$ is a centripetal (relative) acceleration.

In a theory of gravitation the centripetal (relative) acceleration could be interpreted as gravitational acceleration.

Special case: $`{}_{s}{}^{}D:=0`$ (shear-free relative acceleration).

$$a_z=\frac{1}{n1}U\text{ }\xi _{}\text{ .}$$
(148)
If the expansion acceleration invariant $`U>0`$ the acceleration $`a_z`$ is a centrifugal (or expansion) acceleration. If $`U<0`$ the acceleration $`a_z`$ is a centripetal (or contraction) acceleration. Therefore, in the case of a shear-free relative acceleration the centrifugal or the centripetal acceleration is proportional to the expansion acceleration invariant $`U`$.

### 3.2 Coriolis’ acceleration

The vector field $`a_c`$, defined as

$$a_c=\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)]\text{ ,}$$

is called Coriolis’ (relative) acceleration. On the basis of its definition, the Coriolis acceleration has well defined properties.

(a) The Coriolis acceleration is orthogonal to the vector field $`u`$, i.e.

$$g(u,a_c)=0.$$
(149)
Proof: From

$$g(u,a_c)=g(u,\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)])=(u)(h_\xi _{})(_{rel}a)=h_\xi _{}(u,_{rel}a)$$

and

$$(u)(h_\xi _{})=(h_\xi _{})(u)=g(u)\text{ , }g(u,_{rel}a)=0\text{ ,}$$
(150)
it follows that

$$g(u,a_c)=[g(u)](_{rel}a)=g(u,_{rel}a)=0.$$

(b) The Coriolis acceleration $`a_c`$ is orthogonal to the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration $`a_z`$, i.e.

$$g(a_c,a_z)=0\text{ .}$$
(151)
(c) The Coriolis acceleration $`a_c`$ is orthogonal to the deviation vector $`\xi _{}`$, i.e.

$$g(\xi _{},a_c)=0\text{ .}$$
(152)
(d) The length $`\sqrt{a_c^2}=\sqrt{g(a_c,a_c)}`$ of $`a_c`$ could be found by the use of the relations

$`a_c`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)]\text{ ,}`$
$`[g(\xi _{})](_{rel}a)`$ $`=`$ $`g(\xi _{},_{rel}a)\text{ ,}`$ (153)
$`h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)`$ $`=`$ $`g(_{rel}a){\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}g(\xi _{})\text{ ,}`$ (154)
$`a_c`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)]={}_{rel}{}^{}aa_z=`$ (155)
$`=`$ $`{}_{rel}{}^{}a{\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{}\text{ .}`$ (156)
For $`a_c^2`$ we obtain

$`a_c^2`$ $`=`$ $`g(a_c,a_c)=g(_{rel}aa_z,{}_{rel}{}^{}aa_z)=`$ (157)
$`=`$ $`g(_{rel}a,_{rel}a)+g(a_z,a_z)2g(a_z,_{rel}a)\text{ .}`$
Since

$$g(a_z,a_z)=g(a_z,_{rel}a)=\frac{[g(\xi _{}),_{rel}a)]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ }}\text{ ,}$$
(158)
$$a_c^2=g(_{rel}a,_{rel}a)g(a_z,a_z)={}_{rel}{}^{}a_{}^{2}a_z^2\text{ ,}$$
(159)
$`g(_{rel}a,_{rel}a)`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{rel}{}^{}a_{}^{2}=g(\overline{g}[A(\xi _{})],\overline{g}[A(\xi _{})])=`$
$`=`$ $`\overline{g}(A(\xi _{}),A(\xi _{}))\text{ ,}`$
$`A`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{s}{}^{}D+W+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}Uh_u\text{ ,}`$
$`A(\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{})+W(\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}Ug(\xi _{})\text{ ,}`$
$`h_u(\xi _{})`$ $`=`$ $`g(\xi _{})\text{ ,}`$
$`\overline{g}(_sD(\xi _{}),h_u(\xi _{}))`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ ,}`$ (160)
$`\overline{g}(W(\xi _{}),h_u(\xi _{}))`$ $`=`$ $`W(\xi _{},\xi _{})=0\text{ ,}`$ (161)
$`\overline{g}(h_u(\xi _{}),h_u(\xi _{}))`$ $`=`$ $`h_u(\xi _{},\xi _{})=g\text{ }(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ ,}`$ (162)
it follows for $`{}_{rel}{}^{}a_{}^{2}`$

$`{}_{rel}{}^{}a_{}^{2}`$ $`=`$ $`g(_{rel}a,_{rel}a)=\overline{g}(_sD(\xi _{}),_sD(\xi _{}))+\overline{g}(W(\xi _{}),W(\xi _{}))+`$ (163)
$`+2\overline{g}(_sD(\xi _{}),W(\xi _{}))+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{n1}}U{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(n1)^2}}U^2g\text{ }(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}`$
On the other side,

$$a_z^2=\frac{[_sD(\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}+\frac{1}{(n1)^2}U^2g(\xi _{},\xi _{})+\frac{2}{n1}U{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})\text{ .}$$

Therefore,

$`a_c^2`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{rel}{}^{}a_{}^{2}a_z^2=`$ (164)
$`=`$ $`\overline{g}(_sD(\xi _{}),_sD(\xi _{})){\displaystyle \frac{[_sD(\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}+`$
$`+\overline{g}(W(\xi _{}),W(\xi _{}))+2\overline{g}(_sD(\xi _{}),W(\xi _{}))\text{ .}`$
Special case: $`{}_{s}{}^{}D:=0`$ (shear-free acceleration).

$$a_c^2=\overline{g}(W(\xi _{}),W(\xi _{}))\text{ .}$$
(165)
Special case: $`W:=0`$ (rotation-free acceleration).

$$a_c^2=\overline{g}(_sD(\xi _{}),_sD(\xi _{}))\frac{[_sD(\xi _{},\xi _{})]^2}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}\text{ .}$$
(166)
The explicit form of $`a_c`$ could be found by the use of the relations:

$`a_c`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}[h_\xi _{}(_{rel}a)]={}_{rel}{}^{}a{\displaystyle \frac{g(\xi _{},_{rel}a)}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{}={}_{rel}{}^{}aa_z=`$ (167)
$`=`$ $`\overline{g}[_sD(\xi _{})]{\displaystyle \frac{{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{}+\overline{g}[W(\xi _{})]=`$
$`=`$ $`\overline{g}[_sD(\xi _{})]_sD(n_{},n_{})\xi _{}+\overline{g}[W(\xi _{})]\text{ .}`$ (168)
Therefore, the Coriolis acceleration $`a_c`$ does not depend on the expansion acceleration invariant $`U`$.

Special case: $`{}_{s}{}^{}D:=0`$ (shear-free acceleration).

$$a_c=\overline{g}[W(\xi _{})]\text{ .}$$
(169)
Special case: $`W:=0`$ (rotation-free acceleration).

$`a_c`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{g}[_sD(\xi _{})]{\displaystyle \frac{{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}}\xi _{}=`$ (170)
$`=`$ $`\overline{g}[_sD(\xi _{})]_sD(n_{},n_{})\xi _{}\text{ .}`$ (171)
The Coriolis acceleration depends on the shear acceleration $`{}_{s}{}^{}D`$ and on the rotation acceleration $`W`$. These types of accelerations generate a Coriolis acceleration between particles or mass elements in a flow.

## 4 Centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration as gravitational acceleration

1. The main idea of the Einstein theory of gravitation (ETG) is the identification of the centripetal acceleration with the gravitational acceleration. The weak equivalence principle stays that a gravitational acceleration could be compensated by a centripetal acceleration and vice versa. From this point of view, it is worth to be investigated the relation between the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration and the Einstein theory of gravitation as well as the possibility for describing the gravitational interaction as result of the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration generated by the motion of mass elements (particles).

The structure of the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration could be considered on the basis of its explicit form expressed by means of the kinematic characteristics of the relative acceleration and the relative velocity. The centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration is written as

$$a_z=[\frac{1}{n1}U+\frac{{}_{s}{}^{}D(\xi _{},\xi _{})}{g(\xi _{},\xi _{})}]\xi _{}\text{ .}$$

The vector field $`\xi _{}`$ is directed outside of the trajectory of a mass element (particle). If the mass element generates a gravitational field the acceleration $`a_z`$ should be in the direction to the mass element. If the mass element moves in an external gravitational field caused by an other gravitational source then the acceleration $`a_z`$ should be directed to the source. The expansion (contraction) invariant $`U`$ could be expressed by means of the kinematic characteristics of the relative acceleration or of the relative velocity in the forms ,

$$U=U_0+I={}_{F}{}^{}U_{0}^{}{}_{T}{}^{}U_{0}^{}+I\text{ , }U_0={}_{F}{}^{}U_{0}^{}{}_{T}{}^{}U_{0}^{}\text{ ,}$$
(172)
where $`{}_{F}{}^{}U_{0}^{}`$ is the torsion-free and curvature-free expansion acceleration, $`{}_{T}{}^{}U_{0}^{}`$ is the expansion acceleration induced by the torsion and $`I`$ is the expansion acceleration induced by the curvature, $`U_0`$ is the curvature-free expansion acceleration

$`{}_{F}{}^{}U_{0}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`g[b]{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}g(u,_ua)\text{ ,}`$ (173)
$`{}_{F}{}^{}U_{0}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`a^k{}_{;k}{}^{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}g_{\overline{k}\overline{l}}u^ka^l{}_{;m}{}^{}u^m\text{ ,}`$ (174)
$`U_0`$ $`=`$ $`g[b]\overline{g}[_sP(\overline{g})\sigma ]\overline{g}[Q(\overline{g})\omega ]\dot{\theta }_1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}\theta _1\theta `$ (175)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}[g(u,T(a,u))+g(u,_ua)]\text{ ,}`$
$$I=R_{ij}u^iu^j\text{ , }g[b]=g_{\overline{i}\overline{j}}b^{ij}=g_{\overline{i}\overline{j}}a^i{}_{;n}{}^{}g^{nj}=a^n{}_{;n}{}^{}\text{ .}$$
(176)
2. In the ETG only the term $`I`$ is used on the basis of the Einstein equations. The invariant $`I`$ represents an invariant generalization of Newton’s gravitational law . In a $`V_n`$-space $`(n=4)`$ of the ETG, a free moving spinless test particle with $`a=0`$ will have an expansion (contraction) acceleration $`U=I`$ $`(U_0=0)`$ if $`R_{ij}0`$ and $`U=I=0`$ if $`R_{ij}=0`$. At the same time, in a $`V_n`$-space (the bars over the indices should be omitted)

$`{}_{s}{}^{}D`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{s}{}^{}M\text{ , }_sD_0=0\text{ , }M=h_u(K_s)h_u\text{ ,}`$ (177)
$`M_{ij}`$ $`=`$ $`h_{i\overline{k}}K_s^{kl}h_{\overline{l}j}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}h_{i\overline{k}}(K_s^{kl}+K_s^{lk})h_{\overline{l}j}=`$ (178)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}h_{i\overline{k}}(R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}u^mu^ng^{rl}+R^l{}_{mnr}{}^{}u^mu^ng^{rk})h_{\overline{l}j}=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^mu^n(h_{i\overline{k}}R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}h_{\overline{l}j}+h_{i\overline{k}}R^l{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rk}h_{\overline{l}j})=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}u^mu^n[h_{i\overline{k}}R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}(g_{\overline{l}j}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}u_{\overline{l}}u_j)+`$
$`+h_{\overline{l}j}R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rk}(g_{\overline{k}i}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}u_{\overline{k}}u_i)\text{ .}`$
Since

$$h_{i\overline{k}}R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}(g_{\overline{l}j}\frac{1}{e}u_{\overline{l}}u_j)=$$

$`=`$ $`(g_{i\overline{k}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}u_iu_{\overline{k}})R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}g_{\overline{l}j}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}(g_{i\overline{k}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}u_iu_{\overline{k}})R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}u_{\overline{l}}u_j\text{ ,}`$
$`R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}u_{\overline{l}}`$ $`=`$ $`R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}u^r\text{ ,}`$
$`u_{\overline{k}}R^k_{mnr}`$ $`=`$ $`g_{\overline{k}\overline{s}}u^sR^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}\text{ ,}`$
we have

$`h_{i\overline{k}}R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}h_{\overline{l}j}`$ $`=`$ $`g_{i\overline{k}}R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}g_{\overline{l}j}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}u_ig_{\overline{k}\overline{s}}u^sR^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}g_{\overline{l}j}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e}}g_{i\overline{k}}R^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}g_{\overline{l}\overline{s}}u^su_j+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^2}}u_ig_{\overline{k}\overline{s}}u^sR^k{}_{mnr}{}^{}g^{rl}g_{\overline{l}\overline{q}}u^qu_j\text{ .}`$
Special case: $`V_n`$-space: $`S:=C`$.

$$M_{ij}=R_{imnj}u^mu^n\text{ .}$$
(180)
$`{}_{s}{}^{}D_{ij}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{}_{s}{}^{}M_{ij}^{}=M_{ij}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}Ih_{ij}=`$
$`=`$ $`R_{imnj}u^mu^n{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}R_{mn}u^mu^nh_{ij\text{ }}\text{,}`$
$`{}_{s}{}^{}D_{ij}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`(R_{imnj}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}R_{mn}h_{ij\text{ }})u^mu^n={}_{s}{}^{}M_{ij}^{}\text{ ,}`$ (181)
$`U`$ $`=`$ $`I=R_{ij}u^iu^j\text{ .}`$
In a $`V_n`$-space the components $`a_z^i`$ of the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration $`a_z`$ have the form

$`a_z^i`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}U+{\displaystyle \frac{{}_{s}{}^{}D_{jk}^{}\xi _{}^j\xi _{}^k}{g_{rs}\xi _{}^r\xi _{}^s}})\xi _{}^i=`$
$`=`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}R_{mn}u^mu^n+`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_{rs}\xi _{}^r\xi _{}^s}}(R_{jmnk}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n1}}R_{mn}h_{jk})u^mu^n\xi _{}^j\xi _{}^k]\xi _{}^i\text{ .}`$
3. If the Einstein equations in vacuum without cosmological term $`(\lambda _0=0)`$ are valid, i.e. if

$$R_{ij}=0\text{ , }\lambda _0=\text{const.}=0\text{ , }n=4\text{ ,}$$
(183)
are fulfilled then

$`a_z^i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{g_{rs}\xi _{}^r\xi _{}^s}}R_{jmnk}u^mu^n\xi _{}^j\xi _{}^k\xi _{}^i=`$ (184)
$`=`$ $`R_{jmnk}u^mu^nn^jn^k\xi _{}^i=𝐠\xi _{}^i\text{ ,}`$ (185)
where

$$n^j=\frac{\xi _{}^j}{\sqrt{g_{rs}\xi _{}^r\xi _{}^s}}\text{ ,}$$
(186)
$$𝐠=R_{jmnk}u^mu^nn^jn^k\text{ .}$$
(187)
If $`a_z`$ is a centripetal acceleration interpreted as gravitational acceleration for a free spinless test particles moving in an external gravitational field $`(R_{ij}=0)`$ then the condition $`𝐠<0`$ should be valid if the centripetal acceleration is directed to the particle. If the centripetal acceleration is directed to the gravitational source (in the direction $`\xi _{}`$) then $`𝐠>0`$.

From a more general point of view as that in the ETG, a gravitational theory could be worked out in a $`(\overline{L}_n,g)`$-space where $`a_z`$ could also be interpreted as gravitational acceleration of mass elements or particles generating a gravitational field by themselves and caused by their motions in space-time.

4. If we consider a frame of reference in which a mass element (particle) is at rest then $`u^i=g_4^iu^4`$ and $`\xi _{}^i=g_a^i\xi _{}^a:=g_1^i\xi _{}^1`$. The centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration $`a_z^i`$ could be written in the form

$$a_z^i=R_{1441}u^4u^4n^1n^1\xi _{}^i=R_{1441}(u^4)^2(n^1)^2\xi _{}^i\text{ .}$$
(188)
For the Schwarzschild metric

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dr^2}{1\frac{r_g}{r}}}+r^2(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2)(1{\displaystyle \frac{r_g}{r}})(dx^4)^2\text{ ,}`$ (189)
$`\text{ }r_g`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2kM_0}{c^2}}\text{ ,}`$ (190)
the component $`R_{1441}=g_{11}R^1_{441}`$ of the curvature tensor has the form

$$R_{1441}=g_{11}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{44,1}^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_{14,4}^1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_{44}^1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{14}^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_{44}^4\mathrm{\Gamma }_{14}^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_{14}^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_{44}^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_{41}^4)\text{ .}$$
(191)
After introducing in the last expression the explicit form of the metric and of the Christoffel symbols $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{jk}^i`$, it follows for $`R_{1441}`$

$$R_{1441}=\frac{r_g}{r^3}\text{ .}$$
(192)
Then

$$a_z^i=\frac{r_g}{r^3}(u^4)^2(n^1)^2\xi _{}^i\text{ .}$$
(193)
If the co-ordinate time $`t=x^4/c`$ is chosen as equal to the proper time $`\tau `$ of the particle, i.e. if $`t=\tau `$ then

$`u^4`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dx^4}{d\tau }}=c{\displaystyle \frac{d\tau }{d\tau }}=c\text{ , }n^1=1\text{ , }\xi _{}^i=g_1^i\xi _{}^1\text{ ,}`$ (194)
$`a_z^i`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{r_g}{r^3}}c^2g_1^i\xi _{}^1\text{ , }{\displaystyle \frac{r_g}{r^3}}c^2>0\text{ .}`$ (195)
For the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration we obtain

$$a_z^1=\frac{2kM_0}{r^3}\xi _{}^1\text{ ,}$$
(196)
which is exactly the relative gravitational acceleration between two mass elements (particles) with co-ordinates $`x_{c1}=r`$ and $`x_{c2}=r+\xi _{}^1`$ .

Therefore, the centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration could be used for working out of a theory of gravitation in a space with affine connections and metrics as this has been done in the Einstein theory of gravitation.

## 5 Conclusions

In the present paper the notions of centrifugal (centripetal) and Coriolis’ velocities and accelerations are introduced and considered in spaces with affine connections and metrics as velocities and accelerations of flows of mass elements (particles) moving in space-time. It is shown that these types of velocities and accelerations are generated by the relative motions between the mass elements. The null (isotropic) vector fields are considered and their relations with the centrifugal (centripetal) velocity are established. The centrifugal (centripetal) velocity is found to be in connection with the Hubble law and the generalized Doppler effect in spaces with affine connections and metrics. The accelerations are closely related to the kinematic characteristics of the relative velocity and relative acceleration. The centrifugal (centripetal) acceleration could be interpreted as gravitational acceleration as it has been done in the Einstein theory of gravitation. This fact could be used as a basis for working out of new gravitational theories in spaces with affine connections and metrics.


format: text

text:
# References

Recently there has been a lot of studies on the tachyon cosmology . Regarding inflation the unconventional form of the tachyonic action brings some new features and makes it different from that with a normal scalar field, however as pointed out firstly by Kofman and Linde  that the tachyonic inflations suffer from serious difficulties. Authors of Ref.  considered a model of multi tachyonic inflation, which solves some of the problems in the single tachyon model. But still for the string scale $`M_sH`$ as required in these inflation models implies that the size of the de-Sitter horizon be smaller than the string length i.e. $`\frac{1}{H}l_s`$, which makes it invalid to describe the tachyon condensation by using an effective field theory .

In all of these studies, the tachyon action is usually the DBI action with the minimal coupling between the tachyon and gravity . In this paper, we propose a model of tachyon which couples to gravity non-minimally and study its cosmology. We will show that for a specific form of non-minimal coupling of the tachyon to gravity this model satisfies observations and overcomes all of the problems which exist in the single and multi tachyon inflation models. Studies in the bosonic string or for non-BPS brane indicate the possibility on the non-minimal couplings between tachyon and gravity 222We thank A.A. Tseytlin for communication about this with us..

The model under consideration is described by an 4D effective action of tachyon non-minimally coupled to gravity as follows

$$S=\frac{1}{2\kappa ^2}d^4x\sqrt{g}f(T)R+d^4x\sqrt{g}V(T)\sqrt{1+\alpha ^{}g^{\mu \nu }_\mu T_\nu T,}$$
(1)
where $`\kappa ^2=\frac{1}{M_p^2}`$ sets the 4D Planck scale and the tachyon potential around $`T=0`$ is given by $`V(T)=\tau _3e^{T^2}`$. $`f(T)`$ is a function of tachyon field $`T`$, which corresponds to the minimal coupling of tachyon to gravity when $`f(T)=1`$. The tension of the non-BPS brane is

$$\tau _3=\frac{\sqrt{2}M_s^4}{(2\pi )^3g_s},$$
(2)
with $`g_s`$ being the string coupling and $`M_s=l_s^1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\alpha ^{}}}`$ the fundamental string mass and length scales. The Planck mass in this model is given by the dimensional reduction

$$M_p^2=\frac{vM_s^2}{g_s^2},$$
(3)
where $`v=(M_sr)^6`$, $`r`$ is the radius of the compactification. The 4D effective theory is applicable only if $`v1`$.

Following , we perform a conformal transformation $`g_{\mu \nu }(x)f(T)g_{\mu \nu }(x)`$, and obtain that

$$S=\frac{1}{2\kappa ^2}d^4x\sqrt{g}\left(R+\frac{3}{2}(\frac{f^{}}{f})^2g^{\mu \nu }_\mu T_\nu T\right)+d^4x\sqrt{g}\stackrel{~}{V}(T)\sqrt{1+\alpha ^{}f(T)g^{\mu \nu }_\mu T_\nu T,}$$
(4)
in Einstein frame, where $`\stackrel{~}{V}(T)=\frac{V(T)}{f^2(T)}`$ is the tachyon effective potential in this frame. For a spatially homogeneous but time-dependent tachyon field, the Hubble equation is given by

$$H^2=\frac{\kappa ^2}{3}\frac{\stackrel{~}{V}(T)}{\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}f(T)\dot{T}^2}}+\frac{1}{4}\left(\frac{f^{}}{f}\right)^2\dot{T}^2,$$
(5)
and the equation of motion for tachyon is

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}f(T)\dot{T}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}({\displaystyle \frac{f^{}}{f}})^2{\displaystyle \frac{M_p^2}{\alpha ^{}f\stackrel{~}{V}}}\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}f\dot{T}^2}\right)\ddot{T}+\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}({\displaystyle \frac{f^{}}{f}})^2{\displaystyle \frac{M_p^2}{\alpha ^{}f\stackrel{~}{V}}}\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}f\dot{T}^2}\right)3H\dot{T}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha ^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{V}^{}}{\stackrel{~}{V}f}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}f(T)\dot{T}^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{3M_p^2}{\alpha ^{}f\stackrel{~}{V}}}{\displaystyle \frac{f^{\prime \prime }ff{}_{}{}^{}2}{f^2}}\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}f\dot{T}^2}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{f^{}}{f}}\right)\dot{T}^2=0.`$ (6)
When $`f(T)=1`$, we have checked that the (5) and (6) agree with those for a minimally coupled tachyon. For $`f(T)1`$, however the potential is rescaled to be $`\stackrel{~}{V}(T)`$, besides there are more terms proportional to $`\dot{T}^2`$ and $`\left(\frac{f^{}}{f}\right)^2`$ in (6), which can be neglected consistently when $`\delta \frac{M_p^2}{\alpha ^{}f\stackrel{~}{V}}\left(\frac{f^{}}{f}\right)^21`$.

In the following, we study the inflationary solution of this model. The slow-rolling parameters are given by

$$ϵ=\frac{M_p^2}{\alpha ^{}}\frac{\stackrel{~}{V}^2}{\stackrel{~}{V}^3f},$$
(7)
$$\eta =\frac{M_p^2}{\alpha ^{}}\frac{\stackrel{~}{V}^{\prime \prime }}{\stackrel{~}{V}^2f}.$$
(8)
In the slow-rolling approximation $`ϵ,\eta 1`$ and $`\delta 1`$, the Hubble equation and the equation of motion for the rolling tachyon can be expressed as

$$H^2=\frac{\kappa ^2\stackrel{~}{V}}{3},$$
(9)
$$3H\dot{T}+(\alpha ^{}\stackrel{~}{V}f(T))^1\stackrel{~}{V}^{}=0.$$
(10)
To solve Eqs.(9) and (10) we need the specific forms of $`V(T)`$ and $`f(T)`$. Assuming that inflation starts near the top of the tachyon potential, i.e. around $`T=0`$, we take the tachyon potential $`V(T)=\tau _3e^{T^2}`$ which valids around the maximum and has a maximum at $`T=0`$. For $`f(T)`$ we expand it about $`T=0`$ as follows

$$f(T)=1+\underset{i}{}c_iT^{2i},$$
(11)
where $`c_i`$ are coefficients. Thus

$$\tau _3^1\stackrel{~}{V}(T)=\tau _3^1\frac{V(T)}{f^2(T)}=1(1+2c_1)T^2+(\frac{1}{2}+2c_12c_2c_1^2)T^4+𝒪(T^6).$$
(12)
Applying the slow-rolling condition $`\eta <1`$, we obtain

$$g_s>\frac{(2\pi )^3}{\sqrt{2}}v\left((1+2c_1)+𝒪(1)T^2+\mathrm{}\right).$$
(13)
One can see that when $`c_1\frac{1}{2}`$, the result is similar to that for a minimally coupled tachyon. For $`c_1=\frac{1}{2}`$, however the leading term proportional to $`T^2`$ disappears, correspondingly the ”effective potential” of tachyon $`\tau _3^1\stackrel{~}{V}(T)`$ becomes flatter. In this case, Eq.(13) becomes

$$g_s>10^2vT^2.$$
(14)
We have also checked that when $`c_1=\frac{1}{2}`$, $`\delta \eta `$ indeed a small parameter. This justifies our assumption above of $`\delta 1`$ during inflation, so that we can safely drop them off in the calculation.

The amplitude of the gravitational waves produced during inflation is

$$𝒫_g\frac{H}{M_p}<3.6\times 10^5.$$
(15)
Substituting (9) and (3) into (15), we have

$$g_s^3<7\times 10^7v^2.$$
(16)
Then considering (14) and (16), we obtain

$$vT^6<10^{13}.$$
(17)
One can see that for $`v1`$, when $`T<10^3`$, the condition (17) is satisfied, and in the meantime, combining (8) and (9), we have $`H^1T^2<l_s`$. As is seen in the following, in this model, the string length is far less than the cosmological horizon during inflation, which means that the main problem  troubling the single and multi tachyon inflation models is overcome.

The number of e-folds during inflation is

$$N=H𝑑t_{T_{60}}^{T_{end}}\frac{\alpha ^{}f\stackrel{~}{V}(T)}{\stackrel{~}{V}^{}(T)}H^2𝑑T.$$
(18)
In Eq.(18) $`T_{60}`$ is the field value corresponding to $`N60`$ as required when the COBE scale exits the Hubble radius, and $`T_{end}`$ is the field value at which inflation ends, which is determined by $`\eta 1`$. In our model,

$$T_{60}0.1T_{end}\frac{1}{10^2}\sqrt{\frac{g_s}{v}}.$$
(19)
Following the definition of the amplitudes of the density perturbation in Ref , we have

$$𝒫_s\frac{H^2}{\sqrt{\alpha ^{}\stackrel{~}{V}f(T)}\dot{T}}.$$
(20)
Thus

$$𝒫_s\frac{g_s^2}{10^2v^{\frac{3}{2}}T_{60}^3}10^3g_s^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$
(21)
Therefore for $`𝒫_s10^5`$, we find that $`g_s10^{16}`$ and $`M_s10^3`$Gev, $`H^110^{26}M_p^1l_s10^{16}M_p^1`$ during inflation. In this case, the string scale is about Tev.

Before concluding we should point out that the inflationary solution of Eq.(4) can also be solved by firstly expanding $`\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}f(T)\dot{T}^2}`$ in terms of $`\dot{T}^2`$, then renormalizing the kinetic energy term by a re-definition of the tachyon field. With this approach we obtain the same results as those present above.

In summary, we have considered in this paper a model of tachyon which couples to gravity non-minimally and studied its cosmological effects. For a specific coupling of tachyon to gravity $`f(T)=1\frac{1}{2}T^2`$ around $`T=0`$ we have studies the inflationary solution, and found that it makes the tachyon potential flatter, an successful inflation is realized. The string length in our model is far less than the cosmological horizon during inflation, which makes it feasible to describe the tachyon condensation by using an effective field theory, and thus the main problem troubling the single and multi tachyon inflation models is overcome. Finally, we would like to mention that the usual reheating mechanism is not feasible  since the tachyon does not oscillate during the decay of non-BPS branes. There are some discussions about the tachyon reheating . But recently, some studies have pointed out that as the tachyon evolves into the late-time, the strength of coupling to the closed string increase . These results motivate us to expect that the tachyon could emit closed string radiation , such as graviton and dilaton, into the bulk and eventually settles in the finite minimum.

This work implies that the inflation and cosmological applications of tachyon with non-minimal couplings to gravity may have more fruitful phenomena, which is worth studying further.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Miao Li, Ren-Jie Zhang for interesting conversations and comments on our manuscript. We also thank Rong-Gen Cai, Jian-Tao Li for discussions. This project was in part supported by NNSFC under Grant Nos. 10175070, 10047004 and 19925523 as well as also by the Ministry of Science and Technology of China under grant No. NKBRSF G19990754.


text:
# A molecular dynamics “Maxwell Demon” experiment for granular mixtures1footnote 11footnote 1Paper submitted to the special issue of Molecular Physics edited by J.-P. Hansen and R. Lynden-Bell on the occasion of Dominique Levesque’s 65th birthday,

## I Introduction

Although granular matter may exhibit similarities with molecular fluids (such as pattern formation), it is nevertheless intrinsically out of equilibrium: The inter-particle collisions dissipate kinetic energy, and a steady state may only be achieved by a suitable energy supply. As a result, such systems may display many phenomena that are “forbidden” by the laws of equilibrium statistical mechanics. In the realm of granular gases (dilute systems of macroscopic grains in rapid motion and colliding inelastically), tendency to form clusters Kada ; Gold ; McNa ; EPJE , non Gaussian velocity distributions Losert ; Rouyer ; Noije ; Puglisi ; Nie ; Cafiero ; JPA ; Prevost ; vibrated , long range velocity correlations Prevost ; Pre\_twan ; Blair ; Moon ; Pre2 , and breakdown of kinetic energy equipartition in a mixture of dissimilar grains Garzo ; Feitosa ; Wildman ; Granular ; vibrated  have been reported.

Another interesting feature, at complete variance with equilibrium phenomenology has been obtained with a simple experiment Schlichting ; Weele ; Meer ; Mikk : a vibrated system of grains confined in a box with two connected identical compartments may exhibit a stationary state with spontaneous symmetry breaking (non-equipartition of grains between the two compartments). This clustering phenomenon may be interpreted as a separation in a “hot” and a “cold” region, considering that the granular temperature is a direct measure of the mean squared velocity of the particles. In the limit where the exchange of particles between the two compartments may be considered as an effusion process, Eggers Eggers  has put forward an analytical approach to explain this apparent intrusion of a “Maxwell Demon”. On the other hand, Brey and collaborators Brey\_Maxwell  reported a hydrodynamic mechanism for the symmetry breaking, that becomes operational under some simplifying assumptions in the opposite limit where the size of opening connecting the two compartments is larger than the mean-free-path of the gas in its vicinity.

In this contribution, we revisit numerically the Maxwell Demon experiment in the latter case, and consider the specific situation of a binary low density granular mixture, with the aim to investigate whether such a set-up is able to achieve an efficient segregation of the mixture. The model is defined in section II. Making use of molecular dynamics simulations, we discuss in section III how to construct a relevant order parameter for the transition under study, and show that it is dominated by large fluctuations (as also observed recently in a related context Meerson ). The two components of the mixture are found to behave differently: heavy particles display a stronger (left-right) asymmetry than the light ones, leading to a separation between a dense gas rich in heavy particles and a dilute light-rich gas. The behaviour of partial densities and granular temperatures are investigated (section IV) from which we deduce the different components of the pressure tensor making use of the general equation of state derived in vibrated ; although the hypothesis of an isotropic pressure given by the ideal gas equation of state is clearly not verified, we show that the no-convection hydrodynamic condition of a divergence-free pressure tensor ($`P=0`$) is obeyed, taking into account anisotropies, boundaries and corrections to the ideal gas equation of state. Conclusions are finally drawn in section V.

## II The model

The system is made of $`N`$ inelastic hard disks evolving in a $`S\times L`$ two-dimensional box, losing energy at inter-particle collisions and gaining energy through collisions with two vibrating walls situated at $`y=0`$ and $`y=L`$. The particles have diameters $`\sigma _i`$ and masses $`m_i`$, $`i=1,2`$. A binary collision between grains of species $`i`$ and $`j`$ is momentum conserving and dissipates kinetic energy: the collision $`i`$-$`j`$ is characterized by the coefficient of normal restitution $`\alpha _{ij}`$. Accordingly, the pre-collisional velocities ($`𝒗_i,𝒗_j`$) are transformed into the post-collisional couple ($`𝒗_i^{},𝒗_j^{}`$) such that

$`𝒗_i^{}=𝒗_i{\displaystyle \frac{m_j}{m_i+m_j}}(1+\alpha _{ij})(\widehat{𝝈}𝒗_{ij})\widehat{𝝈}`$ (1)
$`𝒗_j^{}=𝒗_j+{\displaystyle \frac{m_i}{m_i+m_j}}(1+\alpha _{ij})(\widehat{𝝈}𝒗_{ij})\widehat{𝝈}`$ (2)
where $`𝒗_{ij}=𝒗_i𝒗_j`$ and $`\widehat{𝝈}`$ is the center to center unit vector from particle $`i`$ to $`j`$. Note that $`\alpha _{ij}=\alpha _{ji}`$ to ensure the conservation of total linear momentum $`m_i𝒗_i+m_j𝒗_j`$. The total density is denoted $`\rho `$, and the partial densities $`\rho _i=x_i\rho `$ (the number fractions $`x_i`$ are such that $`_ix_i=1`$). The granular temperature of species $`i`$ is $`T_i`$, defined from the mean kinetic energy of subpopulation $`i`$, by analogy with the usual temperature of elastic gases: $`T_i=m_iv_i^2/d`$, where $`d`$ is the space dimension (here $`d=2`$). In the remaining of the paper this granular temperature will be coined “temperature”for simplicity.

The box is divided into two compartments of width $`S/2`$ by a wall parallel to $`Oy`$ starting at height $`y_0`$. The walls located at $`x=0`$ and $`x=S`$ are elastic, while those at $`y=0`$ and $`y=L`$ are vibrating and thus inject energy into the system. For simplicity, the two vibrating walls are taken to move in a saw-tooth manner, so that a colliding particle at $`y=0`$ (resp. $`y=L`$) always finds the wall to move “upwards” (resp. “downwards”) with the same velocity $`v_0`$ (resp $`v_0`$). In addition, the amplitude of the vibration is considered to vanish (i.e. to be much smaller than the local mean free path Eggers ; Brey\_Maxwell ), so that the walls are located at the fixed positions $`y=0`$ and $`y=L`$: the $`y`$-component velocity of a particle colliding with the wall at $`y=0`$ (resp. $`y=L`$) is therefore changed according to $`v_y^{}=2v_0v_y`$ (resp. $`v_y^{}=2v_0v_y`$). Since we consider vigorous shakings, the gravitational field has not been included in the analysis.

For simplicity, we have considered equimolar mixtures ($`N_1=N_2`$) of particles having the same diameter ($`\sigma _1=\sigma _2`$) but different masses. Various mass ratios $`m_1/m_2[1:5]`$ have been studied Rqe , so that the species $`1`$ is always the heavier particle. We have run molecular dynamics simulations Allen  changing $`N`$ either at constant packing fraction (equal to $`\pi \rho \sigma ^2/4`$ in two dimensions) or at constant $`\sigma _i`$, with the same qualitative observations. The numerical results we will present correspond to a fixed low mean packing fraction $`\eta _0=0.015`$ (the inelastic collapse McNa  occurring if the mean density exceeds a low threshold), and to equal coefficients of restitution $`\alpha _{ij}=0.9`$, close to experimentally relevant values. We have investigated other values of the restitution coefficients between $`0.7`$ and $`0.9`$, and two different aspect ratios, $`L=S`$ and $`L=2S`$, with the same qualitative results.

## III Bifurcation diagram and large fluctuations

For a one component system, it has been shown from a hydrodynamic approach Brey\_Maxwell  that, as the number of particles in the box ($`N`$) is increased, a transition occurs at a certain threshold $`N^{}`$: for $`N<N^{}`$, the system is symmetric, i.e the mean number of particles in each compartment is $`N/2`$ while, for $`N>N^{}`$, one of the compartments becomes more populated and colder than the other. This hydrodynamic study relies of the assumption of an isotropic pressure given by the ideal gas equation of state Brey\_Maxwell . At a given inelasticity (i.e. at given values of the restitution coefficients), the control parameter (governing the transition from symmetric to asymmetric situation) is proportional to $`N\sigma ^{d1}/S`$, where $`\sigma `$ is the particle diameter Brey\_Maxwell . At fixed reduced density $`n=N\sigma ^d/(LS)`$ the above parameter is proportional to $`N^{1/d}`$, while at fixed size $`\sigma `$ it scales like $`N`$.

The “order parameter” of this transition was defined in Eggers ; Brey\_Maxwell  as the time average $`ϵ`$ of the asymmetry $`ϵ`$:

$$ϵ=\frac{N2N^{left}}{2N}$$
(3)
where $`N^{left}`$ is the number of particles in the left compartment. In addition to the global $`ϵ`$, we may introduce two relevant asymmetry parameters for each type of particles:

$$ϵ_i=\frac{N_i2N_i^{left}}{2N_i},i=1,2.$$
(4)
For a given simulation time, if one computes $`ϵ_i`$ for the binary mixture (or $`|ϵ_i|`$ to have a positive quantity), a left-right symmetry breakdown is evidenced (see Fig. 2). The asymmetry is more pronounced for heavy particles ($`|ϵ_1|>|ϵ_2|`$), and $`|ϵ_1|`$ increases with the mass ratio $`m_1/m_2`$. On the other hand, the light particles asymmetry decreases with $`m_1/m_2`$. At this point we conclude that the compartment with larger global density is heavy-rich, while the lighter particles are more uniformly distributed and therefore the less populated compartment is richer in light particles.

However, for symmetry reasons, one should expect that the mean value $`ϵ`$ (and the $`ϵ_i`$) always vanish for sufficiently long simulation times, so that these quantities are arbitrary and do not provide relevant order parameters. Inspection of the time behaviour of $`N^{left}`$ confirms this picture \[see Fig. 3-a)\], which is made more quantitative by computing the probability distribution function of $`ϵ`$ over very long runs and various initial conditions \[see Fig. 3-b)\]. At small $`N`$, $`ϵ`$ fluctuates around 0 and its standard deviation increases with $`N`$. As $`N`$ increases, the asymmetric configurations become stable but the system continuously jumps from one of the possible asymmetric situations to the other, still spending some time in between close to the symmetric state. When $`N`$ further increases, the residence time spent in each of the asymmetric states increases and may eventually overcome the simulation time: for $`NN^{}`$, starting from a symmetric situation, the system quickly evolves into an asymmetric configuration, in which one compartment is strongly overpopulated, and remains in this situation for all the simulation time. For larger simulation times however the symmetry would be restored. The situation is thus analogous to that of a two-states system, in which the energy barrier between two symmetric states increases with system size. This behaviour is reminiscent of that recently reported in Meerson : in this study of a translational symmetry breaking as the aspect ratio of the simulation box is changed (without a separating wall), large fluctuations have been shown to occur in a wide region around a hydrodynamically predicted threshold value beyond which the homogeneous system becomes unstable.

In any case, $`|ϵ|`$ vanishes for any $`N`$ for long enough simulations, and does not provide an acceptable order parameter. There are then a priori two possibilities to construct such a quantity: a) by time averaging $`|ϵ|`$ or b) by extracting the most probable (say positive) value $`ϵ^{}`$ of $`ϵ`$ from its probability distribution function (p.d.f, see Fig. 3), averaged over the simulation time and over various initial conditions. Note that this p.d.f., and thus both possible definitions, are not sensitive to the length of the simulations (except for very small simulation times) note . We compare in Fig. 4 these two definitions with the previous one, $`|ϵ|`$, computed again for a given (large) simulation time. Since $`ϵ`$ fluctuates around $`0`$ even at small $`N`$, the $`|ϵ_i|`$ depend rather smoothly on $`N`$, and therefore do not allow a clear definition of a critical number of particles. On the other hand, the most probable values $`ϵ_i^{}`$ allow to define a critical region, being identically $`0`$ at small $`N`$ and taking positive values above a certain threshold (see Fig. 4). When $`N`$ is large enough, the probability distribution functions of the $`ϵ_i`$ become sharply peaked around the $`ϵ_i^{}`$ so that both quantities $`ϵ_i^{}`$ and $`|ϵ_i|`$ become close; moreover, these p.d.f. take extremely small values in the vicinity of $`ϵ_i=0`$: this corresponds to the fact that the system is stuck for long times in one of its two most probable states, so that the computation of $`|ϵ_i|`$ coincides with that of $`|ϵ_i|`$, or $`ϵ_i^{}`$.

## IV Density profiles and pressure tensor

Instantaneous typical configurations are displayed in Fig. 5 for various values of $`N`$ and mass ratio $`m_1/m_2`$. From the coarse grained local packing fractions $`\eta _i(x,y)`$, we define $`x`$-averaged quantities in each compartment:

$$\eta _i^l(y)=\frac{2}{S}_0^{S/2}dx\eta _i(x,y),\eta _i^r(y)=\frac{2}{S}_{S/2}^Sdx\eta _i(x,y),i=1,2.$$
(5)
These quantities are averaged over time for one run between two successive “flips” (see section III), but not averaged over various runs since the asymmetry would then be lost. The corresponding density and temperature profiles are shown in Fig. 6 for $`N=1000`$, well above the bifurcation point. One may observe that in the asymmetric situation, the densities are different even for $`y<y_0`$, i.e. not only where the compartments are physically separated.

Two-dimensional plots of the coarse grained densities $`\eta _i(x,y)`$ are displayed in Fig. 7 for two values of the number of particles, well below and well above the bifurcation. Below the transition, translational invariance in $`x`$ holds in the whole box, while above, the densities and temperatures are almost independent of $`x`$ in each compartment, but are discontinuous at $`x=S/2`$ for $`y>y_0`$ because of the separating wall; at $`y<y_0`$ but close to $`y_0`$ a quite sharp change is observed in the vicinity of $`x=S/2`$. At small $`y`$ the $`x`$-gradients are smaller.

In the hydrodynamic study of Brey\_Maxwell , the ideal gas form for the pressure constitutes a fundamental hypothesis which allows for an analytic treatment; moreover, the pressure is assumed to be isotropic. However, anisotropic energy injection mechanisms lead to anisotropic pressure tensors, especially near vibrating walls Brey\_aniso ; vibrated . Knowing the density and pressure profiles for our system, one may compute the two components $`P_{xx}`$ and $`P_{yy}`$ of the pressure tensor from a given equation of state. We consider the generic expression derived in vibrated  within Enskog-Boltzmann kinetic theory. For an homogeneous and isotropic mixture with partial temperatures $`T_i`$, number fractions $`x_i`$, and without any approximation on the single particle velocity distribution, it was obtained that

$$P=\underset{i}{}\rho _iT_i+\rho \eta \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}^{d1}\underset{i,j}{}x_ix_j\frac{m_j}{m_i+m_j}(1+\alpha _{ij})T_i\frac{\sigma _{ij}^d}{\sigma ^d}\chi _{ij},$$
(6)
where $`d`$ denotes space dimension, $`\sigma _{ij}=(\sigma _i+\sigma _j)/2`$, $`\sigma ^d=_ix_i\sigma _i^d`$. The $`\chi _{ij}`$ are the a priori unknown pair distribution functions at contact; these quantities embody the correction to the ideal gas equation of state, and since we are considering dilute system, it is sufficiently accurate to assume $`\chi _{ij}=1`$ (low density limiting value). The values of $`P_{xx}`$ and $`P_{yy}`$ are finally obtained by substituting $`T_i`$ in (6) respectively by $`T_{ix}`$ and $`T_{iy}`$ (i.e. the mean square $`x`$ or $`y`$ components of particles velocities).

The results are summarized in Fig. 8, where we plot $`P_{xx}(x,y)`$ and $`P_{yy}(x,y)`$ for $`N=600`$ and $`N=900`$. Below the transition ($`N=600`$), the picture is similar to the one without a separating wall, and the pressure tensor is $`x`$ independent. One therefore has $`_xP_{xx}=_xP_{yy}=_yP_{yy}=0`$. However, for $`N=900`$ (above the transition), the $`yy`$ components are no longer equal in the left and right sides, while the $`xx`$ components are equal only for $`y<y_0`$ where the separation begins. One still observes $`_xP_{xx}=_yP_{yy}=0`$ in each compartment, except close to the extremity of the separating wall ($`x=S/2,y=y_0`$), but for $`y>y_0`$ the separating wall allows for different values of the pressure components. Moreover $`_xP_{yy}0`$ for $`y<y_0`$ while for $`y>y_0`$, $`_xP_{yy}=0`$ in each compartment (except close to $`x=S/2`$), with a discontinuity at $`x=S/2`$. It is noteworthy that the denser compartment is also the one where both components of the pressure tensor are lower, since it is much “colder” than the dilute compartment.

This analysis shows that both above and below the symmetry breaking, the (anisotropic) pressure tensor as computed from Eq. (6) is divergence free: $`_xP_{xx}+_yP_{yy}=0`$. This “hydrostatic” requirement follows from the condition of a vanishing flow field, and in spite of the low mean densities considered here, would not be fulfilled restricting $`P_{xx}`$ and $`P_{yy}`$ to their ideal parts.

## V Conclusions

For a one component granular gas enclosed in a box made of two connected compartments, a vigorous shaking is known to promote a symmetry breakdown and separate the system into a cold and dense region on the one hand, and a hot and dilute part on the other hand (so called “Maxwell-Demon” experiment). In addition, in a binary granular mixture, heavy and light grains generically have different granular temperatures. In this contribution, we have combined both aspects (Maxwell Demon and mixture) to investigate the possibility to separate the two components of the mixture. Our molecular dynamics results show a spontaneous symmetry breaking as the number of particles is increased, all other parameters being kept constant. The denser compartment then appears to be rich in heavy particles, but this partial segregation is such that this compartment is also richer in light particles than the other half of the confining box (which is however the light-rich one). It therefore seems that such a set-up cannot achieve an efficient segregation (although a possibility would be to isolate the dense compartment and iterate the process with this non-equimolar mixture).

The transition reported here is not stricto sensu a phase transition, since the control parameter is the system size. As a consequence, fluctuations can always bring the system from one of the asymmetric states to the other, as e.g. for a finite size Ising model below its critical temperature. We have discussed the consequences of this feature on the definition of a relevant order parameter to characterize the bifurcation.

We finally note that the experimental realization of the two dimensional situation investigated here seems feasible, for instance by adapting the configuration used in Rouyer  (friction with the walls confining the system in a 2D slab might play an role, and has not been considered here). The experimental signature of the large fluctuations that invalidate hydrodynamic approaches seems an interesting issue.