Are Killing Vectors the Key to Solving Complex Equations?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TimeFall
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vectors
TimeFall
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
See below. I screwed up the edit and the use of tex.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
EDIT: Used proper tex (hopefully!)

Hello! I'm working through Weinberg's book Gravitation and Cosmology, and I'm currently in chapter 13, symmetric spaces. I'm trying to follow his derivation of the Killing condition, and I simply cannot, for the life of me, get from equation 13.1.2 to equation 13.1.4. I plugged 13.1.3 into 13.1.2 as he says to, but what I get is very different.
13.1.2: g_{\mu\nu} (x) = \frac{\partial x'^\rho}{\partial x^\mu} \frac{\partial x'^\sigma}{\partial x^\nu}g_{\rho\sigma} (x')
And 13.1.3: x'^\mu = x^\mu + \epsilon \zeta^\mu (x)

Then, only keep the result of the substitution to first order in epsilon. When I do this, I get:
g_{\mu\nu} (x) = \frac{\partial x^\rho}{\partial x^\mu} \frac{\partial x^\sigma}{\partial x^\nu} g_{\rho\sigma} (x') + \epsilon \left [ \frac{\partial \zeta^\sigma (x) }{\partial x^\nu } \frac{\partial x^\rho }{\partial x^\mu } g_{\rho\sigma} (x') + \frac{\partial \zeta^\rho (x)}{\partial x^\mu } \frac{\partial x^\sigma }{\partial x^\nu } g_{\rho\sigma} (x') \right ].

It's supposed to be 13.1.4: 0 = \frac{\partial \zeta^\mu (x)}{\partial x^\rho} g_{\mu\sigma}(x) + \frac{\partial \zeta^\nu (x)}{\partial x^\sigma} g_{\rho\nu} (x) + \zeta^\mu (x) \frac{\partial g_{\rho\sigma} (x)}{\partial x^\mu}

All of his metrics are functions of x, not x', and he has no epsilon in the equation. That makes it seem to me that the first term on the right hand side of the equation I got has to equal the left hand side, so that they cancel and equal 0. Then the epsilon can divide out. The problem is that then there are only two terms left, as opposed to the three that he has. I'm guessing it has something to do with switching from g(x) to g(x'), but I don't see it. Any help would be greatly, greatly appreciated! Thank you very much!
 
Your expression reduces to ##g_{\mu\nu}(x) = g_{\mu\nu}(x) + \epsilon (\zeta^{\rho}\partial_{\rho}g_{\mu\nu}(x) + g_{\mu\sigma}(x)\partial_{\nu}\zeta^{\sigma} + g_{\rho \nu}\partial_{\mu}\zeta^{\rho}) ## after using the fact that ##g_{\rho\sigma}(x') = g_{\rho\sigma}(x) + \epsilon \zeta^{\gamma}\partial_{\gamma}g_{\rho\sigma}(x) + O(\epsilon^2)## hence ##\zeta^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}g_{\rho\sigma}(x) + g_{\rho\nu}(x)\partial_{\sigma}\zeta^{\nu} + g_{\mu\sigma}\partial_{\rho}\zeta^{\mu} = 0 ## after appropriately relabeling the indices. Don't forget that ##\partial_{\nu}x^{\mu} = \delta^{\mu}_{\nu}##.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Thank you very much! I totally forgot about expanding the metric, as well as the delta condition.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...

Similar threads

Back
Top