I Deriving Contravariant Form of Levi-Civita Tensor

AndersF
Messages
27
Reaction score
4
TL;DR Summary
If the covariant form for the Levi-Civita is defined as ##\varepsilon_{i,j,k}:=\sqrt{g}\epsilon_{i,j,k}##, how could be shown from this definition that it's contravariant form is given by ##\varepsilon^{i,j,k}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}\epsilon^{i,j,k}##?
The covariant form for the Levi-Civita is defined as ##\varepsilon_{i,j,k}:=\sqrt{g}\epsilon_{i,j,k}##. I want to show from this definition that it's contravariant form is given by ##\varepsilon^{i,j,k}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}\epsilon^{i,j,k}##.My attemptWhat I have tried is to express this tensor ##\varepsilon^{i j k}## through the contraction with the metric tensor of ##\varepsilon_{i j k}## the contravariant form, and then to replace the definition of ##\varepsilon_{i j k}##:##\varepsilon^{i j k}=g^{i p} g^{j q} g^{k r} \varepsilon_{p q r}=g^{i p} g^{j q} g^{k r} \sqrt{g} \epsilon_{p q r}##

This expression reminds me of the the expression of the determinant of the dual metric tensor, ##g^{-1}=\det (g^{ij})##, through the Levi-Civita symbol:

##g^{-1}=g^{1 p} g^{2 q} g^{3 r} \epsilon_{p q r}##

But I'm stuck here, as I don't know how to match these expressions... Would there be any way to achieve this? Would this be a good way to prove the theorem?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I guess you talk about a 3D Riemannian manifold here. Then let's define ##\Delta_{jkl}=\Delta^{jkl}## as the totally antisymmetric symbol with ##\Delta_{123}=\Delta^{123}=1##.

Then
$$\epsilon_{jkl}=\sqrt{g} \Delta_{jkl} \quad \text{with} \quad g=\mathrm{det}(g_{\mu \nu})$$
are covariant (pseudo) tensor components.

Indeed, using the transformation law for covariant tensor components you get
$$\epsilon_{abc}'=\sqrt{g} \Delta_{jkl} \frac{\partial q^j}{\partial q^{\prime a}} \frac{\partial q^k}{\partial q^{\prime b}} \frac{\partial q^l}{\partial q^{\prime c}}=\sqrt{g} J \Delta_{abc},$$
where
$$J=\mathrm{det} (\partial_a' q^j)$$
is the Jacobian of the coordinate transformation.

On the other hand
$$g' = \mathrm{det} g_{ab}'=\mathrm{det} (\partial_a' q^j \partial_b' q^k g_{jk})=J^2 g.$$
So if ##J>0##, then indeed
$$\epsilon_{abc}'=\sqrt{g'} \Delta_{abc}.$$
If ##J<0## you get an additional minus sign. That's why ##\epsilon_{jkl}## are the components of a pseudo-tensor rather than a true tensor.

For the contravariant components you get
$$\epsilon^{jkl}=g^{ja} g^{kb} g^{lc} \epsilon_{abc} = \sqrt{g} g^{ja} g^{kb} g^{lc} \Delta_{abc} = \sqrt{g} \mathrm{det}(g^{ab}) \Delta^{jkl}=\frac{1}{g} \sqrt{g} \Delta^{jkl} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{g}} \Delta^{jkl},$$
where I've used that in a Riemannian manifold ##\mathrm{det}(g_{ab})>0##.
 
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
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...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top