I Derivation notation with capital D?

Emil_M
Messages
45
Reaction score
2
Hi, I came across a derivation notation I didn't recognize:
Let ##s## be some four-vector and ##\tau## the proper time. What is the significance of
$$\frac{Ds}{\mathrm{d}\tau}?$$

I know ##Ds## can be used to mean the Jacobian, but I've never come across the notation above. Does someone recognize it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Where did you come across this notation? It should be explained there what is meant by the notation. If we cannot see the text we are just stabbing in the dark.
 
I came across this notation in one of my General Relativity scripts, but I checked the entire text before posting and this notation is not introduced in the script. I guess the author believes the notation is commonplace enough not to need an introduction. The only time ##D_X## was used in the context of derivations was in a prove for the linearity of covariant derivatives as an alternative symbol for ##\nabla_x##.

However, ##D## really doesn't make sense in the context of a covariant derivative here, as I wouldn't know what the operator ##\frac{D}{\mathrm{d}\tau}## means?

Specifically, the above notations appears in a chapter about Gyroscopic Precession:
48841_Screen_Shot_2018-02-15_at_14.07.04.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 48841_Screen_Shot_2018-02-15_at_14.07.04.jpg
    48841_Screen_Shot_2018-02-15_at_14.07.04.jpg
    46.6 KB · Views: 822
Ah ok, the notation is introduced three pages further down... I guess this is a just a formatting error of the author

Thanks for the help, though!
 
It is not a formatting error. It is a somewhat standard notation for the induced connection.
 
martinbn said:
It is not a formatting error. It is a somewhat standard notation for the induced connection.
Just to be a bit more specific; the derivative along a curve ##\gamma## with respect to the curve parameter, i.e.,
$$
\frac{Ds}{d\tau} = \nabla_{\dot\gamma} s = \dot x^\mu \nabla_\mu s,
$$
for the induced Levi-Civita connection.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top