In summary, the general form of the Riemann tensor components when defined with respect to the Levi-Civita connection is given by R_{\kappa\lambda\mu\nu}\equiv g_{\kappa\zeta}R^{\zeta}_{\;\lambda\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\nu\kappa}-\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\kappa}g_{\nu\lambda}-\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\mu\kappa}+\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\kappa}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)+g
  • #1
"Don't panic!"
601
8
How does one derive the general form of the Riemann tensor components when it is defined with respect to the Levi-Civita connection?

I assumed it was just a "plug-in and play" situation, however I end up with extra terms that don't agree with the form I've looked up in a book. In a general coordinate frame it should be of the form [tex] R_{\kappa\lambda\mu\nu}\equiv g_{\kappa\zeta}R^{\zeta}_{\;\lambda\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\nu\kappa}-\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\kappa}g_{\nu\lambda}-\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\mu\kappa}+\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\kappa}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)+g_{\kappa\zeta}\left(\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\mu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\nu\lambda}-\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\nu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\mu\lambda}\right)[/tex]
However, when I naively calculate ##R_{\kappa\lambda\mu\nu}=g_{\kappa\zeta}\left[\partial_{\mu}\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\nu\lambda}-\partial_{\nu}\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\mu\lambda}+\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\mu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\nu\lambda}-\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\nu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\mu\lambda}\right]## using that [tex]\Gamma^{\lambda}_{\;\mu\nu}=\bigg\lbrace\matrix{\lambda \\ \mu\nu}\bigg\rbrace=\frac{1}{2}g^{\lambda\eta}\left(\partial_{\mu}g_{\nu\eta}+\partial_{\nu}g_{\eta\mu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\mu\nu}\right)[/tex] I end up with the following extra contributions [tex]\frac{1}{2}g_{\kappa\zeta}\left(\partial_{\mu}g^{\zeta\eta}\right)\left(\partial_{\nu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\nu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\nu\lambda}\right)-\frac{1}{2}g_{\kappa\zeta}\left(\partial_{\nu}g^{\zeta\eta}\right)\left(\partial_{\mu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\mu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)[/tex] which I can't seem to make disappear! What am I doing wrong?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
There's no way to tell what you're doing wrong if you don't show your actual calculations.
 
  • #3
PeterDonis said:
There's no way to tell what you're doing wrong if you don't show your actual calculations.

Apologies. Here's what I've done so far:

[tex]R_{\kappa\lambda\mu\nu}\equiv g_{\kappa\zeta}R^{\zeta}_{\;\lambda\mu\nu}=g_{\kappa\zeta}\left[\partial_{\mu}\left(\frac{1}{2}g^{\zeta\eta}\left(\partial_{\nu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\nu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\nu\lambda}\right)\right)-\partial_{\nu}\left(\frac{1}{2}g^{\zeta\eta}\left(\partial_{\mu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\mu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)\right)+\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\mu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\nu\lambda}-\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\nu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\mu\lambda}\right]\\
=g_{\kappa\zeta}\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\partial_{\mu}g^{\zeta\eta}\right)\left(\partial_{\nu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\nu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\nu\lambda}\right)-\frac{1}{2}\left(\partial_{\nu}g^{\zeta\eta}\right)\left(\partial_{\mu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\mu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)+\frac{1}{2}g^{\zeta\eta}\left(\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\nu}-\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\eta}g_{\nu\lambda}\right)-\frac{1}{2}g^{\zeta\eta}\left(\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\mu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\mu}-\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\eta}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)+\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\mu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\nu\lambda}-\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\nu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\mu\lambda}\right][/tex]

So upon a bit of algebra I end up with what I put in my first post, i.e. the correct expression plus the two extra contributions.
 
  • #4
"Don't panic!" said:
with the form I've looked up in a book.

Also, which book?
 
  • #5
PeterDonis said:
Also, which book?

Nakahara's book: "Geometry, topology & physics", in the chapter on Riemannian geometry (chapter 7), section on the Levi-Civita connection.
 
  • #6
"Don't panic!" said:
So upon a bit of algebra I end up with what I put in my first post, i.e. the correct expression plus the two extra contributions.

To elaborate on this (sorry I was writing the last post on my phone and lost the will to try and LaTeX on such a small screen!), I end up with

[tex]R_{\kappa\lambda\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\kappa\nu}-\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\kappa}g_{\nu\lambda}-\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\kappa\mu}+\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\kappa}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)+g_{\kappa\zeta}\left(\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\mu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\nu\lambda}-\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\nu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\mu\lambda}\right)+\frac{1}{2}g_{\kappa\zeta}\left[\left(\partial_{\mu}g^{\zeta\eta}\right)\left(\partial_{\nu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\nu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\nu\lambda}\right)-\left(\partial_{\nu}g^{\zeta\eta}\right)\left(\partial_{\mu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\mu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)\right][/tex]

"Don't panic!" said:
Nakahara's book: "Geometry, topology & physics", in the chapter on Riemannian geometry (chapter 7), section on the Levi-Civita connection.

And the exact reference is: "Geometry, topology & physics", Nakahara. Chapter 7, Section 7.2, Sub-section 7.4.5, page 268.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
"Don't panic!" said:
How does one derive the general form of the Riemann tensor components when it is defined with respect to the Levi-Civita connection?

I assumed it was just a "plug-in and play" situation, however I end up with extra terms that don't agree with the form I've looked up in a book. In a general coordinate frame it should be of the form [tex] R_{\kappa\lambda\mu\nu}\equiv g_{\kappa\zeta}R^{\zeta}_{\;\lambda\mu\nu}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\nu\kappa}-\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\kappa}g_{\nu\lambda}-\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\lambda}g_{\mu\kappa}+\partial_{\nu}\partial_{\kappa}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)+g_{\kappa\zeta}\left(\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\mu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\nu\lambda}-\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\nu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\mu\lambda}\right)[/tex]
However, when I naively calculate ##R_{\kappa\lambda\mu\nu}=g_{\kappa\zeta}\left[\partial_{\mu}\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\nu\lambda}-\partial_{\nu}\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\mu\lambda}+\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\mu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\nu\lambda}-\Gamma^{\zeta}_{\;\nu\eta}\Gamma^{\eta}_{\;\mu\lambda}\right]## using that [tex]\Gamma^{\lambda}_{\;\mu\nu}=\bigg\lbrace\matrix{\lambda \\ \mu\nu}\bigg\rbrace=\frac{1}{2}g^{\lambda\eta}\left(\partial_{\mu}g_{\nu\eta}+\partial_{\nu}g_{\eta\mu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\mu\nu}\right)[/tex] I end up with the following extra contributions [tex]\frac{1}{2}g_{\kappa\zeta}\left(\partial_{\mu}g^{\zeta\eta}\right)\left(\partial_{\nu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\nu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\nu\lambda}\right)-\frac{1}{2}g_{\kappa\zeta}\left(\partial_{\nu}g^{\zeta\eta}\right)\left(\partial_{\mu}g_{\lambda\eta}+\partial_{\lambda}g_{\eta\mu}-\partial_{\eta}g_{\mu\lambda}\right)[/tex] which I can't seem to make disappear! What am I doing wrong?

Here is a quick way to do it. Write
[tex]R_{\rho\sigma\mu\nu} = \left\{ \partial_{\mu}\left(g_{\rho\tau}\Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma}\right) - \Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma} \partial_{\mu}g_{\rho\tau} + g_{\rho \alpha} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\tau} \Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma} \right\} - \left\{\mu \leftrightarrow \nu \right\} ,[/tex]
or
[tex]R_{\rho\sigma\mu\nu} = \left\{ \partial_{\mu}\left(g_{\rho\tau}\Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma}\right) - \left( \partial_{\mu}g_{\rho\tau} - g_{\rho\alpha} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\tau} \right) \Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma} \right\} - \left\{\mu \leftrightarrow \nu \right\} .[/tex] Now, if you use the identity [tex]\partial_{\mu}g_{\rho\tau} - g_{\rho\alpha} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\tau} = g_{\alpha\tau} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\rho\mu} ,[/tex] you get what you need to arrive at the final result
[tex]R_{\rho\sigma\mu\nu} = \left\{ \partial_{\mu}\left( g_{\rho\tau}\Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma} \right) - g_{\alpha\tau} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\rho\mu} \Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma}\right\} - \left\{\mu \leftrightarrow \nu \right\} .[/tex]
 
  • Like
Likes strangerep
  • #8
samalkhaiat said:
Here is a quick way to do it. Write
Rρσμν={∂μ(gρτΓτνσ)−Γτνσ∂μgρτ+gραΓαμτΓτνσ}−{μ↔ν},​
R_{\rho\sigma\mu\nu} = \left\{ \partial_{\mu}\left(g_{\rho\tau}\Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma}\right) - \Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma} \partial_{\mu}g_{\rho\tau} + g_{\rho \alpha} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\tau} \Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma} \right\} - \left\{\mu \leftrightarrow \nu \right\} ,
or
Rρσμν={∂μ(gρτΓτνσ)−(∂μgρτ−gραΓαμτ)Γτνσ}−{μ↔ν}.​
R_{\rho\sigma\mu\nu} = \left\{ \partial_{\mu}\left(g_{\rho\tau}\Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma}\right) - \left( \partial_{\mu}g_{\rho\tau} - g_{\rho\alpha} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\tau} \right) \Gamma^{\tau}_{\nu\sigma} \right\} - \left\{\mu \leftrightarrow \nu \right\} . Now, if you use the identity
∂μgρτ−gραΓαμτ=gατΓαρμ,​
\partial_{\mu}g_{\rho\tau} - g_{\rho\alpha} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\tau} = g_{\alpha\tau} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\rho\mu} , you get what you need to arrive at the final result
Rρσμν={∂μ(gρτΓτνσ)−gατΓαρμΓτνσ}−{μ↔ν}.​

Cool, thanks for your help. I'm guessing I could rectify my attempt using the identity you specified in your post (although it would be a lot more work)?!
 
  • #9
"Don't panic!" said:
Cool, thanks for your help. I'm guessing I could rectify my attempt using the identity you specified in your post (although it would be a lot more work)?!
Yes, differentation alone does not get you any where. You need to use [itex]\nabla_{\rho}g_{\mu\nu}=0[/itex]. However, doing it your way generates 12 terms of the form [itex](g\partial g)(g \Gamma)[/itex]! Why make life difficult for yourself.
 
  • #10
samalkhaiat said:
Yes, differentation alone does not get you any where. You need to use ∇ρgμν=0\nabla_{\rho}g_{\mu\nu}=0. However, doing it your way generates 12 terms of the form (g∂g)(gΓ)(g\partial g)(g \Gamma)! Why make life difficult for yourself.

Yes, you're right. I ended up heeding your advice and doing it the way you suggested - much more straight forward!
 

Related to Deriving Riemann Tensor Comp. in General Frame

1. What is the Riemann tensor in general frame?

The Riemann tensor, also known as the Riemann curvature tensor, is a mathematical object used to describe the curvature of a space in a general frame. It is a four-dimensional tensor that contains information about the curvature of space in terms of the curvature of its geodesics (paths of least resistance).

2. How is the Riemann tensor derived in a general frame?

The Riemann tensor can be derived using the covariant derivative of the metric tensor in a general frame. This involves taking the partial derivatives of the metric tensor and applying the Christoffel symbols, which represent the curvature of the space, to obtain the components of the Riemann tensor.

3. What is the significance of the Riemann tensor in general relativity?

In general relativity, the Riemann tensor is used to describe the curvature of spacetime and is a key component in Einstein's field equations. It is essential in understanding the effects of gravity on the motion of objects and the behavior of light in curved space.

4. Can the Riemann tensor be used to determine the topology of a space?

No, the Riemann tensor alone cannot determine the topology of a space. It only describes the curvature of a space and does not provide information about the shape or size of the space. Additional information, such as the metric tensor and the equations of motion, are needed to determine the topology of a space.

5. Is there a physical interpretation of the Riemann tensor?

Yes, the Riemann tensor has a physical interpretation as it describes the tidal forces experienced by objects in a gravitational field. These forces are responsible for the curvature of spacetime and can be visualized as the stretching and squeezing of the space itself.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
557
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
211
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
723
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
869
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top