- Access by Xinjiang University
Energy conservation and cosmological redshift from the Brown-York quasilocal energy
Phys. Rev. D 114, 084029 – Published 8 October, 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/w7j7-ddv8
Abstract
The question whether energy is conserved in an expanding universe remains one of the central conceptual issues of relativistic cosmology. The absence of a global timelike Killing vector and the lack of a local gravitational energy density often lead to the conclusion that cosmological redshift represents a genuine violation of energy conservation. In this work we reconsider this problem within the framework of Brown-York quasilocal energy and its associated balance law. For comoving spherical boundaries in Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker spacetimes we show that the ordinary stress-energy flux through the boundary vanishes identically for arbitrary perfect fluids, while the unreferenced Brown-York energy evolves entirely due to a purely geometrical boundary contribution. We further demonstrate that the timelike boundary world tube possesses a natural dynamical reference geometry. The corresponding reference subtraction removes the universal background contribution of the unreferenced Brown-York energy and leads to a quasilocal energy whose leading nontrivial term exactly reproduces the enclosed matter energy. For radiation dominated cosmologies, the resulting expansion is , where the leading term coincides precisely with the energy of the enclosed radiation responsible for cosmological redshift. Higher-order contributions naturally possess the structure expected for gravitational self-energy corrections. These results suggest that cosmological redshift can be understood within a fully quasilocal conservation framework. The apparent loss of photon energy therefore need not indicate a breakdown of energy conservation but may instead reflect the fundamentally quasilocal character of gravitational energy in general relativity.
Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)
Article Text
References (15)
- J. Brown and James W. York, Jr., Phys. Rev. D 47, 1407 (1993).
- J. W. York, Jr., Phys. Rev. Lett. 28, 1082 (1972).
- L. B. Szabados, Living Rev. Relativity 12, 4 (2009).
- B. S. Schmekel, Phys. Rev. D 98, 104051 (2018).
- A. P. Lundgren (private communication).
- B. S. Schmekel, Phys. Rev. D 100, 124011 (2019).
- R. J. Epp, P. L. McGrath, and R. B. Mann, Classical Quantum Gravity 30, 195019 (2013).
- M. M. Afshar, Classical Quantum Gravity 26, 225005 (2009).
- M. Oltean, H. Bazrafshan Moghaddam, and R. J. Epp, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 2043029 (2020).
- C.-M. Chen, J.-L. Liu, and J. M. Nester, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 22, 2039 (2007).
- J. Brown, S. Lau, and James W. York, Jr., Phys. Rev. D 59, 064028 (1999).
- R. J. Epp, Phys. Rev. D 62, 124018 (2000).
- C.-C. M. Liu and S.-T. Yau, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 231102 (2003).
- M.-T. Wang and S.-T. Yau, Commun. Anal. Geom. 15, 249 (2007).
- M.-T. Wang and S.-T. Yau, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 021101 (2009).