I Covariant divergence of vector; physical meaning with contracted Tuv

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Tertius
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the covariant divergence of a vector, specifically how it is expressed through the equation $$\nabla_\mu V^\mu = \partial_\mu V^\mu + \Gamma^\mu_{\mu\lambda}V^\lambda$$. It highlights that the term $$\Gamma^\mu_{\mu\lambda}$$ can be rewritten in terms of the metric determinant, leading to a simplified expression for the divergence that appears independent of volume changes. The rank-1 tensor formed by $$U_\nu T^{\mu\nu}$$ is interpreted as representing energy and momentum densities, with its covariant divergence indicating changes in these densities across coordinate directions. The discussion also clarifies that in a flat FRW universe, the covariant derivative accounts for metric changes, which can be perceived as volumetric due to the metric's dependence on the scale factor. This interpretation emphasizes the role of the covariant derivative in correcting for metric variations in the analysis of physical systems.
Tertius
Messages
57
Reaction score
10
TL;DR
The covariant divergence of a vector has a simplified form. I am discussing this in relation to a contraction of the SEM tensor and its meaning.
I'm studying Carroll's section on covariant derivatives, which shows that the covariant divergence of a vector ##V^\mu## is given by $$\nabla_\mu V^\mu = \partial_\mu V^\mu + \Gamma^\mu_{\mu\lambda}V^\lambda$$. Because ##\Gamma^\mu_{\mu\lambda}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}\partial_\lambda \sqrt{g}## we can write $$\nabla_\mu V^\mu = \frac{1}{\sqrt{g}} \partial_\mu(\sqrt{g}V^\mu)$$. If we say ##V^\mu = U_\nu T^{\mu\nu}##, then the covariant divergence looks like $$\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}} \partial_\mu(\sqrt{g} U_\nu T^{\mu\nu})$$. The rank-1 tensor ##U_\nu T^{\mu\nu}## should represent the energy and momentum densities in each of the 4 coordinate directions. The covariant divergence of this rank-1 tensor should then be the sum of the changes of the energy and momentum densities along each coordinate. The simplified form $$\nabla_\mu V^\mu = \frac{1}{\sqrt{g}} \partial_\mu(\sqrt{g}V^\mu)$$ looks to be volume independent in that the partial derivative is taken of the volume element multiplied by the vector, and then divided again by ##\sqrt{g}## after the change is computed. From this perspective, it seems like ##\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}} \partial_\mu(\sqrt{g}V^\mu)## should represent changes to the components of ##V^\mu## independent of volumetric changes. Is this a correct interpretation?
For a flat FRW universe of only dust and a timelike observer, it would look like $$\frac{1}{a^3}\partial_t(-\rho a^3)$$
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I realized the problem was quite simple. The covariant derivative is "correcting" for changes to the metric. The changes in the FRW metric look volumetric because ##\sqrt{g}=a^3##.
 
It's, of course, ##\sqrt{-g}## everywhere, since ##g=\mathrm{det} g<0##. Otherwise it's correct.
 
In Birkhoff’s theorem, doesn’t assuming we can use r (defined as circumference divided by ## 2 \pi ## for any given sphere) as a coordinate across the spacetime implicitly assume that the spheres must always be getting bigger in some specific direction? Is there a version of the proof that doesn’t have this limitation? I’m thinking about if we made a similar move on 2-dimensional manifolds that ought to exhibit infinite order rotational symmetry. A cylinder would clearly fit, but if we...