Coordinate transformation and choice of a suitable coordinate system.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of coordinate transformations in general relativity, specifically regarding the line element ds^2=-f(x)dt^2+g(x)dx^2. The transformation g(x)dx^2=dy^2 is proposed to simplify calculations in the (t,y) coordinate system. Participants agree that while results should theoretically remain consistent across coordinate systems, the transformation of the metric tensor, defined by A_n^{n'} = \frac{\partial x^n'}{\partial x^n}, complicates this assumption. The conversation highlights the importance of deriving the new metric tensor from the coordinate transformation to ensure accurate physical interpretations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of general relativity and Einstein's equations
  • Familiarity with metric tensors and their transformations
  • Knowledge of coordinate systems and their implications in physics
  • Basic grasp of differential geometry concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of metric tensors in different coordinate systems
  • Explore the implications of coordinate transformations in general relativity
  • Learn about the role of line elements in defining physical phenomena
  • Investigate higher-dimensional general relativity and its coordinate systems
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in general relativity, mathematicians interested in differential geometry, and students seeking to understand the complexities of coordinate transformations in theoretical physics.

arroy_0205
Messages
127
Reaction score
0
Consider the line element:
[tex] ds^2=-f(x)dt^2+g(x)dx^2[/tex]
in a coordinate system (t,x) where f(x) and g(x) are two functions to be determined by solving Einstein equation. But I can always make a transformation
[tex] g(x)dx^2=dy^2[/tex]
and then calculate everything in the (t,y) coordinate system. My doubt is whether the results obtained will be physically same in the two coordinate systems. In my opinion the results will be same, and the second approach is easier than the first one. But I notice in some of the papers the authors use the first approach. I do not understand why they do so. However they work in higher dimensions and I have formulated my problem in 1+1 dimension for simplicity. Can anybody explain if there is anything wrong in the second approach which I prefer?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When you make a co-ordinate transformation, the metric will also be transformed. The transformation of the metric is through a tensor A defined by

[tex]A_n^{n'} = \frac{\partial x^n'}{\partial x^n}[/tex]

The new metric is given by

[tex]g_{m'n'} = g_{nm}A^n_{n'}A^m_{m'}[/tex]

My point is that the new space may not be the same as the old space. I think you should do this calculation, I don't have the energy right now.

M
 
I'm not that knowledgeable about GR, but my understanding is that normally you start with the coordinate transformation, and from that you derive the new metric tensor in this coordinate system, and from that the new line element. Here you seem to be going in reverse, first picking the line element you want in the new coordinate system--but would it be trivial or difficult to derive the appropriate coordinate transformation from that? The new line element is of no use unless you know how the coordinates of the new system are related to the coordinates of the original system which you were previously using to describe physical events and worldlines.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K