PDA

View Full Version : Ricci and Weyl tensors in GR


Kasper J. Larsen
Oct8-04, 06:20 AM
<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>Hello all,\n\n\n\nI happened to stumble upon a tutorial on general relativity authored\nby John Baez (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/gr/ricci.weyl.html). In\nthe section called "The Ricci and Weyl Tensors" the author tries to\ngive a geometric interpretation of these tensors. However, I am not at\nall clear about the precise meaning of what he writes:\n\n\n" [...] We consider a bunch of initially comoving coffee grounds near\na point P in spacetime, with the coffee ground that actually goes\nthrough P having velocity v at that instant. (Hence the term "instant\ncoffee".) Working in the local rest frame of the coffee ground that\ngoes through P, we consider a small round ball of comoving coffee\ngrounds centered at P, and see what happens as time passes. Each\ncoffee ground moves along a geodesic, but since spacetime is curved,\nthe ball may shrink, expand, rotate, and/or be deformed into an\nellipsoid.\n\nThe Ricci tensor Rab only keeps track of the change of volume of this\nball. Namely, the second time derivative of the volume of the ball is\n-Rabva vb times the ball\'s original volume."\n\n(Actually, Lee C. Loveridge may also be quoted, writing something\nalong the same lines: "The Ricci tensor governs the changing size of a\nsmall volume propagating through a curved space.")\n\n\nIt is the last paragraph quoted from Baez that I am very unsure about.\nThere are several naturally defined balls associated with a manifold,\nso I am unclear about which exact definition is being referred to.\nFurther, some vector field on the manifold or some family of geodesics\nneeds to be chosen for the "ball" to be uniquely determined.\n\n\nMy questions are as below:\n\n1. How would the claim made by Baez be expressed precisely, as a\ntheorem of differential geometry? I should like very much to see a\nproof also. A reference to some bibliography would be nice.\n\n2. Is there some direct geometric interpretation of the Ricci tensor,\napart from it being defined as "the" contraction of the Riemann\ntensor? In terms of sectional curvature, perhaps?\n\n3. Is there some way of interpreting the Weyl tensor, physical as well\nas geometric? (In Baez\'s tutorial, the Weyl tensor is related to\ngravitational waves, but in my opinion the argument given there\ndoesn\'t seem to pinpoint waves as the only possible interpretation.)\n\n\n\nThanks in advance!\n\nKasper J. Larsen\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">&nbsp;&nbsp;View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>Hello all,



I happened to stumble upon a tutorial on general relativity authored
by John Baez (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/gr/ricci.weyl.html). In
the section called "The Ricci and Weyl Tensors" the author tries to
give a geometric interpretation of these tensors. However, I am not at
all clear about the precise meaning of what he writes:


" [...] We consider a bunch of initially comoving coffee grounds near
a point P in spacetime, with the coffee ground that actually goes
through P having velocity v at that instant. (Hence the term "instant
coffee".) Working in the local rest frame of the coffee ground that
goes through P, we consider a small round ball of comoving coffee
grounds centered at P, and see what happens as time passes. Each
coffee ground moves along a geodesic, but since spacetime is curved,
the ball may shrink, expand, rotate, and/or be deformed into an
ellipsoid.

The Ricci tensor Rab only keeps track of the change of volume of this
ball. Namely, the second time derivative of the volume of the ball is
-Rabva vb times the ball's original volume."

(Actually, Lee C. Loveridge may also be quoted, writing something
along the same lines: "The Ricci tensor governs the changing size of a
small volume propagating through a curved space.")


It is the last paragraph quoted from Baez that I am very unsure about.
There are several naturally defined balls associated with a manifold,
so I am unclear about which exact definition is being referred to.
Further, some vector field on the manifold or some family of geodesics
needs to be chosen for the "ball" to be uniquely determined.


My questions are as below:

1. How would the claim made by Baez be expressed precisely, as a
theorem of differential geometry? I should like very much to see a
proof also. A reference to some bibliography would be nice.

2. Is there some direct geometric interpretation of the Ricci tensor,
apart from it being defined as "the" contraction of the Riemann
tensor? In terms of sectional curvature, perhaps?

3. Is there some way of interpreting the Weyl tensor, physical as well
as geometric? (In Baez's tutorial, the Weyl tensor is related to
gravitational waves, but in my opinion the argument given there
doesn't seem to pinpoint waves as the only possible interpretation.)



Thanks in advance!

Kasper J. Larsen

Lee_Loveridge
Mar8-08, 04:29 PM
1. I don't believe that a unique deffinition of "ball" is required. The small volume of coffee grounds does not need to be a ball at all. Mine was more of a small parallelipiped. The point is not the shape of the volume, but that the Ricci tensor governs the volume change. (Actually, the Ricci tensor can be made without a metric. It only needs a connection. Volume can still be defined in this situation, but I don't believe a ball can be.)

2. Beyond the statement in Baez tutorial and my paper, I don't know a better geometrical meaning for the Ricci Tensor. It is the part of the curvature that governs volume change as you move along a geodesic (or more accurately an infinitesimal family of geodesics). If you find a more fundamental geomentric explanation, I would be anxious to hear about it. (Einstein's tensor contracted with a direction vector can be seen as the intrinsic scalar curvature of the subspace perpendicular to that direction.)

3. Gravity waves have to depend on the Weyl tensor, because they can propagate through empty space. (With no sources there can be no Ricci tensor.) However, there is no reason that it has to have only that meaning. It is the part of the Riemann tensor that causes non-volume changing deformations along a geodesic. Thus, it can change the shape of an object (however you define it) but not its volume. There may be better explanations, and I encourage you to seek them, but I don't know what they are.

By the way, Baez has a more technical paper though I'm not certain where it is. I thought my paper at Arxiv.org had proofs. I think you can find Baez's technical paper there too, maybe under math physics or general relativity.