Affine connection transformation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the transformation of affine connections in the context of tensor calculus, specifically focusing on the transformation properties of the affine connection and the associated mixed tensor terms. Participants explore the mathematical details involved in deriving these transformations, referencing specific equations from D'Inverno's book and Carroll's notes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in isolating the affine connection and understanding its transformation, indicating a lack of familiarity with tensors.
  • Another participant suggests making a coordinate transformation on the term involving the derivative and the affine connection, noting that the derivative does not transform as a tensor.
  • A participant mentions that Carroll provides a detailed explanation of this topic in his general relativity notes, implying that it may be a useful reference.
  • One participant acknowledges their confusion with dummy variables and the process of leaving the connection unchanged while transforming known tensors, which was clarified through the reference to Carroll's work.
  • A participant successfully derives the transformation but questions the application of the chain rule in a specific equation, indicating a moment of realization regarding the mathematical process involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need for a coordinate transformation to understand the affine connection's behavior, but there are varying levels of understanding and clarity regarding the details of the transformation process. The discussion remains unresolved in terms of fully clarifying all aspects of the transformation.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of missing assumptions and potential confusion regarding the treatment of dummy variables and the application of the chain rule in multi-variable calculus. These aspects are not fully resolved within the discussion.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals studying tensor calculus, particularly those interested in the transformation properties of affine connections and related mathematical techniques in general relativity.

Mr-R
Messages
123
Reaction score
23
Dear All,


I am teaching myself tensors for the first time. I am using D'Inverno's book and got stuck at page 73. Basically, he says: demand that the first term on the left of the equation to be a type (1,1) tensor. Then he gets the affine connection transformation.

I basically wrote the first term as a second rank mixed tensor transformation. Then I got stuck. I am not sure on how to isolate (?) the affine connection and show how it transforms. I tried many times but failed due to my lack of knowledge of tensors. Could someone help me understand this please?

[itex]\nabla_{c}X^{a}[/itex]= [itex]\partial_{c}[/itex][itex]X^{a}[/itex]+[itex]\Gamma_{bc}^{a}[/itex][itex]X^{b}[/itex]

Thanks in advance! (Sorry if my post isn't very informative as I have to go for 6 hours. When I come back I will be more than happy to upload pictures of my attempts)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You can make a coordinate transformation on the term:

$$\partial_c X^a +\Gamma^a_{bc}X^b$$

You know how ##\partial_c X^a## transform (equation 6.1), and it does not transform as a tensor, so now you need that the transformation of ##\Gamma^a_{bc}X^b## to cancel out the "wrong terms".

Are you having troubles with the details?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Carroll does this in detail in his gr notes, if i remember correctly.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Matterwave said:
You can make a coordinate transformation on the term:

$$\partial_c X^a +\Gamma^a_{bc}X^b$$

You know how ##\partial_c X^a## transform (equation 6.1), and it does not transform as a tensor, so now you need that the transformation of ##\Gamma^a_{bc}X^b## to cancel out the "wrong terms".

Are you having troubles with the details?

Oh I didn't think of it in that way. Yes my trouble was in the details. I keep messing up the dummy variables and didn't know that I can leave the connection alone while transforming the tensors I know. Like the way Carroll did.

Edit: I managed to derive it finally :smile: but I have a question. In equation 6.1, why do we make [itex]\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{'c}}[/itex]= [itex]\frac{\partial x^{d}}{\partial x^{'c}}[/itex][itex]\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{d}}[/itex] ? at first I didnt do this and it didnt work :frown:
 
Last edited:
haushofer said:
Carroll does this in detail in his gr notes, if i remember correctly.

This indeed helped me a lot. Made me discover where I need improvements in. Thanks :smile:
 
Mr-R said:
Oh I didn't think of it in that way. Yes my trouble was in the details. I keep messing up the dummy variables and didn't know that I can leave the connection alone while transforming the tensors I know. Like the way Carroll did.

Edit: I managed to derive it finally :smile: but I have a question. In equation 6.1, why do we make [itex]\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{'c}}[/itex]= [itex]\frac{\partial x^{d}}{\partial x^{'c}}[/itex][itex]\frac{\partial}{\partial x^{d}}[/itex] ? at first I didnt do this and it didnt work :frown:


This is just the chain rule from multi-variable calculus.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K