Covariant derivative of a vector field

physicus
Messages
52
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


Show that \nabla_a(\sqrt{-det\;h}S^a)=\partial_a(\sqrt{-det\;h}S^a)
where h is the metric and S^a a vector.


Homework Equations


\nabla_a V^b = \partial_a V^b+\Gamma^b_{ac}V^c
\Gamma^a_{ab} = \frac{1}{2det\;h}\partial_b\sqrt{det\;h}
\nabla_a\sqrt{-det\;h} (is that right??) since \nabla_a h


The Attempt at a Solution


I can't quite figure out how to get the result:
\nabla_a(\sqrt{-det\;h}S^a)
=\nabla_a(\sqrt{-det\;h})S^a+\sqrt{-det\;h}\nabla_a(S^a)
=\sqrt{-det\;h}\;\partial_a S^a+\sqrt{-det\;h}\Gamma^a_{ab}S^b
=\sqrt{-det\;h}\;\partial_a S^a+\sqrt{-det\;h}\frac{1}{2det\;h}\partial_b\sqrt{det\;h}S^b
=\sqrt{-det\;h}\;\partial_a S^a+\frac{1}{2\sqrt{-det\;h}}\partial_b\sqrt{det\;h}S^b
=\ldots
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'd be interested to find out if someone figures out what's going on here, because to me, it does seem unusual that the connection term must drop out for this to work.
 
Are you sure you have the right equations? I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think there should be square root in the second relevant equation. Also I think the problem would make more sense if one of the square roots was outside the derivative on one of the sides of the original equation.
 
Thank you very much for you help! You are right. There is a mistake in my second relevant equation. It should be: \Gamma^a_{ab} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{det\;h}}\partial_b\sqrt{det\;h}

Then I get:
\nabla_a(\sqrt{-det\;h}S^a)
=\nabla_a(\sqrt{-det\;h})S^a+\sqrt{-det\;h}\;\nabla_a(S^a)
=\sqrt{-det\;h}\;\partial_a S^a+\sqrt{-det\;h}\;\Gamma^a_{ab}S^b
= \sqrt{-det\;h}\;\partial_a S^a+\sqrt{-det\;h}\frac{1}{\sqrt{det\;h}}\partial_b \sqrt{det\;h}\;S^b
=\sqrt{-det\;h}\;\partial_a S^a+\partial_b\sqrt{-det\;h}\;S^b
=\partial_a (\sqrt{-det\;h}\;S^a)
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top