Conservation of Energy Momentum Tensor

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conservation of the energy-momentum tensor in the context of general relativity, particularly focusing on the implications of having sources present in spacetime. Participants explore the conditions under which the divergence of the energy-momentum tensor is zero, comparing flat and curved spacetime scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that in the absence of sources, the divergence of the energy-momentum tensor is zero, expressed as ##\partial_\alpha T^{\alpha \beta} = 0##.
  • Another participant corrects an earlier statement, asserting that the correct expression in curved spacetime is ##\nabla_\alpha T^{\alpha \beta} = 0##, linking it to the Bianchi identity.
  • A participant emphasizes that if there is a non-zero stress-energy tensor, spacetime cannot be flat, and thus the divergence condition must be reconsidered.
  • There is a reiteration that ##\partial_\alpha T^{\alpha \beta} = 0## holds true only in the context of flat spacetime where the stress-energy tensor is zero.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the conditions under which the divergence of the energy-momentum tensor is zero, with some advocating for the use of the covariant derivative in curved spacetime while others reference the partial derivative in flat spacetime scenarios. The discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the nature of spacetime (flat vs. curved) and the implications of the presence of stress-energy on the divergence of the energy-momentum tensor. The discussion does not resolve these assumptions.

kent davidge
Messages
931
Reaction score
56
Unfortunetly, I found across the web only the case where there's no source, in which case ##\partial_\alpha T^{\alpha \beta} = 0##. I'm considering Minkowski space with Minkowski coordinates here.

When there's source, is it true that ##\partial_\alpha (T^{\alpha \beta}) = 0## or is it ##\int \partial_\alpha (T^{\alpha \beta}) = 0##? Where now this latter ##T^{\alpha \beta}## is the result of the variation of the complete action (source included).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
##\nabla_\alpha T^{\alpha\beta}=0## (edit: and not ##\partial_\alpha T^{\alpha\beta}=0##, as I incorrectly typed originally). Since the stress-energy tensor is the same as the Einstein tensor give or take a constant factor, this turns out to be simply a statement of the Bianchi identity.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kent davidge
kent davidge said:
When there's source, is it true that ##\partial_\alpha (T^{\alpha \beta}) = 0##

No, because if there's stress-energy present, spacetime is not flat, so you have to use the correct curved spacetime equation, which is

$$
\nabla_\alpha T^{\alpha \beta} = 0
$$

Ibix said:
##\partial_\alpha T^{\alpha\beta}=0##. Since the stress-energy tensor is the same as the Einstein tensor give or take a constant factor, this turns out to be simply a statement of the Bianchi identity.

Careful! If there is a non-zero stress-energy tensor, spacetime isn't flat. If spacetime is flat, then it is true that ##\partial_\alpha T^{\alpha \beta} = 0##, but only in the vacuous sense that ##T^{\alpha \beta} = 0##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix
PeterDonis said:
Careful! If there is a non-zero stress-energy tensor, spacetime isn't flat. If spacetime is flat, then it is true that ##\partial_\alpha T^{\alpha \beta} = 0##, but only in the vacuous sense that ##T^{\alpha \beta} = 0##.
I knew it looked wrong as I was typing it. I should listen to my instincts more, apparently.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
942
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K