How does TsT transformation differ from teleparallel gravity's equivalence problem with general relativity?

Question

Antigravity · Accepted Answer

TsT Transformations vs. Teleparallel Gravity's Equivalence Problem Your question asks about two quite different topics that aren't directly addressed together in the archive. Let me unpack what we know about each. Teleparallel Gravity's Equivalence Problem The archive makes clear that whether teleparallel gravity is truly equivalent to general relativity is contested . On one side, teleparallel gravity (TEGR) is claimed to be dynamically equivalent to GR in the sense that both give the same equations of motion [AG 2025.01 442]. The appeal is geometric: GR attributes gravity to spacetime curvature, while TEGR attributes it to spacetime torsion—yet they predict identical dynamics [AG 2024.05 608]. This is one leg of the "Geometric Trinity" framework, which also includes symmetric teleparallel gravity (STEGR, based on non metricity) [AG 2025.03 120]. On the other side, equivalence is not obvious . One line of argument is that TEGR posits strictly more structure than GR—specifically, a flat teleparallel connection in addition to the metric—and so fails to be equivalent under reasonable mathematical criteria [AG 2024.06 418]. Another view holds that the "trinity" is oversold: if you insist on a metric (as gravity theories must), the Levi Civita connection is not arbitrary but determined by the metric, making torsion and non metricity merely new labels for the same physics rather than genuine alternatives [AG 2024.11 413]. The deep issue is whether these formulations describe the same physical content or whether the choice of how to decompose spacetime geometry—curvature vs. torsion vs. non metricity—carries real physical meaning [AG 2025.03 042]. TsT Transformations The provided preprints do not address TsT (Target space Torsion) transformations , which are primarily a tool in string theory and supergravity for generating dual solutions by exchanging T duality with torsion.