Question on weak field approximation

In summary, the use of the weak field approximation in A First Course in General Relativity can be confusing, especially when the term "f(x) is only valid to first order in f" is mentioned. This is related to the Newtonian potential in the metric, as shown in the book's equation of 1/2(-1/(1 + 2\phi))(-2\phi),0, which is simplified to \phi,0 + 0(\phi^{2}). The step of simplification involves using a Taylor expansion, where the assumption of smallness of phi and its derivative allows for the product of two small quantities to be negligible and thus the equation can be simplified to \partial_0 \phi + \math
  • #1
WannabeNewton
Science Advisor
5,844
550
In A First Course in General Relativity, the use of the weak field approximation is confusing to me. I constantly get confused when the term "f(x) is only valid to first order in f..." for the Newtonian potential in the metric comes up. At a certain point the book states:
...1/2(-1/(1 + 2[tex]\phi[/tex]))(-2[tex]\phi[/tex]),0 (where ,0 is the time derivative)
and then the book simplifies this to:
[tex]\phi[/tex],0 + 0([tex]\phi[/tex][tex]^{2}[/tex])

I have NO IDEA how that step came about. Does this step and the whole "correct to first order" have to do with a Taylor expansion and if so how does one come to what the book came to? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
[tex]\frac{1}{1+2\phi}} \approx 1 - 2 \phi + \mathcal{O}(\phi^2)[/tex]

So when you multiply it all out...
[tex]\partial_0 \left(\phi - 2 \phi ^2\right) = \partial_0 \phi - 4 \phi \partial_0 \phi [/tex]

Since we assume phi is small, phi dot is also small, so the product of two small quantities is really small! Specifically, of order phi^2. So

[tex] = \partial_0 \phi + \mathcal{O}(\phi^2) [/tex]
 
  • #3
Nabeshin said:
[tex]\frac{1}{1+2\phi}} \approx 1 - 2 \phi + \mathcal{O}(\phi^2)[/tex]

So when you multiply it all out...
[tex]\partial_0 \left(\phi - 2 \phi ^2\right) = \partial_0 \phi - 4 \phi \partial_0 \phi [/tex]

Since we assume phi is small, phi dot is also small, so the product of two small quantities is really small! Specifically, of order phi^2. So

[tex] = \partial_0 \phi + \mathcal{O}(\phi^2) [/tex]

Is there something special about phi? Obviously, in general, smallness of phi implies nothing about its derivative.
 
  • #4
If you don't mind, could you explain what big omicron of psi ^ 2 actually is? I had no idea it was that; I thought it was a zero being multiplied by the function (and I kept thinking why this was being showed on the text) =p.
 
  • #5
WannabeNewton said:
If you don't mind, could you explain what big omicron of psi ^ 2 actually is? I had no idea it was that; I thought it was a zero being multiplied by the function (and I kept thinking why this was being showed on the text) =p.

That's 'big O' notation. It means that the error is 'of the order' of the big O argument. Thus:

g(x) = f(x)+O(x^2)

means that g(x) = f(x) + <some function bounded by a constant times x ^2>
 
  • #6
so what does it mean when psi is only correct to first order? Thanks.
 
  • #7
PAllen said:
Is there something special about phi? Obviously, in general, smallness of phi implies nothing about its derivative.

In general, you are correct. But this is not something limited to phi, but rather a general feature of doing these "to order x^2" type taylor expansions. Generally, if phi is small, we want it to stay small so our approximation is always valid. The way we do this is by ensuring all derivatives of phi are equally small.

"Correct to first order" means just that: everything up to phi^1 is correct. You can think of the real function we are approximating as an infinitely long series expansion, so we're saying "what we've written down as the solution is correct for the first term of that expansion". Similarly, correct to phi^2 would be stating that we have the first two terms in the expansion correct.

Basically, the nth order comment is just a reference to how many terms in the taylor series we are interested in.
 
  • #8
Ah ok I think I understand. I think the book should have had an omicron in front of the function and not a zero which was really confusing. If it isn't any trouble could you explain if the given first order approximation can be found using a taylor expansion (or am I missing something?).
 
  • #9
WannabeNewton said:
Ah ok I think I understand. I think the book should have had an omicron in front of the function and not a zero which was really confusing.
Yes, this probably would have helped! That notation is pretty standard, not sure where you're supposed to be first introduced to it...
If it isn't any trouble could you explain if the given first order approximation can be found using a taylor expansion (or am I missing something?).

Umm, is that not what I did in my first post? I'm not entirely sure what you're asking for here.
 
  • #10
Just not used to seeing it put that way when using taylor series sorry.
 

1. What is the weak field approximation?

The weak field approximation is a mathematical technique used in physics to simplify the calculation of a system in which the gravitational field is considered to be weak. It is based on the assumption that the gravitational field is much weaker than other forces present in the system, making it easier to solve complex equations.

2. When is the weak field approximation applicable?

The weak field approximation is applicable when the gravitational field is significantly weaker than other forces present in the system. This is typically the case for objects with small masses and large distances between them, such as planets in our solar system.

3. How is the weak field approximation used in general relativity?

In general relativity, the weak field approximation is used to simplify the equations of motion for objects in a gravitational field. It allows for the calculation of the curvature of spacetime caused by a massive object without having to consider the full complexity of the gravitational field.

4. What are the limitations of the weak field approximation?

The weak field approximation is only valid for systems where the gravitational field is significantly weaker than other forces present. It also cannot accurately describe strong gravitational fields, such as those near black holes or neutron stars. In these cases, more advanced mathematical techniques are needed.

5. Can the weak field approximation be applied to other physical phenomena?

Yes, the weak field approximation can also be applied to other forces besides gravity. For example, it can be used to simplify the calculation of electromagnetic fields in cases where they are much weaker than other forces present. However, it is most commonly used in the context of gravity.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
973
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
40
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top