Graduate How Do You Calculate the D'Alembert Operator in a Given Metric for GR?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on calculating the d'Alembert operator in a specific metric for General Relativity (GR). The metric provided is defined as ##ds^2 = -dudv + \frac{(v-u)^2}{4} \left( d\theta^2 + \sin^2 \theta d\phi^2 \right)##, leading to the inverse metric components ##g^{uv} = -2## and ##g^{vu} = -2##. The correct definition of the d'Alembert operator is clarified as ##\Box = \nabla^a \nabla_a##, which incorporates Christoffel symbols, resulting in the expression ##\Box f(u,v) = 4 \left( -\frac{1}{v-u} \frac{\partial f}{\partial u} + \frac{\partial f}{\partial v} - \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial u \partial v} \right)

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensor notation and operations in General Relativity
  • Familiarity with metrics and their components in GR
  • Knowledge of Christoffel symbols and their role in covariant derivatives
  • Basic proficiency in partial differential equations and their applications in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and application of the d'Alembert operator in various metrics
  • Learn about calculating Christoffel symbols for different coordinate systems in GR
  • Explore the implications of covariant derivatives in the context of scalar fields
  • Investigate the relationship between the d'Alembert operator and wave equations in curved spacetime
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students and researchers in theoretical physics, particularly those studying General Relativity, differential geometry, and tensor calculus.

ChrisJ
Messages
70
Reaction score
3
Was not sure weather to post, this here or in differential geometry, but is related to a GR course, so...

I am having some trouble reproducing a result, I think it is mainly down to being very new to tensor notation and operations.

But, given the metric ##ds^2 = -dudv + \frac{(v-u)^2}{4} \left( d\theta^2 + \sin^2 \theta d\phi^2 \right)##

<br /> g_{\alpha\beta} =<br /> <br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> 0 &amp; -\frac{1}{2} &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> -\frac{1}{2} &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; \frac{(v-u)^2}{4} &amp; 0 \\<br /> 0 &amp; 0 &amp; 0 &amp; \frac{(v-u)^2}{4} \sin^2 \theta<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br />

and given this definition of the d'Alambert operator ##\Box := g^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}\partial_{\beta}## , reproduce the following given the d'Alambert acting on a function ##f(u,v)##

<br /> <br /> \Box f(u,v) = 4 \left( -\frac{1}{v-u} \frac{\partial f}{\partial u} + \frac{\partial f}{\partial v} - \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial u \partial v} \right)<br />

And when I try to to reproduce it, I can see from the definition that the only non-zero parts are where the inverse metric components are ##g^{uv} = -2## and ##g^{vu} = -2 ## . The ##g^{\theta \theta} ## and ##g^{\phi \phi}## bits would be zero since the function is just of ##u## and ##v##.

So what I get is this...
<br /> \Box := g^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}\partial_{\beta}\\<br /> \Box f(u,v) = g^{uv}\partial_{u}\partial_{v} f+ g^{vu}\partial_{v}\partial_{u}f = -4 \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial u \partial v}<br />

And I can't seem to see what I am missing here? Any help is really appreciated. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The d'Alembertian is not ##\Box = g^{\alpha\beta} \partial_\alpha \partial_\beta##, it is ##\Box = \nabla^a \nabla_a##, which for scalar fields reduces to
$$
\Box f = g^{ab} \nabla_b \nabla_a = g^{ab} \nabla_b \partial_a f = g^{ab}(\partial_b\partial_a f - \Gamma_{ba}^c \partial_c f).
$$
 
  • Like
Likes Photonnnn and ChrisJ
Orodruin said:
The d'Alembertian is not ##\Box = g^{\alpha\beta} \partial_\alpha \partial_\beta##, it is ##\Box = \nabla^a \nabla_a##, which for scalar fields reduces to
$$
\Box f = g^{ab} \nabla_b \nabla_a = g^{ab} \nabla_b \partial_a f = g^{ab}(\partial_b\partial_a f - \Gamma_{ba}^c \partial_c f).
$$
Oh. Ok.. thanks will give that a go!
 
ChrisJ said:
Oh. Ok.. thanks will give that a go!

Previous to trying this I found all of the christoffel symbols for the metric define in the OP, so now trying with this new definition, it still simplifies to ##g^{ab}\partial_a \partial_b ## because ##a## and ##b## can only take on ##u## or ##v## since there are not partials wrt to the others, and there are no non-zero Christoffel symbols for ##\Gamma^c_{uv}## , so I must still be missing something
 
Do you have any Christoffel symbols of the form ##\Gamma^u_{ab}##?
 
Orodruin said:
Do you have any Christoffel symbols of the form ##\Gamma^u_{ab}##?

Yes, but only for ##\Gamma^u_{\theta\theta}## and ##\Gamma^u_{\phi\phi} ## (and the same, but with with ##v## as ##c##). But that would lead to partials wrt to ##\theta## and ##\phi##, which don't appear in what I am trying to reproduce.
 
ChrisJ said:
But that would lead to partials wrt to ##theta## and ##\phi##
No, this is wrong.

Edit: To be more specific, for example ##\Gamma^u_{\theta\theta}## leads to the term
$$
-\Gamma^{u}_{\theta\theta} g^{\theta\theta} \partial_u f,
$$
which includes a derivative wrt ##u##.
 
Orodruin said:
No, this is wrong.

Sorry! Yes, I just saw it, the ##\partial_c## bit,
Orodruin said:
No, this is wrong.

Edit: To be more specific, for example ##\Gamma^u_{\theta\theta}## leads to the term
$$
-\Gamma^{u}_{\theta\theta} g^{\theta\theta} \partial_u f,
$$
which includes a derivative wrt ##u##.

Thank you! I just saw it, ok, so the terms with ##\Gamma^u_{\theta\theta}## and ##\Gamma^u_{\phi\phi}## lead to ##\frac{-4}{v-u}\frac{\partial f}{\partial u}## (and the same for the ones with ##\Gamma^v_{\theta\theta}## and ##\Gamma^v_{\phi\phi}## lead to ##\frac{4}{v-u}\frac{\partial f}{\partial u}##. And then the one that I already found in the OP with the zero christoffel symbol, leads to ##-4\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial u \partial v}##
 
So everything works out now?
 
  • #10
Orodruin said:
So everything works out now?

Yes, thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
401
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K