Covariant Derivative Wrt Superscript Sign: Explained

cr7einstein
Messages
87
Reaction score
2
Dear all,
I was reading this https://sites.google.com/site/generalrelativity101/appendix-c-the-covariant-derivative-of-the-ricci-tensor, and it said that if you take the covariant derivative of a tensor with respect to a superscript, then the partial derivative term has a MINUS sign. How? The Christoffel symbol should have a minus sign, but I don't understand how does the partial derivative get one?

Also, does covariant derivative always have an index opposite to that of the tensor(e.g. a contravariant tensor will be differentiated wrt a covariant tensor, and a covariant tensor wrt to a covariant index)? If so, why? Is there a relation between the two(which the minus sign mentioned above indicates)?
Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cr7einstein said:
How? The Christoffel symbol should have a minus sign, but I don't understand how does the partial derivative get one?

None of that is correct actually. ##\nabla^{\mu}A^{\nu} = g^{\mu\delta}\nabla_{\delta}A^{\nu} = g^{\mu\delta}\partial_{\delta}A^{\nu} + g^{\mu\delta}\Gamma^{\nu}_{\delta \sigma}A^{\sigma}## and similarly for tensors of arbitrary rank, so it depends entirely on ##g_{\mu\nu}##.

cr7einstein said:
Also, does covariant derivative always have an index opposite to that of the tensor(e.g. a contravariant tensor will be differentiated wrt a covariant tensor, and a covariant tensor wrt to a covariant index)?

No.
 
I'm afraid you didn't choose a bright source for reading. So, in general relativity there's no x_{\mu} (and in special relativity shouldn't be either). Next:

\nabla^{\mu} T_{\alpha} = g^{\mu\beta}\nabla_{\beta}T_{\alpha}

is just a shorthand whenever necessary. Because the nonmetricity is 0, then you can play around freely with the position of the index in the covariant derivative. The metric also allows you to play with the index position also for the tensorial objects being differentiated:

\nabla^{\mu}T_{\alpha}^{~~\gamma} = g_{\alpha\delta} g^{\mu\lambda}\nabla_{\lambda}T^{\delta\gamma}

Relativists call this 'idex gymnastics'.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top