'Small' singular regions of spacetime

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2511.02676
• Title: 'Small' singular regions of spacetime
• Author: Franciszek Cudek (St Edmund Hall, University of Oxford)
• Classification: gr-qc (General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology)
• Publication Date: November 4, 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.02676

Abstract

This paper proves that every open connected region in a relativistic spacetime $(M,\textbf{g})$ containing a $b$-incomplete half-curve possesses an open connected subregion that likewise contains a $b$-incomplete half-curve and is "small" in the following sense: it is the image of an open region in the orthonormal frame bundle $O^+M$ under the bundle projection map, where this open region is bounded with respect to any "natural" distance function and its closure is Cauchy incomplete. As a corollary, every $b$-incomplete half-curve can be covered by a sequence of singular regions that are images of bounded subsets of $O^+M$, with the sequence of diameters (relative to any natural distance function) tending to zero. The paper discusses the extent to which these results support the view that singular structures in classical general relativity are "localizable."

Research Background and Motivation

1. Core Problem

In classical general relativity, spacetime singularities are typically defined through curves that are incomplete in some sense. However, this definition faces a conceptual problem: Can singular structures be localized to some "small" region of spacetime?

2. Significance of the Problem

• Physical Intuition: Taking Kruskal-Schwarzschild spacetime as an example, intuitively Region I is not singular while Region II is singular. This suggests that singularity should be a property of certain specific regions rather than a global property of the entire spacetime.
• Theoretical Completeness: A successful analysis of singularities should be able to specify where singular structures occur, i.e., possess "localizability."

3. Limitations of Existing Approaches

Difficulties with Boundary Construction Methods:

• Some traditional approaches attempt to represent singularities by defining well-behaved points on the boundary of some mathematical space (such as Schmidt's $b$-boundary, Geroch-Kronheimer-Penrose ideal points, etc.)
• These methods face serious obstacles:
  • Inability to properly separate boundary points from interior points of spacetime
  • Misclassification of intuitively singular cases
  • Requirement of rather stringent causality conditions

Difficulties in Directly Defining "Small" Regions:

• Lorentz metrics do not induce standard distance functions, making it impossible to define "bounded regions"
• Relative compactness is inappropriate: removing a single point from an arbitrarily small open region leads to geodesic incompleteness and failure of relative compactness (e.g., Minkowski spacetime with a point removed)
• $b$-boundedness is also unsuitable: any $b$-complete spacetime is $b$-bounded

4. Research Motivation of This Paper

To seek a way of defining the "smallness" of singular regions that does not rely on boundary constructions, by connecting spacetime regions with bounded regions in the frame bundle, providing a new perspective on the localizability of singular structures.

Core Contributions

1. Main Theorem (Proposition 1): Proves that any spacetime region containing a $b$-incomplete half-curve has a "small" singular subregion, which is the projection image of an open region in the orthonormal frame bundle that is bounded and has Cauchy incomplete closure.
2. Corollary (Corollary 2): Proves that every $b$-incomplete half-curve can be covered by a sequence of singular regions corresponding to frame bundle subsets whose diameters tend to zero, providing a precise mathematical formulation of "singularity scale tending to zero."
3. Converse Theorem (Proposition 4): Proves that open connected subsets of the frame bundle with Cauchy incomplete closure necessarily project to $b$-incomplete singular regions in spacetime, establishing a bidirectional correspondence.
4. Conceptual Contribution: Provides a new mathematical characterization of the "localizability" of singular structures, circumventing difficulties of boundary construction methods, and giving an explicit definition of "small" regions through the geometry of the frame bundle.

Detailed Methodology

Task Definition

Input: An open region $U$ in relativistic spacetime $(M,\textbf{g})$ containing a $b$-incomplete half-curve $\gamma:[0,a)\to M$

Output:

1. A singular subregion $V\subseteq U$ of $U$
2. An open region $\tilde{V}$ in the orthonormal frame bundle $O^+M$
3. Satisfying: $\tilde{V}$ is bounded, $\text{cl}(\tilde{V})$ is Cauchy incomplete, and $\pi[\tilde{V}]=V$

Core Mathematical Framework

1. $b$-Incompleteness

For a $C^1$ curve $\gamma:I\to M$ (where $I=[0,a)$), the generalized affine parameter $\lambda$ is defined as: $\lambda(t) = \int_0^t \left(\sum_i V^i(t')^2\right)^{1/2}dt'$ where $V^i(t')$ are the components of the tangent vector in a parallel-transported frame.

A curve is $b$-incomplete if and only if:

• The generalized affine length is finite
• It has no endpoint (i.e., there does not exist $p\in M$ such that the curve "approaches" $p$)

2. Natural Metrics on the Frame Bundle

Construction Process:

• Frame bundle $FM\xrightarrow{\pi}M$: pairings of all points and frames $(p,\{e_i|_p\})$
• Orthonormal frame bundle $O^+M$: the connected component of $FM$, with structure group $SO^+(3,1)$
• Levi-Civita connection induces connection 1-form $\omega:T_uO^+M\to\mathfrak{gl}(4,\mathbb{R})$
• Canonical 1-form $\theta:T_uO^+M\to\mathbb{R}^4$

Natural Riemannian Metric: $h(X,Y)|_u = \langle\omega_u(X|_u),\omega_u(Y|_u)\rangle_{\mathfrak{gl}(4,\mathbb{R})} + \langle\theta_u(X|_u),\theta_u(Y|_u)\rangle_{\mathbb{R}^4}$

Key properties:

• Different choices of Euclidean inner products lead to natural metrics that are uniformly equivalent
• The induced distance function $d:O^+M\times O^+M\to\mathbb{R}$ makes $O^+M$ a metric space

3. Key Properties of Curve Lifts

For a curve $\gamma$ in spacetime, its lift $\bar{\gamma}$ in $O^+M$ (constructed via parallel transport) satisfies: $\text{Arc length of $\bar{\gamma}$ (relative to $h$)} = \text{Generalized affine length of $\gamma$}$

This is the core bridge connecting spacetime geometry with the frame bundle metric.

Proof Strategy for Main Theorem (Proposition 1)

Step 1: Construct Bounded Open Sets

• Let the generalized affine length of $\gamma:[0,a)\to U$ be $b$ (finite)
• Take the lift $\bar{\gamma}$ of $\gamma$ in $O^+M$, with arc length also $b$
• For each point $u_i$ on $\bar{\gamma}$, construct an open ball $B_\epsilon(u_i)$ of radius $\epsilon$
• Define $\tilde{W}:=\bigcup_{u_i\in\bar{\gamma}}B_\epsilon(u_i)$, which is open
• Define $\tilde{V}:=\pi^{-1}[U]\cap\tilde{W}$

Boundedness: The diameter of $\tilde{V}$ (relative to any natural distance function) is at most $b+2\epsilon$

Step 2: Prove Cauchy Incompleteness (by Contradiction)

• Assume $\text{cl}(\tilde{V})$ is Cauchy complete
• Construct a Cauchy sequence $\{x_n\}$: $x_n$ is the lift of the point on $\bar{\gamma}$ with generalized affine length $b-b/(2n)$
• This sequence is Cauchy but does not converge to a point on $\bar{\gamma}$ (because $\gamma$ has no endpoint)
• If $\text{cl}(\tilde{V})$ is complete, then $\{x_n\}$ converges to some point $x\in\text{cl}(\tilde{V})$
• Then $\pi(x)$ would be an endpoint of $\gamma$, contradiction!

Step 3: $V=\pi[\tilde{V}]$ is a Singular Region

• The projection map is open, so $V$ is open
• $V$ contains the image of $\gamma$, so it is a $b$-incomplete singular region

Proof Strategy for Corollary (Corollary 2)

For the sequence $\{t_n\}\to a$:

• For each $n$, treat $\gamma|_{[t_n,a)}$ as a curve witnessing incompleteness
• Apply Proposition 1, but using open balls of radius $\epsilon_n=\epsilon/n$
• Obtain $\tilde{V}_n$, whose diameter is at most $b_n+2\epsilon_n$ (where $b_n$ is the length of $\gamma|_{[t_n,a)}$)
• Since $b_n\to 0$ and $\epsilon_n\to 0$, the diameter tends to zero
• Uniform equivalence ensures this holds for all natural distance functions

Technical Innovation Points

1. Circumventing Limitations of Lorentz Metrics: Rather than defining "small" directly on spacetime, the approach utilizes the Riemannian structure of the frame bundle
2. Uniform Equivalence of Natural Metrics: All results are independent of the specific choice of Euclidean inner product, ensuring robustness of the definition
3. Arc Length Correspondence of Curve Lifts: Cleverly uses parallel transport so that the generalized affine length in spacetime equals the arc length in the frame bundle
4. Geometric Meaning of Cauchy Incompleteness: Through proof by contradiction, converts the property of curves having no endpoint into topological properties of the metric space

Experimental Setup

Note: This paper is pure mathematical theoretical research with no numerical experiments or datasets. All results are rigorous mathematical proofs.

This work belongs to theoretical research in mathematical physics, employing primarily:

• Differential geometry (manifolds, fiber bundle theory)
• Metric space theory
• Lorentz geometry
• Mathematical foundations of general relativity

Theoretical Results

Main Theorem Statements

Proposition 1 (Main Theorem): Let $(M,\textbf{g})$ be a relativistic spacetime, $U\subseteq M$ an open set, and $O^+M$ the positive connected component of the orthonormal frame bundle. If there exists a curve $\gamma:[0,a)\to M$ satisfying:

• Finite generalized affine length
• No endpoint
• Image contained in $U$

Then there exists a $b$-incomplete singular region $V\subseteq U$ and an open set $\tilde{V}\subseteq O^+M$ such that:

1. $\tilde{V}$ is bounded (relative to any natural distance function)
2. $\text{cl}(\tilde{V})$ is Cauchy incomplete
3. $\pi[\tilde{V}]=V$

Corollary 2 (Corollary): Under the conditions of Proposition 1, if $\{t_n\}\to a$, then there exists a sequence of open sets $\{\tilde{V}_n\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\subseteq O^+M$ such that for any natural distance function $d$:

1. Each $\tilde{V}_n$ is bounded and $\text{cl}(\tilde{V}_n)$ is Cauchy incomplete
2. $V_n:=\pi(\tilde{V}_n)$ is a singular region containing the image of $\gamma|_{[t_n,a)}$
3. The diameter of $\tilde{V}_n$ tends to zero

Proposition 4 (Converse Theorem): If $\tilde{V}$ is an open connected subset of $O^+M$ and $\text{cl}(\tilde{V})$ is Cauchy incomplete relative to some natural distance function, then $\pi[\tilde{V}]$ is a $b$-incomplete singular region of $M$.

Relationship with Existing Results

Schmidt-Hawking-Ellis Theorem (Theorem 3): Spacetime $(M,\textbf{g})$ is $b$-incomplete $\Longleftrightarrow$ For any natural distance function $d$, $(O^+M,d)$ is Cauchy incomplete

The results of this paper represent a localization and refinement of this theorem:

• Theorem 3 establishes a global correspondence
• Proposition 1 establishes correspondence for local regions and adds a "boundedness" requirement
• Corollary 2 provides a dynamic characterization of "scale tending to zero"

Theoretical Significance

1. Complete Bidirectional Correspondence:
   • Proposition 1: $b$-incomplete $\Rightarrow$ existence of small singular region
   • Proposition 4: Cauchy incomplete $\Rightarrow$ $b$-incomplete singular region
2. Multi-Scale Characterization: Corollary 2 shows that singular structure can be manifested at arbitrarily small scales
3. Independence from Metric Choice: All results hold for any natural metric, reflecting geometric essence

Related Work

1. Definitions of Spacetime Singularities

Different Incompleteness Concepts:

• Geodesic Incompleteness (Wald 1): Existence of incomplete timelike or null geodesics
• Bounded Acceleration Incompleteness (Geroch 2; Olmo et al. 3): Existence of incomplete causal curves with bounded acceleration
• $b$-Incompleteness (Hawking & Ellis 4; Clarke 5): Existence of curves with finite generalized affine length and no endpoint

This paper adopts the weakest form of $b$-incompleteness, thus achieving maximum generality.

2. Boundary Construction Methods

Main Methods and Their Problems:

• Schmidt's $b$-boundary 6,7: Based on geodesic bundle construction, but fails to separate boundary points in certain cases (Bosshard 20; Johnson 21)
• Geroch-Kronheimer-Penrose Ideal Points 17: Uses causal structure, requires strong causality conditions
• Abstract Boundary 18: Scott-Szekeres method, Hausdorff separation issues (Flores et al. 19)
• Common Problem: Geroch et al. 22 identify fundamental difficulties with these methods

3. Pioneering Work on Frame Bundle Methods

• Schmidt 6,7: First introduced natural metrics on frame bundles, proved local $b$-completeness theorem
• Hawking & Ellis 4: Theorem 3 establishes equivalence between global $b$-incompleteness and frame bundle Cauchy incompleteness
• Dodson 8: Studies edge geometry of manifolds
• Friedrich 13: Systematic study of construction and properties
• Marathe 12: Paracompactness conditions on manifolds

Advances in This Paper:

• Deepens from global equivalence to fine characterization of local regions
• Introduces quantitative descriptions of "boundedness" and "diameter tending to zero"
• Explicitly discusses philosophical significance of localizability

4. Philosophical Discussion of Localizability

• Earman 14: Importance of localizability in singularity research
• Curiel 15: Critical analysis of various singularity definitions, emphasizing localizability difficulties

This paper provides new mathematical tools for these philosophical discussions.

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Technical Conclusions:
   • Any $b$-incomplete singular region contains a "small" singular subregion (Proposition 1)
   • "Small" means: the region is the projection image of a bounded open set in the frame bundle with Cauchy incomplete closure
   • One can construct a sequence of singular regions with diameters tending to zero covering any $b$-incomplete curve (Corollary 2)
2. Conceptual Conclusions:
   • Singular structures are localizable in a precise mathematical sense
   • No need to define boundary points; singularity "location" can be characterized through region properties alone
   • The definition of "small" is independent of specific natural metric choices, possessing geometric invariance
3. Philosophical Significance:
   • Supports the intuition of "being able to point to some region of spacetime and say 'singularity exists here'"
   • Provides a localizability concept not dependent on boundary construction
   • Offers a mathematically satisfying answer to "where is the singularity"

Limitations

Limitations explicitly noted by the author:

1. Uncertainty of Physical Meaning:
   • The physical meaning of natural Riemannian metrics on the frame bundle remains opaque
   • Although these metrics derive from physically meaningful Levi-Civita connections, their broader theoretical and practical applicability has not been sufficiently explored
   • What "small" regions mean physically remains unclear
2. No Guarantee of Relative Compactness:
   • The projection image $V=\pi[\tilde{V}]$ is not necessarily relatively compact
   • Because Cauchy incompleteness of $O^+M$ means it lacks the Heine-Borel property
   • Closed and bounded frame bundle regions are not necessarily compact, so their continuous projections are not necessarily relatively compact
3. Limitation to $b$-Incompleteness:
   • This paper only addresses $b$-incompleteness, the weakest singularity definition
   • For stronger singularity concepts (e.g., geodesic incompleteness), results may require modification
4. Technical Assumptions:
   • Requires spacetime to be orientable (to define $O^+M$)
   • Although proofs also work for $F^+M$ (general frame bundle), main results depend on orthonormal frame bundle

Future Directions

While not explicitly listed, the following research directions can be inferred:

1. Physical Interpretation:
   • Explore the role of natural metrics in physical theory
   • Seek connections between observables and frame bundle geometry
2. Generalization to Other Singularity Definitions:
   • Study analogous results for geodesic incompleteness or bounded acceleration incompleteness
   • Compare "small" regions under different singularity concepts
3. Quantum Gravity Applications:
   • In quantum gravity, spacetime may be discretized at Planck scale
   • Results on "diameter tending to zero" may relate to quantum effects
4. Numerical Methods:
   • Develop numerical algorithms for computing bounded regions in frame bundles
   • Visualize singular regions in specific spacetimes (e.g., Schwarzschild)
5. Relationship with Volume Singularities:
   • García-Heveling 25 recently introduced "volume incompleteness"
   • Study relationship between "small" regions in this paper and volume singularities

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Mathematical Rigor:
   • Proofs are based entirely on standard differential geometry and metric space theory
   • Logic is clear with sufficient justification for each step
   • Correct use of advanced tools: fiber bundles, connections, metric spaces
2. Conceptual Innovation:
   • Core Innovation: Defines "smallness" of spacetime regions through frame bundle geometry, circumventing the fundamental difficulty that Lorentz geometry lacks natural distance functions
   • Localizes and refines global theorems (Schmidt-Hawking-Ellis)
   • "Diameter tending to zero" provides dynamic characterization of singularity "scale"
3. Technical Elegance:
   • Uniform equivalence ensures results are independent of metric choice
   • Arc length correspondence of curve lifts is key technical insight
   • Proof by contradiction for Cauchy incompleteness is concise and powerful
4. Philosophical Depth:
   • Takes the philosophical problem of localizability seriously
   • Honestly discusses uncertainty of physical meaning
   • Tightly connects technical results with conceptual questions
5. Writing Clarity:
   • Well-structured: preliminaries → main results → philosophical discussion
   • Sufficient motivation explanation (e.g., Kruskal-Schwarzschild example)
   • Balanced technical details with intuitive explanations

Weaknesses

1. Missing Physical Interpretation:
   • Greatest Problem: Author admits physical meaning of frame bundle natural metrics is unclear
   • No concrete examples computing "small" regions in specific spacetimes
   • Lacks connection to observable physical quantities
   • Undermines physical significance of "localizability"
2. Lack of Concrete Examples:
   • No computation of "small" singular regions in Schwarzschild spacetime
   • No demonstration of specific behavior of sequences in Corollary 2
   • For mathematical physics papers, one or two detailed examples would greatly strengthen persuasiveness
3. Unclear Relationship with Other Singularity Concepts:
   • Only addresses $b$-incompleteness
   • Does not discuss whether geodesic incompleteness admits similar results
   • Does not compare with recent "volume incompleteness" 25
4. Relative Compactness Issue:
   • Footnote 8 notes that $V$ may not be relatively compact
   • Does not deeply discuss how this affects intuitive understanding of "small"
   • In what sense is a bounded but non-relatively-compact region "small"?
5. Computational Aspects:
   • Completely lacks discussion of how to actually compute these regions
   • For applications, algorithms and numerical methods are needed
6. Necessity of Results:
   • In some sense, main results are "obvious": finite-length curves "near singularity" must lie in small regions
   • Main contribution is formalizing this intuition rather than discovering surprising phenomena

Impact

Contribution to the Field:

1. Theoretical Contribution:
   • Provides new tools for singularity theory
   • Enriches discussion of localizability
   • May inspire similar studies of other geometric quantities
2. Potential Impact:
   • Short-term: likely mainly affects mathematical physics and general relativity foundations communities
   • If physical meaning is clarified, could influence broader gravitational physics research
   • May provide insights for handling singularities in quantum gravity
3. Practical Value:
   • Currently Low: Lacks concrete applications and computational methods
   • Potential Value: If numerical methods are developed, could analyze singular structures in complex spacetimes
4. Reproducibility:
   • Very High: Pure mathematical proofs verifiable by anyone
   • No numerical experiments or data, no reproducibility issues

Applicable Scenarios

1. Theoretical Research:
   • Mathematical foundations of general relativity
   • Conceptual analysis of singularity theory
   • Differential geometric methods in spacetime geometry
2. Philosophical Analysis:
   • Localizability problems in physical theory
   • Ontological status of spacetime singularities
   • Conceptual foundations of classical field theory
3. Potential Application Areas (requiring further development):
   • Singularity detection in numerical relativity
   • Fine analysis of black hole physics
   • Classification of cosmological singularities
4. Teaching:
   • Supplementary material for advanced general relativity courses
   • Demonstration of fiber bundle methods in physics
   • Case study in mathematical physics methods

Overall Assessment

This is a paper that is technically solid, conceptually interesting, but with unclear physical significance.

Main Value:

• Provides new mathematical perspective on an ancient conceptual problem (localizability of singularities)
• Rigorous proofs with technical innovation (using frame bundle geometry)
• Honestly confronts difficulties in physical interpretation

Main Limitations:

• Unclear physical meaning is a critical weakness
• Lacks concrete examples and computations
• Results are somewhat "formalization of intuition" rather than surprising discoveries

Recommended for:

• Researchers interested in mathematical foundations of general relativity
• Theoretical physicists studying spacetime singularities
• Philosophers of physics (especially those concerned with localizability)

Not recommended for:

• Numerical relativists seeking directly applicable methods
• Students needing physical intuition and concrete examples

Key for Future Work: Clarifying the physical meaning of frame bundle natural metrics, or finding alternative definitions of "small" with clear physical interpretation.

Selected References

1. Hawking & Ellis (1973): The Large-Scale Structure of Spacetime - Classical textbook, source of Theorem 3
2. Schmidt (1971, 1973): Pioneering work introducing $b$-boundary and frame bundle methods
3. Clarke (1993): The Analysis of Spacetime Singularities - Comprehensive review of singularity theory
4. Geroch (1968): "What is a singularity in general relativity?" - Foundational literature on singularity definitions
5. Curiel (1999): "The analysis of singular spacetimes" - Critical philosophical analysis
6. Earman (1995): Bangs, Crunches, Whimpers, and Shrieks - Philosophical monograph on singularities
7. García-Heveling (2024): Recent work on volume singularities, worth comparing with this paper

Summary: This paper is technically successful, providing new tools for an important conceptual problem, but its ultimate value depends on whether future work can clarify its physical meaning. It is a paper worth attention but requiring subsequent development to fully realize its potential.