How Does the Ricci Tensor Affect Tensor Equations in Wald's Problem?

  • Thread starter tommyj
  • Start date
In summary, the author has found two mistakes in his solution to problem 10.2 and is unsure how to fix them. He is hopeful that someone else can help him.
  • #1
tommyj
22
0
EDIT dw i figured it out, not sure how to remove it though!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Could you show me how you did part (b) of problem 10.2?

Some while back I did problem 10.2 and I thought I did part (b) of it right (https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=687641#post4359286) but a few weeks later I found a mistake in my solution. Since then I forgot about the problem but you bringing it up has reminded me I have yet to still fix the mistake in my solution to part (b)!
 
  • #3
Sorry to get your hopes up but I made mistakes in both parts! How did you do part a) may i ask? I can't get terms to dissappear.

Also, for part b) both constraints only seem to imply that [itex]F^{ab}\nabla _an_b=0[/itex] which don't really seem to help to solve for the time derivative of the initial conditions. I've spent ages looking and can't find anything on it!
 
  • #4
tommyj said:
Sorry to get your hopes up but I made mistakes in both parts! How did you do part a) may i ask? I can't get terms to dissappear.

Let me start by showing that Gauss's law for electricity holds on the space-like Cauchy surface. Keep in mind that ##n^{a}n_{a} = -1##, which implies that ##n^{a}\nabla_{b}n_{a} = 0##; also keep in mind that ##n_{[a}\nabla_{b}n_{c]} = 0## since the unit normal field is hypersurface orthogonal to the space-like foliation ##\Sigma_t## (c.f. Theorem 8.3.14).

I will denote the derivative operator associated with the spatial metric ##h_{ab}## by ##\tilde{\nabla}_{a}##.

We have ##\tilde{\nabla}_{a}E^{a} = h_{a}{}{}^{b}h^{a}{}{}_{c}\nabla_{b}(F^{c}{}{}_{d}n^{d})\\ = (\delta^{bc} + n^{b}n^{c})(n^{d}\nabla_{b}F_{cd} + F_{cd}\nabla_{b}n^{d})\\ = n^{d}\nabla^{c}F_{cd} + F_{cd}\nabla^{c}n^{d} + n^{b}n^{c}n^{d}\nabla_{b}F_{cd} + n^{b}n^{c}F_{cd}\nabla_{b}n^{d}##.

Now ##n^{c}n^{d}\nabla_{b}F_{cd} = n^{d}n^{c}\nabla_{b}F_{dc} = -n^{c}n^{d}\nabla_{b}F_{cd}\Rightarrow n^{c}n^{d}\nabla_{b}F_{cd} = 0##

and ##n_{[a}\nabla_{b}n_{c]} = 0\Rightarrow n^{b}n^{c}F_{cd}\nabla_{b}n^{d} - n^{b}n^{d}F_{cd}\nabla_{b}n^{c}= 2n^{b}n^{c}F_{cd}\nabla_{b}n^{d}\\ = F_{cd}\nabla^{d}n^{c} - F_{cd}\nabla^{c}n^{d} = - 2F_{cd}\nabla^{c}n^{d}##

thus ##\tilde{\nabla}_{a}E^{a}= n^{d}\nabla^{c}F_{cd} = -4\pi j_{d}n^{d} = 4\pi\rho## by virtue of the inhomogeneous Maxwell equations.

Showing Gauss's law for magnetism holds on the spacelike Cauchy surface is very similar.

We have ##\tilde{\nabla}_{a}B^{a} =-\frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{cdef} h_{a}{}{}^{b}h^{a}{}{}_{c}\nabla_{b}(F_{de}n_{f})\\ = -\frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{cdef} (n_{f}\nabla_{c}F_{de} + F_{de}\nabla_{c}n_{f} + n^{b}n_{c}n_{f}\nabla_{b}F_{de} + n^{b}n_{c}F_{de}\nabla_{b}n_{f})##.

Now ##\epsilon^{cdef}n_{c}n_{f} = 0## because the volume form is totally antisymmetric and just as before we have ##n_{[a}\nabla_{b}n_{c]} = 0 \Rightarrow \epsilon^{cdef} n^{b}n_{c}F_{de}\nabla_{b}n_{f} - \epsilon^{cdef} n^{b}n_{f}F_{de}\nabla_{b}n_{c}= 2\epsilon^{cdef} n^{b}n_{c}F_{de}\nabla_{b}n_{f}\\ = \epsilon^{cdef} F_{de}\nabla_{f}n_{c} - \epsilon^{cdef}F_{de}\nabla_{c}n_{f} = -2 \epsilon^{cdef}F_{de}\nabla_{c}n_{f}##

so we are left with ##\tilde{\nabla}_{a}B^{a} = -\frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{cdef} n_{f}\nabla_{c}F_{de}##. But ##\epsilon^{cdef}\nabla_{c}F_{de} = -\epsilon^{cdef}\nabla_{d}F_{ce} = \epsilon^{cdef}\nabla_{e}F_{cd}## hence ##3\epsilon^{cdef}\nabla_{c}F_{de} = 3\epsilon^{cdef}\nabla_{[c}F_{de]} = 0 ## by virtue of the homogeneous Maxwell equations thus we have the desired result ##\tilde{\nabla}_{a}B^{a} = 0##.

tommyj said:
Also, for part b) both constraints only seem to imply that [itex]F^{ab}\nabla _an_b=0[/itex] which don't really seem to help to solve for the time derivative of the initial conditions. I've spent ages looking and can't find anything on it!

I'm stuck on that calculation as well. I have to finish my particle physics HW but after that I'll take another jab at it.
 
  • #5
ah man I even noted the hypersurface orthogonal relation as I knew it would be useful but I forgot about it. You live and learn as they say. thanks alot, I know how much effort it is to write tensor equations on here so I really appreciate it!

I cannot see how to do the second part. Its completely different from the example in the book, the Ricci Tensor term just messes everything up for the second constraint part
 

What is the problem being addressed in Wald Chapter 10 Problem 2?

The problem being addressed in Wald Chapter 10 Problem 2 is how to accurately estimate the population mean from a small sample size.

What is the significance of this problem?

This problem is significant because it is a common issue faced by scientists and researchers when trying to make inferences about a larger population based on a small sample size.

What is the solution proposed in Wald Chapter 10 Problem 2?

The solution proposed in Wald Chapter 10 Problem 2 is the use of confidence intervals, specifically the use of the t-distribution and t-intervals, to estimate the population mean with a given level of confidence.

How does the t-distribution differ from the normal distribution?

The t-distribution differs from the normal distribution in that it takes into account the smaller sample size and therefore has heavier tails, allowing for a more accurate estimation of the population mean.

What are some limitations of using t-intervals to estimate the population mean?

Some limitations of using t-intervals include the assumption of normality for the population, the assumption of independence within the sample, and the requirement of a large enough sample size for the t-distribution to be a good approximation of the normal distribution.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
711
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
851
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
989
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
967
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top