Integration by parts in curved space time

In summary, the conversation discusses how integration by parts can be used in general relativity and how it can be applied to a specific integral involving the d'Alembertian operator. The conversation also touches on the use of differential p-forms and the covariant derivative in this context. The conversation also mentions a paper by Benini that further explores this topic.
  • #1
naima
Gold Member
938
54
In this thread, ramparts asked how integration by parts could be used in general relativity.
suppose you have
##\int_M (\nabla^a \nabla_a f) g .Vol##
Can it be written like
##\int_M (\nabla^a \nabla_a g) f .Vol## plus a boundary integration term (by integrating twice by parts)?

I think thay it is possible.
look at Benini's paper page 18. I would like to understand the math behind that.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I like to think of it in another way which I learned from fzero a while back.

First you can use that ##\nabla^a\nabla_a = \Box## with ##\Box## the d'Alembertian.
Next write
##\int_M\left[\Box (fg) \right]\text{Vol} = \int_M\left[\Box (f)g + \Box (g)f \right]\text{Vol}##.

Rewriting this as
##\int_M\left[\Box (f)g \right]\text{Vol} = \int_M\left[\Box (fg) \right]\text{Vol} - \int_M\left[ \Box (g)f \right]\text{Vol}##

This is a great way to work with this stuff. Especially when you have differential p-forms in there.

I can't follow the notation in the paper you linked so I'm not going to make 5 mistakes trying to help you.
 
  • #3
Are you sure that you consider the metric ##h_{\mu \nu}## in ##\nabla^a \nabla_a ##?
 
  • #4
I don't understand what you mean.
Are the latin indices a subset of the greek ones?
I need a little more context to give a detailed response.

One remark I can make is ##\nabla_af = \partial_a f## for a scalar function f.
 
  • #5
let us take the simpler case of 1+1 space time with this metric
##
\begin{matrix}
a & b \\
b & c
\end{matrix}
##
We have to calculate
##\int_M f(t,x)
\begin{matrix}
(\partial_t & \partial_x)\end{matrix}
\begin{matrix}
a & b \\
b & c
\end{matrix}
\begin{matrix}
(\partial_t \\
(\partial_x
\end{matrix} g(t,x) \sqrt{-ac+b^2}dt.dx##
and in a curved space a, b, and c can depend on t and x.
So it is not obvious to say "i integrate twice by parts"
 
  • #6
In fact you forget that the covariant derivatives are chosen in such a way that ##\nabla_a g^{bc} = 0##.
That should resolve that part of your confusion.
 
  • #7
The covariant derivative obeys the Leibnitz rule and is metric compatible. So yes, performing integration by parts you get your result.
 
  • #8
Can you write the integral just with the ##\partial^2_{tt}## term?(it will be the same for the other terms)
thanks
 
  • #9
I read something that could help:
##g^{\mu \nu} \nabla_\mu \nabla_\nu = (1/\sqrt{-g}) \partial_\mu (\sqrt{-g} \partial^\mu)##
it is here
so the square root disappears in Vol.My notation in #5 for the product of covariant derivative and contravariant derivative was incorrect.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
  • #10
The covariant divergence of a vector field [itex]V^{a} (x)[/itex] is given by the identity

[tex]

\begin{equation}

\sqrt{-g} \ \nabla_{a}V^{a} = \partial_{a} \left(\sqrt{-g} V^{a} \right) .

\end{equation}

[/tex]

Let [itex]\Omega[/itex] be some n-dimensional region with boundary [itex]\partial \Omega[/itex]. Let [itex]\Phi(x)[/itex] and [itex]\Psi(x)[/itex] be smooth scalar fields. Set

[tex]

\begin{equation}

V^{a}(x) = g^{ab}\ \nabla_{b}\Phi (x) = g^{ab}\ \partial_{b}\Phi (x) .

\end{equation}

[/tex]

Put (2) in (1)

[tex]

\begin{equation}

\sqrt{-g} \ g^{ab} \ \nabla_{a}\nabla_{b}\Phi (x) = \partial_{a} \left( \sqrt{-g} \ g^{ab} \ \partial_{b}\Phi (x) \right) .

\end{equation}

[/tex]

Multiply (3) with [itex]\Psi(x)[/itex] and integrate over the region [itex]\Omega[/itex]

[tex]

\begin{equation}

\int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \sqrt{-g} \left( \nabla^{a}\nabla_{a}\Phi (x) \right) \ \Psi(x) = \int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \partial_{a} \left( \sqrt{-g} \ g^{ab} \ \partial_{b}\Phi (x) \right) \ \Psi(x) .

\end{equation}

[/tex]

Integrate the RHS by part

[tex]

\begin{equation*}

\int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \sqrt{-g} \left( \nabla^{a}\nabla_{a}\Phi \right) \ \Psi = \int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \partial_{a} \left( \Psi \ \sqrt{-g} \ g^{ab} \ \partial_{b}\Phi \right) - \int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \partial_{b}\Phi \left( \sqrt{-g} \ g^{ab} \ \partial_{a}\Psi \right) .

\end{equation*}

[/tex]

Repeat integration by part on the second integral on the RHS

[tex]

\begin{equation*}

\begin{split}

\int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \sqrt{-g} \left( \nabla^{a}\nabla_{a}\Phi (x) \right) \ \Psi (x) =& \int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \partial_{a} \left( \sqrt{-g} \ g^{ab} \left( \Psi (x) \ \partial_{b}\Phi (x) - \Phi (x) \ \partial_{b} \Psi (x) \right) \right) \\

& + \int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \Phi (x) \ \partial_{a} \left( \sqrt{-g} \ g^{ab} \ \partial_{b} \Psi (x) \right) .

\end{split}

\end{equation*}

[/tex]

Using Stokes' theorem, the first integral on the RHS can be converted to integral over the boundary. In the second integral, use (3)

[tex]

\begin{equation*}

\begin{split}

\int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \sqrt{-g} \left( \nabla^{a}\nabla_{a}\Phi (x) \right) \ \Psi (x) =& \int_{\partial \Omega} d \Sigma^{a} \ \sqrt{-g} \ \left( \Psi \ \partial_{a}\Phi - \Phi \ \partial_{a} \Psi \right) \\

& + \int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \sqrt{-g} \ \Phi (x) \ \left( \nabla^{a}\nabla_{a} \Psi (x) \right) .

\end{split}

\end{equation*}

[/tex]

Finally, if the scalar fields vanish on the boundary, you get

[tex]

\begin{equation}

\int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \sqrt{-g} \left( \nabla^{a}\nabla_{a}\Phi (x) \right) \ \Psi (x) = \int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \sqrt{-g} \ \Phi (x) \ \left( \nabla^{a}\nabla_{a} \Psi (x) \right) .

\end{equation}

[/tex]
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes ShayanJ and naima
  • #11
Thank you very much for this answer.
In fact in the paper after two integrations by parts the only remaining things are the integrals on the boundary. (the remaining integral on ##\Omega## contains something which vanishes because it obeys the generalized Klein Gordon equation.
Thanks again
 
  • #12
naima said:
Thank you very much for this answer.
In fact in the paper after two integrations by parts the only remaining things are the integrals on the boundary. (the remaining integral on ##\Omega## contains something which vanishes because it obeys the generalized Klein Gordon equation.
Thanks again
You welcome. I did not look at any paper, I just answered your original question.
 
  • #13
samalkhaiat said:
## \int_{\Omega} d^{n} x \ \partial_{a} \left( \sqrt{-g} \ g^{ab} \left( \Psi (x) \ \partial_{b}\Phi (x) - \Phi (x) \ \partial_{b} \Psi (x) \right) \right) = ##
## \int_{\partial \Omega} d \Sigma^{a} \sqrt{-g} \left( \Psi \partial_{a}\Phi - \Phi \partial_{a} \Psi \right) ##

I have no problem before that.

If we start from a manifold M having some boundary ##\partial M## it maydescribed by a set of overlapping maps. An open set V of the manifold which does not intersect ##\partial M## can be mapped to ##R^4##. In this map we can integrate by parts but we have no natural ##\Sigma^a## boundaries. Have we to consider boundaries at infinity and what are ##d\Sigma## at infinity?
 
  • #14
What do you mean by “can do integration by part”? You can always do that. If you are asking about the application of Stokes’ theorem, then one can say few words about it. Basically, it is all about the topological properties of [itex]\partial\Omega[/itex]. In order to avoid complications, which can arise from the “corners” of [itex]\partial\Omega[/itex], one can take [itex]\partial\Omega[/itex] to be a “tube” consisting of two spacelike hypersurfaces [itex]\Sigma_{t_{1}}[/itex] and [itex]\Sigma_{t_{2}}[/itex] having the same topology, and a connecting timelike element [itex]\mathcal{T}[/itex]
[tex]\partial\Omega = \Sigma_{t_{1}} \cup \Sigma_{t_{2}} \cup \mathcal{T} .[/tex]
It is usually assumed that spacetime is foliated into spacelike hypersurfaces [itex](\Sigma_{t})_{t \in \mathbb{R}}[/itex] defined by [itex]x^{0}= t = \mbox{constant}[/itex], where [itex]t : M^{(1,n-1)} \to \mathbb{R}[/itex] is a well defined time function throughout space time [tex]M^{(1,n-1)}= \bigcup_{t \in \mathbb{R}}\Sigma_{t}.[/tex]
([itex]\Sigma_{t_{1}}[/itex] and [itex]\Sigma_{t_{2}}[/itex] are the initial and final Cauchy surfaces). This induces another foliation on the boundary element [itex]\mathcal{T}= \mathbb{R} \times \mathcal{S}^{(n-2)}[/itex], where [itex] \mathcal{S}^{(n-2)}[/itex] are [itex](n-2)[/itex]-dimensional spacelike surfaces given by [tex]\mathcal{S}^{(n-2)} = \partial \Sigma_{t} = \Sigma_{t} \cap \mathcal{T}.[/tex] (The boundary [itex]\partial \Sigma_{t}[/itex] of each [itex]\Sigma_{t}[/itex] (leaf) lies in the boundary element [itex]\mathcal{T}[/itex]; the intersections of [itex]\Sigma_{t}[/itex] leaves with [itex]\mathcal{T}[/itex] induce a foliation of [itex]\mathcal{T}[/itex])
The surface element differential [itex]d\Sigma_{\mu}[/itex] on [itex]\partial \Omega[/itex] is given by
[tex]d\Sigma_{\mu} = d\Sigma \ n_{\mu} = d^{n-1}x \ \sqrt{|g^{(n-1}|} \ n_{\mu} ,[/tex] where [itex]d\Sigma[/itex] is “volume” form on [itex]\partial\Omega[/itex], that is to say that the [itex]\epsilon[/itex]-tensor on [itex]\partial\Omega[/itex] is given by [tex]\epsilon_{\mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots \mu_{n-1}} = n^{\nu}\epsilon_{\nu \mu_{1}\mu_{2}\cdots \mu_{n-1}},[/tex]
[itex]n^{\mu}[/itex] is the outward pointing normal to [itex]\partial\Omega[/itex], and [itex]g^{(n-1)}[/itex] is the determinant of the induced metric on [itex]\partial\Omega[/itex]. Now, we have all the ingredients to do Stokes’ theorem
[tex]\int_{\Omega \subset M} \epsilon \ (\nabla_{\mu}V^{\mu}) = \int_{\partial \Omega} (\epsilon \cdot V) ,[/tex] or, explicitly
[tex]
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Omega} d^{n}x \ \sqrt{|g|} \ \nabla_{\mu}V^{\mu} &= \int_{\partial\Omega} d^{n-1}x \ \sqrt{|g^{(n-1)}|} \ n_{\mu}V^{\mu} \\
&= \left( \int_{\Sigma_{t_{1}}} + \int_{\Sigma_{t_{2}}} + \int_{\mathcal{T}} \right) d^{n-1}x \ \sqrt{|g^{(n-1)}|} \ n_{\mu}V^{\mu} .
\end{align*}
[/tex]
Okay, now take
[tex]
\begin{align*}
n_{\mu}(\Sigma_{t_{1}}) &= (-1, 0, 0, \cdots , 0) \\
n_{\mu}(\Sigma_{t_{2}}) &= (1, 0, 0, \cdots , 0) , \ \mbox{and} \\
n_{\mu}(\mathcal{T}) &= (0, 1, 1, \cdots , 1) ,
\end{align*}
[/tex]
and use [itex]\mathcal{T} = \mathbb{R} \times \mathcal{S}^{(n-2)}[/itex] to obtain
[tex]
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\int_{\Omega} d^{n}x \ \sqrt{|g|} \ \nabla_{\mu}V^{\mu}(x) =& \int_{\Sigma_{t_{1}}}^{\Sigma_{t_{2}}} d^{(n-1}\vec{x} \ \sqrt{|g^{(\Sigma_{t})}|} \ V^{0}(x^{0} , \vec{x}) \\
& + \int_{t_{1}}^{t_{2}} dx^{0} \ \int d^{(n-2)}\vec{x} \ \sqrt{|g^{(\mathcal{S})}|} \ n_{j}V^{j}( x^{0}, \vec{x}) .
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
[/tex]
If the vector [itex]V^{\mu}[/itex] is built out of physical fields, we are most likely to having
[tex]|\vec{x}|^{n-2} V^{j} \to 0 , \ \ \mbox{as} \ \ |\vec{x}| \to \infty .[/tex] Therefore
[tex]\int_{\Omega} d^{n}x \ \sqrt{|g|} \ \nabla_{\mu}V^{\mu}(x) = \int_{\Sigma_{t_{1}}}^{\Sigma_{t_{2}}} d \vec{x} \ \sqrt{|g^{(\Sigma_{t})}|} \ V^{0}(t , \vec{x}) .[/tex] Furthermore, if it is covariantly conserved [itex]\nabla_{\mu}V^{\mu}=0[/itex], we obtain a time-independent charge
[tex]
\begin{align*}
Q(t) &= \int_{\Sigma_{t_{1}}} d \vec{x} \ \sqrt{|g_{(\Sigma_{t})}|} \ V^{0}(t,\vec{x}) \\
&= \int_{\Sigma_{t_{2}}} d \vec{x} \ \sqrt{|g_{(\Sigma_{t})}|} \ V^{0}(t,\vec{x}) \\
&= \int_{\Sigma_{t}} d \vec{x} \ \sqrt{|g_{(\Sigma_{t})}|} \ V^{0}(t,\vec{x}) .
\end{align*}
[/tex]
All of this should be familiar from Noether theorem and/or from the word go in general relativity. The starting statement in GR is that of the invariance of the H-E action under the group of general coordinate transformations, i.e. under a diffeomorphism generated by the Lie derivative along a vector field [itex]\xi^{\mu}[/itex] that is tangent to the boundaries:
[tex]
\mathscr{L}_{\xi} \left( \int_{\Omega} d^{4}x \sqrt{|g|} R \right) = \int_{\Omega} \mathscr{L}_{\xi} (d^{4}x \sqrt{|g|}) R + \int_{\Omega} d^{4}x \ \sqrt{|g|} \mathscr{L}_{\xi}(R) ,
[/tex]
or
[tex]
\begin{align*}
\delta S &= \int_{\Omega} d^{4}x \sqrt{|g|} \left( R \nabla_{\mu}\xi^{\mu} + \xi^{\mu} \nabla_{\mu}R \right) \\
&= \int_{\Omega} d^{4}x \ \nabla_{\mu}(\xi^{\mu} \sqrt{|g|}R) .
\end{align*}
[/tex]
Using, Stokes' theorem, we get
[tex]
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\delta S =& \int_{\Sigma_{1}}^{\Sigma_{2}} d^{3}x \sqrt{|g^{(3)}(\Sigma)|} \ ( n_{\mu} \xi^{\mu} ) R \\
& + \int_{\mathcal{T}} d^{3}x \sqrt{|g^{(3)}(\mathcal{T})|} \ ( n_{\mu} \xi^{\mu}) R ,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
[/tex]
And this vanishes because of [itex](\xi^{\mu}n_{\mu})|_{\partial \Omega} = 0[/itex].
 
Last edited:

Related to Integration by parts in curved space time

1. What is integration by parts in curved space time?

Integration by parts in curved space time is a mathematical technique used to solve integrals in a non-Euclidean curved space. It involves breaking down the integral into smaller parts and using the properties of curved space to simplify the integration process.

2. Why is integration by parts necessary in curved space time?

In curved space time, the traditional methods of integration may not work due to the non-Euclidean geometry. Integration by parts allows us to adapt these methods to work in curved space and find solutions to integrals that would otherwise be difficult to solve.

3. How does integration by parts differ in curved space time compared to flat space?

In flat space, the integration by parts formula involves a simple exchange of variables. However, in curved space time, the formula is modified to account for the curvature of space. This means that the traditional formula cannot be directly applied and must be adapted to the specific curved space being studied.

4. What are some real-world applications of integration by parts in curved space time?

Integration by parts in curved space time is commonly used in the field of general relativity, where it helps in solving equations for the behavior of matter and energy in a curved space. It is also used in cosmology to study the evolution of the universe and in astrophysics to understand the behavior of objects in curved space, such as black holes.

5. Are there any limitations to using integration by parts in curved space time?

One limitation of integration by parts in curved space time is that it can be more complex and challenging to apply compared to standard integration in flat space. It also requires a good understanding of the properties of curved space, which can be difficult to grasp for beginners. Additionally, it may not be suitable for certain types of integrals, depending on the specific curvature of the space being studied.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
95
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • Differential Equations
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
666
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
32
Views
5K
Back
Top