Not much use in cosmology, alas'Killing' would work but has to be followed by 'vector' or 'tensor'. 'Kretschmann' would work but has to be followed by 'scalar', 'curvature' or 'invariant'. (Actually I'm buggerd if I know what the Kretschmann scalar for cosmology is. Quite possibly it's even zero.) There's a stupid theory called Kruskaton cosmology but I think may actually be spelled Cruscaton.
Edit: Hmmm. Waves, Anisotropies and Null-surfaces in Kundt-Einstein Riemannian Spacetimes. That one *almost* works and gives us an added 'Kundt' in the title, but it's damn near meaningless.
(Edit: Hmmm. Waves, Anisotropies and Null-surfaces in Kundt-Einstein Riemannian Spacetimes. That one *almost* works and gives us an added 'Kundt' in the title, but it's damn near meaningless.
boris the spider,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 15:47,
archived)
Hmmmm not a bad ideaI might email Katherine Freese and suggest a follow-up to the Cardassian model. They called it that because it "takes over the universe" and ends up dominating all other matter. Perhaps something that starts to take over the universe but then settles down would be a Klingon model.
This has legs.
(This has legs.
boris the spider,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 16:05,
archived)
I EXPECT TO BE CREDITED
Griffin Saver Something, something, 2006, something.,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 16:15,
archived)
You shall be in the acknowledgements"The authors wish to thank Griffy Savalas for useful and constructive discussions."
( boris the spider,
Wed 14 Apr 2010, 16:17,
archived)