Finding the geodesic function for scalar * function= scalar

metric tensor
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
56baaad965b3374c53c31863fac4d60e.png

In this expression the junk on the left is a scalar. The stuff before the integral is another scalar. The integral is a time-like curve between x1 and x2 and at imagine fgf(x1) is a lower left corner of the rectangle and fgf(x2) is the upper right corner and x2-x1 is the length of the base of the rectangle. I know the geodesic is the shortest distance curve paramaerized by this on the condition that the area (the integral) times the scalar1 = scalar2. The solution isn't a strait line but could be some curved function. How do I find the function fgf ?
Do i need to find the 2x2 metric tensor for the 2-d paramaterization curve and solve a pair of differential equations like here ?

http://count.ucsc.edu/~rmont/classes/121A/polarChristoffelE_Lag.pdf
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Unfortunately, it is not possible to answer this question without knowing more details about the specific problem. However, in general, if you have an integral equation of the form:scalar1 = scalar2*Integral[fgf(x), x1, x2]Then you can solve for fgf by taking the integral of both sides and rearranging the equation:fgf(x) = (scalar1/scalar2)*1/(x2-x1)This should give you the function fgf that you need.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...

Similar threads

Back
Top