By energy conservation, show the 4-velocity of dust satisfies this....

whatisreality
Messages
286
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Using conservation of energy, show that the 4-velocity ##u^{\mu}## of dust satisfies:
##u^{\mu}\nabla_{\mu}u^{\nu} = f u^{\nu}##

Explicitly identify ##f##, which is some function of ##u^{\mu}##, ##\rho## and their derivatives. And show that this equation becomes

##\dot{\rho} + 3 \left(\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\right)\rho = 0##

For comoving observers in a homogeneous Friedmann-Robertson-Walker Universe.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I don't think I've done the first bit right, I'm not really sure how to treat the ##\rho##. For dust, ##T^{\mu\nu} = \rho u^{\mu}u^{\nu}## and energy conservation means:
##\nabla_{\mu}T^{\mu\nu} = 0##
So
##\nabla_{\mu} (\rho u^{\mu}u^{\nu})##
Using the product rule,
##\rho u^{\mu} (\nabla_{\mu}u^{\nu}) + \rho u^{\nu} (\nabla_{\mu}u^{\mu}) + u^{\mu}u^{\nu}\nabla_{\mu}\rho = 0##
I think ##\nabla_{\mu} \rho =0##, but if it is then I could just divide through by ##\rho## and I could rearrange to get the LHS
I want:
##u^{\mu}\nabla_{\mu}u^{\nu}##
But the RHS wouldn't be a function of ##\rho##. So if ##\nabla_{\mu} \rho## isn't zero, then I get:
##u^{\mu}\nabla_{\mu}u^{\nu} = -u^{\nu}\nabla_{\mu}u^{\mu} - \frac{u^{\nu}u^{\mu}}{\rho} \nabla_{\mu}\rho##
##= \left(-\nabla_{\mu}u^{\mu}-\frac{u^{\mu}}{\rho}\nabla_{\mu}\rho \right)u^{\nu}##
Is that right? Is ##\nabla_{\mu}\rho## not zero?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For the second part, I'm not really sure how to do it. I think it's a case of using the FLRW metric and the equations of motion for an FRW universe?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top