2nd order correction to gauge transformation

matt91a
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
In the weak field approximation,

g_{\mu\nu}=\eta_{\mu\nu}+h_{\mu\nu}

If we make a coordinate transformation of the form

x^{\mu&#039;}=x^{\mu}+\xi^{\mu}(x)[\itex]<br /> <br /> it changes h_{\mu\nu}[\itex] to&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; h&amp;amp;#039;_{\mu\nu}=h_{\mu\nu}+\xi_{\mu,\nu}+\xi_{\nu,\mu}+O(\xi^{2})[\itex]&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt; &amp;lt;br /&amp;gt; I was wondering if anyone could shed some light on what form the higher order terms take. I have an inkling it&amp;amp;#039;s terms from a taylor series expansion but I&amp;amp;#039;m not sure.&amp;lt;br /&amp;gt; &amp;lt;br /&amp;gt; Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for your reply but I'm afraid it doesn't shed any more light on it. I'm not sure if \xi^{\mu}(x)[\itex] being a Killing vector has anything to do with it.
 
The exact transformation is xμ = x'μ + ξμ. Applied to the metric this is

gμν = ∂xα/∂x'μ ∂xβ/∂x'ν gαβ

= (δαμ + ξα)(δβν + ξβ)(ηαβ + hαβ)

= ημν + (hμν + ξα hαν + ξβ hμβ + ξαξβhαβ)

= ημν + h'μν
 
A clear reference is http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9609040, although this is not that accessible to the beginner. One subtlety is that if you take the transformation x = x' + xi to be exact, then xi is no longer the generator of the diffeomorphism at higher than linear order. So most people use equation (1.1) of the above reference for the coordinate transformation. With that form you can express everything in terms of Lie derivatives, equation (1.3).
 
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