Components of Riemann Tensor: 4 Indexes, 16x16 Matrix

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the representation of the Riemann tensor, specifically its components denoted as ##R^i_{jkl}##, and how to express these components in a matrix form. The conversation explores the implications of the tensor's indices and the dimensionality of the representation in the context of spacetime coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the Riemann tensor with four indices can be represented as a 16x16 matrix in spacetime, considering time and space coordinates.
  • Others argue that a two-dimensional matrix representation is not suitable for rank-four tensors, as it loses information about the indices' contravariant or covariant nature.
  • A participant suggests that writing out the components individually is necessary, regardless of whether they are arranged in a matrix format.
  • Another participant clarifies that the Riemann tensor is fundamentally a 4x4x4x4 tensor, but it can be grouped to form a 16x16 matrix under certain conditions.
  • Discussion includes the skew symmetries of the Riemann tensor, noting that using all-lower indices may lead to simplifications, such as reducing the tensor to a 12x12 matrix by eliminating zero diagonal elements.
  • Further reduction to a 6x6 matrix is suggested by specifying components where indices are distinct, and the symmetry properties of the tensor are discussed.
  • References to the Bel decomposition and the degrees of freedom associated with the Riemann tensor are made, indicating a complex structure that includes symmetric matrices and constraints from the Bianchi identity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriate representation of the Riemann tensor, with no consensus reached on a definitive method for matrix representation or the implications of the tensor's properties.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the representation of the Riemann tensor, including the loss of information regarding index types and the assumptions made when grouping indices. The mathematical steps involved in reducing the tensor's dimensionality remain unresolved.

Z3kr0m
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Hello, Riemann tensor ##R^i_{jkl}## 4 indexes, and it should be matrix 16x16 in spacetime if we have time coirdinate - 0 and space coordinates -1,2,3. But how should I write the components to matrix? For example ##\begin{pmatrix}R^0_{000} & R^1_{000} & R^2_{000} ... \\ R^0_{100} & R^1_{100} & R^2_{100} ...\\ R^0_{200} & R^1_{200} ... \\ R^0_{300} ... \end{pmatrix}##?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Z3kr0m said:
Hello, Riemann tensor ##R^i_{jkl}## 4 indexes, and it should be matrix 16x16 in spacetime if we have time coirdinate - 0 and space coordinates -1,2,3. But how should I write the components to matrix? For example ##\begin{pmatrix}R^0_{000} & R^1_{000} & R^2_{000} ... \\ R^0_{100} & R^1_{100} & R^2_{100} ...\\ R^0_{200} & R^1_{200} ... \\ R^0_{300} ... \end{pmatrix}##?
You can't. The two-dimensional matrix representation only works for rank-two tensors (those with only two indices). Even then you have to be alert to whether you are representing the components of the tensor with contravariant or covariant (upper or lower) indices - this information is lost in the matrix representation, so it's best to avoid it altogether.
 
So I must write out the components one by one?
 
Z3kr0m said:
So I must write out the components one by one?
Yes, but you have to do that whether you're arranging the values you're writing down in a matrix or not.
 
Z3kr0m said:
Hello, Riemann tensor ##R^i_{jkl}## 4 indexes, and it should be matrix 16x16 in spacetime if we have time coirdinate - 0 and space coordinates -1,2,3. But how should I write the components to matrix? For example ##\begin{pmatrix}R^0_{000} & R^1_{000} & R^2_{000} ... \\ R^0_{100} & R^1_{100} & R^2_{100} ...\\ R^0_{200} & R^1_{200} ... \\ R^0_{300} ... \end{pmatrix}##?

It's not really a matrix, its a 4x4x4x4 tensor. But if you group the first two componetns together, and the last two, you can write the 256 element tensor as a 16x16 matrix.

I've only seen discussions (in MTW's "Gravitation") of ##R_{ijkl}## and NOT ##R^i{}_{jkl}## however. To take advantage of the skew symmetries ##R_{ijkl} = -R_{jikl} = -R_{ijlk}## https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_curvature_tensor#Symmetries_and_identities, I believe one needs the indices to be all lower, or all upper, not mixed. It is possible I am mistaken.

If one does consider the all-lower index ##R_{ijkl}##, the skew symmetries imply that ##R_{00**} = R_{11**} = R_{22**} = R_{33**} = 0##, i.e. any repeated index in the first pair must be zero. A similar argument leads to the same conclusion for repeated indices in the last pair. This lowers the Riemann to a 12x12 matrix by dropping the 4 zero diagional elelents, , and a further reduction to a 6x6 matrix by only specifying ##R_{ij**}## where i<j, as ##R_{ji**} = -R_{ij**}##.

The natural pair-groupings are (0,1), (0,2), (0,3) and their duals *(0,1) = (2,3), *(0,2) = (1,3), *(0,3)=(1,2) in a coordinate or orthonormal basis.

Using this approach, the 256 element tensor becomes a 6x6 symmetric matrix, where the symmetry comes from the "interchange symmetry", ##R_{ijkl} = R_{klij}##.

This can be further decomposed into three (in GR) 3x3 matrices Wiki calls this the Bel decomposition, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bel_decomposition, MTW does a similar decomposition but doesn't use this name to describe it.

Two of the 3x3 matrices from this decomposition are symmetric, the so-called electrogravitc and topogravitc tensors. This is a total of 21 degree of freedom, there is one additional constraint due to the Bianchi identity that reduces the degrees of freedom of the Riemann to 20.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K