Calculation Involving Projection Tensor in Minkowski Spacetime

crime9894
Messages
5
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
I am asked to calculate the expression in Minkowski spacetime
Relevant Equations
Projection tensor ##P^{\alpha\beta}=\eta^{\alpha\beta}+U^{\alpha}U^{\beta}##
4-velocity ##U^{\mu}##
Minkowski Metric ##\eta^{\alpha\beta}## signature ##(-+++)##
In Minkowski spacetime, calculate ##P^{\gamma}_{\alpha}U^{\beta}\partial_{\beta}U^{\alpha}##.

I had calculated previously that ##P^{\gamma}_{\alpha}=\delta^{\gamma}_{\alpha}+U_{\alpha}U^{\gamma}##
When I subsitute it back into the expression
##P^{\gamma}_{\alpha}U^{\beta}\partial_{\beta}U^{\alpha}##
##=(\delta^{\gamma}_{\alpha}+U_{\alpha}U^{\gamma})U^{\beta}\partial_{\beta}U^{\alpha}##
##=U^{\beta}\partial_{\beta}U^{\gamma}+U_{\alpha}U^{\gamma}U^{\beta}\partial_{\beta}U^{\alpha}##
But I think hit a dead end. Could it be further simplified?

Later, I look back into my lecture slides again and I saw this "geodesics equation ##U^{\upsilon}\nabla_{\upsilon}U^{\mu}=0##" written at a corner. I haven't reach geodesics yet and I can't find relevant source on confirming this equation.

I believe it reduce to ##U^{\upsilon}\partial_{\upsilon}U^{\mu}=0## in flat spacetime and would one-shot my problem.
Is this the correct approach instead? If so, how do I prove the equation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Note that ##U^{\nu} \partial_{\nu} U^{\mu}=\mathrm{D}_{\tau} U^{\mu}## is the "material time derivative". This is 0 for "dust", i.e., for non-interacting "particles" only. For an ideal or viscous fluid it's not!

Concerning implification of your expression, note that ##U_{\alpha} U^{\alpha}=-1=\text{const}##. What does that imply for the 2nd term in your result?
 
vanhees71 said:
Concerning implification of your expression, note that ##U_{\alpha} U^{\alpha}=-1=\text{const}##. What does that imply for the 2nd term in your result?
I see! Thank you.
I could prove ##U_{\alpha}\partial_{\beta}U^{\alpha}=0## and eliminate second term.
As for the first term, I don't think it could proceed further. Am I done?
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top