Are Killing Vectors the Key to Solving Complex Equations?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TimeFall
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Vectors
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the Killing condition as presented in Weinberg's "Gravitation and Cosmology," specifically focusing on the transition from equation 13.1.2 to equation 13.1.4. Participants are exploring the mathematical steps involved in this derivation, including the application of perturbative expansions and the implications of metric functions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in following the derivation from equation 13.1.2 to 13.1.4, noting discrepancies in the terms and the presence of epsilon in their result.
  • The same participant questions the transition from metrics as functions of x to metrics as functions of x' and its implications for the derivation.
  • Another participant provides a mathematical reduction of the expression, indicating how the terms relate to the original equations and suggesting that the terms can be rearranged to show a relationship that leads to the desired result.
  • The second participant reminds the first to consider the expansion of the metric and the delta condition, which may have been overlooked.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus on the derivation process, as one participant is struggling with the steps while another offers a potential resolution. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact nature of the transition between the equations.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in understanding the assumptions behind the metric expansion and the implications of switching between coordinate systems. There may be unresolved mathematical steps that contribute to the confusion.

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: [tex]g_{\mu\nu} (x) = \frac{\partial x'^\rho}{\partial x^\mu} \frac{\partial x'^\sigma}{\partial x^\nu}g_{\rho\sigma} (x')[/tex]
And 13.1.3: [tex]x'^\mu = x^\mu + \epsilon \zeta^\mu (x)[/tex]

Then, only keep the result of the substitution to first order in epsilon. When I do this, I get:
[tex]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 ][/tex].

It's supposed to be 13.1.4: [tex]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}[/tex]

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   Reactions: 1 person
Thank you very much! I totally forgot about expanding the metric, as well as the delta condition.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K