Finding Geodesics What I wish to understand, is how to solve

  • Thread starter Thread starter noamriemer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Geodesics
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding geodesics given a specific metric. The original poster presents a metric and expresses confusion regarding the application of the Euler-Lagrange equations in this context, particularly concerning the dependence of the Lagrangian on the parameter chosen.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to derive geodesics using the Euler-Lagrange equations but questions the dependence of the Lagrangian on the parameter. Some participants suggest alternative forms of the Lagrangian to simplify the problem, while others raise concerns about integrating with respect to the parameter.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem. Some guidance has been offered regarding the Lagrangian, but there is no explicit consensus on the approach to take.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of integrating with respect to a parameter and the implications of variations in the context of arc length. There are indications of confusion regarding the relationship between the parameter and the integral.

noamriemer
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
Finding Geodesics


What I wish to understand, is how to solve this one:
given this metric:
ds^2= \frac {dt^2} {t^2}- \frac{dx^2} {t^2}
I have to calculate the geodesics.

S=\int{ \frac {d} {d\lambda} \sqrt{\frac {1} {t^2} \frac {dt^2} {d\lambda^2}- \frac{1} {t^2} \frac {dx^2} {d\lambda^2}}}

But \lambda here, is any parameter I choose. Therefore, L does not depend on it (right? )
So now I want to use E-L equations:

\frac {d}{dλ}\frac {∂L}{∂\dot t}=\frac {\partial L} {∂t}, <br /> \frac {d} {dλ}\frac {∂L} {∂\dot x} =\frac {\partial L} {∂x}

When \dot t refers to \frac {dt} {d\lambda} etc.
But here I get confused:
What does L depend on?
I'll continue my solution:

\frac {d} {dλ} 0.5 ({{\frac {{\dot t}^2} {t^2}-\frac {{\dot x}^2} {t^2}}})^{-0.5} 2 \frac {\dot t} {t^2}= \frac {\partial L} {\partial x}

As I stated, L does not depend on lambda, and so:

\frac {d} {d\lambda} {[\frac {\dot t} {t^2}]}^2 = \frac {{\dot t}^2-{\dot x}^2} {t^3}
So how am I supposed to derive this? Do I add another dot?
\frac {d} {d\lambda} \dot t = \ddot t ? and do I refer to it as an operator? Meaning- \ddot t = {\dot t}^2?

How do I continue? These calculations on classical mechanics were so trivial to me- but for some reason I get lost in here...
Thank you!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


i'm sorry I'm having problems making sense of this. you seem to be wanting arc length depending on an internal parameter time(lamba) and space(lamba), but then you will need to integrate with respect to d(lamba), not d/d(lamba) for it to remain arc length. i assume if either S is a total integral or S is conserved under variation,
d/d(lamba)S=0. now can you commute lamba variation and integration?
 


The easiest Lagrangian to use would be L=g_{\alpha \beta }\frac{dx^\alpha }{d\lambda }\frac{dx^\beta }{d\lambda }. Then you don't have to deal with the annoying square root.
 


xaos said:
i'm sorry I'm having problems making sense of this. you seem to be wanting arc length depending on an internal parameter time(lamba) and space(lamba), but then you will need to integrate with respect to d(lamba), not d/d(lamba) for it to remain arc length. i assume if either S is a total integral or S is conserved under variation,
d/d(lamba)S=0. now can you commute lamba variation and integration?

Hi... I did not understand what you meant. I integrate with respect to lambda... not d/d(lambda) ...
Thank you
 


elfmotat said:
The easiest Lagrangian to use would be L=g_{\alpha \beta }\frac{dx^\alpha }{d\lambda }\frac{dx^\beta }{d\lambda }. Then you don't have to deal with the annoying square root.

Thank you. I would use that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K