Special relativity: 2d metric components

In summary, the conversation discusses a question about finding the contravariant and covariant components of a 2D metric for an upcoming exam. The speaker initially assumes the metric to be Euclidean and only considers the diagonal components in the summation, but later realizes that the metric may not be Euclidean and considers the non-zero off-diagonal components as well. The conversation also touches upon the concept of symmetry in tensors and the meaning of mixed components in the index notation.
  • #1
Uku
82
0
An SR question again, exam on monday.

Homework Statement


I'm given a 2D metric as:

[tex]ds^{2}=x^{2}dx^{2}+2dxdy-dy^{2}[/tex]

I have to first find the contravariant and covariant components of the metric, or [tex]g_{ab}[/tex] and [tex]g^{ab}[/tex]

Homework Equations


General expression of a metric tensor

[tex]ds^{2}=g_{\mu\nu}dx^{\nu}dx^{\mu}[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


Since the metric is 2D, I can write the above as (with significance to me)

[tex]ds^{2}=g_{00}dx^{0}dx^{0}+g_{11}dx^{1}dx^{1}[/tex] 1)

Now this is assuming that the metric is Euclidean, with the components not on the main diagonal being zero.

Now using "common sense" I know that in Euclidean space [tex]ds^{2}=dx^{2}+dy^{2}[/tex]
Comparing the two I can assume that [tex]g_{00}=1[/tex] and [tex]g_{11}=1[/tex], which seems to make sense, because then the Phythagoras theroem emerges from 1)

But! The lecturer has written down the metric formally as:

[tex]g_{ab}=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} g_{xx} & g_{xy} \\ g_{yx} & g_{yy} \end{array} \right][/tex]

And now, out of the blue for me, he has written [tex]g_{xx}=x^{2}[/tex] and [tex]g_{yy}=-1[/tex] Why so?

Further, he has written that the metric is non-diagonal, meaning that

[tex]\left[ \begin{array}{cc} g_{xx} & g_{xy} \\ g_{yx} & g_{yy} \end{array} \right]=\left[ \begin{array}{cc} x^{2} & 1 \\ 1 & -1 \end{array} \right][/tex]

the elements aside the main diagonal are not zero. I'm puzzled at this point. The non-diagonal metric means that the summation 1) is a false assumption by me, because the components are not zero. How do I approach this 2D metric to find the [tex]g_{ab}[/tex] and [tex]g^{ab}[/tex]?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Uku said:
An SR question again, exam on monday.

Homework Statement


I'm given a 2D metric as:

[tex]ds^{2}=x^{2}dx^{2}+2dxdy-dy^{2}[/tex]

I have to first find the contravariant and covariant components of the metric, or [tex]g_{ab}[/tex] and [tex]g^{ab}[/tex]

Homework Equations


General expression of a metric tensor

[tex]ds^{2}=g_{\mu\nu}dx^{\nu}dx^{\mu}[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution


Since the metric is 2D, I can write the above as (with significance to me)

[tex]ds^{2}=g_{00}dx^{0}dx^{0}+g_{11}dx^{1}dx^{1}[/tex] 1)

Why no [itex]g_{01}[/itex] and [itex]g_{10}[/itex] terms?
 
  • #3
Because I assumed the metric to be Euclidean, where the components not on the main diagonal are zero, meaning that the [tex]g_{01}[/tex] and [tex]g_{10}[/tex] are zero, meaning I do not have to consider them in the summation. But now that you put my attention to it, ill look into it.

EDIT: I see some light!
 
  • #4
Why assume the metric is Euclidean (although you should assume it is symmetric)? The metric is defined by the equation [itex]ds^{2}=x^{2}dx^{2}+2dxdy-dy^{2}[/itex].
 
  • #5
Solved it! I assumed because I wanted to start solving the assignment from somewhere.

Why should I assume symmetry? Because I can't prefer any direction over others?
 
  • #6
I have a second question about symmetry. My my course material, I have a following statement about symmetric tensors:

[tex]S^{\mu}_{\;\nu}=S^{\;\mu}_{\nu}\equiv S^{\mu}_{\nu}[/tex]

What does the spacing in the indexes mean?

EDIT: I see it means that the tensor has mixed components, but what does that mean when I start the summation? I'm seeing that I can't sum, because the indexes are both cotravariant or covariant.
 
Last edited:

Related to Special relativity: 2d metric components

1. What is special relativity?

Special relativity is a theory developed by Albert Einstein that describes the way objects move and interact at high speeds. It is based on two main principles: the principle of relativity, which states that the laws of physics are the same for all observers in uniform motion, and the principle of the constancy of the speed of light, which states that the speed of light is the same for all observers regardless of their relative motion.

2. What are 2d metric components in special relativity?

In special relativity, the 2d metric components refer to the mathematical representation of the spacetime interval between two events in 2-dimensional space. This interval is represented by a 2x2 matrix, known as the Minkowski metric, which takes into account both space and time coordinates.

3. How does special relativity differ from classical mechanics?

Special relativity differs from classical mechanics in several ways. Firstly, it takes into account the effects of high speeds on the passage of time and the length of objects. Secondly, it introduces the concept of spacetime, where space and time are intertwined and cannot be considered separately. Lastly, special relativity replaces the concept of absolute space and time with relative space and time, meaning that measurements of time and distance depend on the observer's frame of reference.

4. What are some practical applications of special relativity?

Special relativity has many practical applications, including GPS navigation, particle accelerators, and nuclear power plants. GPS satellites, for example, use special relativity to accurately measure time and account for the effects of relativity on the satellites' speed and location. Particle accelerators use special relativity to study the behavior of particles at high speeds, and nuclear power plants use it to calculate the energy released in nuclear reactions.

5. Can special relativity be proven?

Special relativity has been extensively tested and has been shown to accurately predict the behavior of objects at high speeds. However, like all scientific theories, it cannot be proven beyond any doubt. It is continually being tested and refined as new evidence and technology become available. So far, all experiments and observations have supported the principles of special relativity.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
700
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
953
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
4K
Back
Top