A question about metric compatibility equation

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jianbing_Shao
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Metric
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of metric compatibility in the context of connections in differential geometry, particularly in relation to general relativity (GR) and its extensions. Participants explore the conditions under which a connection can be derived from a metric, the implications of torsion, and the constraints necessary for a connection to be metric compatible.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that a conservative vector field must satisfy the condition that its curl is zero, drawing a parallel to the constraints that a connection derived from a metric must meet.
  • Others propose that a metric compatible connection is not necessarily torsion free, suggesting that additional equations are needed to determine torsion in extensions of GR, such as Einstein-Cartan theory.
  • A participant emphasizes that if the connection is not torsion free, it becomes an independent variable from the metric, leading to the introduction of contorsion and non-metricity tensors.
  • Some participants question the specific constraints that allow a connection to be determined from a metric, suggesting that metric compatibility and the torsion zero constraint are essential for deriving the Levi-Civita connection.
  • There is mention of the non-metricity tensor as a relevant concept in the discussion of metric compatibility.
  • Participants discuss the implications of the number of components in vector fields and connections, arguing that the connection derived from a metric must also meet certain constraints due to the higher number of components.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that a metric compatible connection is not necessarily torsion free, and that certain constraints must be satisfied for a connection to be derived from a metric. However, there is no consensus on the specific nature of these constraints or the implications of torsion and non-metricity.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the relationship between metric compatibility and torsion, as well as the specific conditions that must be met for a connection to be considered metric compatible. The discussion includes references to mathematical concepts and the implications of these relationships in theoretical frameworks.

  • #61
Jianbing_Shao said:
I think it perhaps a conbination of rotation invariance of metric and curvature determine the property of path dependence of metric.
It's frustrating when you continue to make these statements about what you "think". What matters is what you can prove! The whole point of my post #46 is to demonstrate (prove!) that the metric ##g## is unchanged by parallel-transport through an infinitesimal-distance along a path by any metric-compatible connection ##\Gamma## (see eq.(10)), regardless of the curvature or torsion. So I must cease commenting in this thread unless you do me the courtesy of one of the following:
  • Prove using equations (not words) that "curvature determine the property of path dependence of metric", or
  • Prove using equations (not words) that there is an error in post #46 that renders eq.(10) invalid, or
  • Acknowledge that eq.(10) is valid and proves that ##g## is invariant when parallel-transported by a metric-compatible ##\Gamma##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: haushofer and dextercioby
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Thread closed for Moderation...
 
  • #63
After moderator review, this thread will remain closed as the OP question has been sufficiently addressed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: renormalize

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
628
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K