Clarifying Robertson-Walker Metric Math Objects

  • Thread starter Thread starter space-time
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Metric
space-time
Messages
218
Reaction score
4
Here is the Robertson Walker metric:

ds2= (cdt)2 - R2(t)[dr2/(1- kr2) + r2(dθ2 + sin2(θ)dΦ2)]

This metric is seen and discussed in this link: http://burro.cwru.edu/Academics/Astr328/Notes/Metrics/metrics.html

Now I am in the process of deriving the general relativistic mathematical objects for this metric such as the Christoffel symbols, Ricci tensor, etc... However, one thing is bothering me.

As you can see both in the link and at the top of this post, they did not omit the c term using the c=1 convention in the first term of the metric. However, that scale factor R(t) only has t in it and not ct.

This bothers me because I am on the fence about whether I should treat R(t) as a constant when deriving my Christoffel symbols or if I should treat it as a function of x0 and differentiate accordingly when deriving my Christoffel symbols. Note that x0 = ct , x1= r , x2=θ , x3 = Φ

It is possible that they may be assuming that c=1 inside of the R(t) function and that is why they omit the c there, or it could just simply be that R(t) is not a function of x0 and I should just treat it as a constant when differentiating terms of my metric tensors.

Which option is the correct choice?

For those who need clarification on what I am asking, here is a numerical example:

The metric tensor element g11 = -R2(t)/(1- kr2)

While deriving the Christoffel symbols, one of the derivatives I will have to take is:
∂g11 /∂x0

If I treat the term -R2(t) as a function of x0, then the above derivative would evaluate to be:

-2R(t)R'(t)/(1- kr2) where R'(t) is simply the derivative of R(t) with respect to t.

However, if I treat the term -R2(t) as a constant, then the derivative is 0.

Which case is the correct case?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think your difficulty is in ##x^0=ct##. Just drop the ##c## there. ##R(t)## is a function of ##x^0##. If not you get no curvature as you say.
 
  • Like
Likes space-time
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...

Similar threads

Back
Top