Calculating Christoffell Symbols of Second Kind for Cartesian Space

  • Thread starter Thread starter zheng89120
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cartesian Space
zheng89120
Messages
139
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let a surface be define by z = x^(a=3) = f[x^(a=1,2)]

Show that the Christoffell sybols of the 2nd kind are:

[Christoffell symbol]^abc = { fafbc }/ { f^\alpha f_sub_\alpha }

where indices on f indicates partial derivatives

Homework Equations



(d^2 x/dt^2)^\alpha + [Christoffell symbol]^\alphaBC (dx/dt)^B (dx/dt)^C = 0

compare with:

Euler-Lagrangian Equation

The Attempt at a Solution



E-L equatiion: x** - m dz*/dx* = -g dz/dx

compare with the first relevant equation...

how? what is x*^B and x*^C in the first equation
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
have you got an online version of the question or picture because it is hard to make sense of this thing
 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/59383047@N05/5436668502/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
you have a 2d metric that only depends on the derivatives of f . You can derive it to be

g = \begin{pmatrix}<br /> <br /> 1+(\partial_1 f)^2 &amp; \partial_1 f \partial_2 f \\<br /> \partial_1 f \partial_2 f &amp; 1+(\partial_2 f)^2 \end{pmatrix}

or in component form and using your notation

g_{ab} = \delta_{ab} +f_a f_b

then you can use the standard formula for the Christoffel symbols

\Gamma^{a}_{bc} = \frac{1}{2} g^{ad} (\partial_c g_{bd} +\partial_b g_{cd} - \partial_d g_{bc} )

the inverse metric is a bit harder to write down in component form but it is possible
 
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