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

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!
 
Back
Top