[General Relativity] Prove that a tensor is a co-tensor

mef51
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Hello! I'd appreciate any help or pokes in the right direction.

Homework Statement


Show that a co-tensor of rank 2, ##T_{\mu\nu}##, is obtained from the tensor of rank 2 ##T^{\mu\nu}## by using a metric to lower the indices:
$$T_{\mu\nu} = g_{\mu\alpha}g_{\nu\beta}T^{\alpha\beta}$$

Homework Equations


I know that a vector is a covector if its components transform from one frame to another as:
$$B_\alpha '= \frac {\partial x^\beta}{\partial x'^\alpha } B_\beta$$

The Attempt at a Solution


Analogous to a co-vector, I figure that a tensor of rank 2 is a co-tensor if
$$T_{\alpha\beta} '= \frac {\partial x^\mu}{\partial x'^\alpha } \frac {\partial x^\nu}{\partial x'^\beta } T_{\mu\nu}$$

So I'll start on the right-side and try to simplify it to the left side...
$$
RS = \frac {\partial x^\mu}{\partial x'^\alpha } \frac {\partial x^\nu}{\partial x'^\beta } T_{\mu\nu}
= \frac {\partial x^\mu}{\partial x'^\alpha } \frac {\partial x^\nu}{\partial x'^\beta } g_{\mu\delta} g_{\nu\epsilon} T^{\delta\epsilon}
$$
Now I'll substitute in the Jacobians...
$$
= ({\Lambda^{-1}})^\mu_\alpha ({\Lambda^{-1}})^\nu_\beta g_{\mu\delta} g_{\nu\epsilon} T^{\delta\epsilon}
$$

And I'm not sure where to go from here. I suspect I can contract the jacobians with the metric tensors but I'm not sure how to handle that.

Thanks,
mef
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So I think what the problem is asking you is to show that ##T_{\mu\nu}\equiv g_{\mu\alpha}g_{\nu\beta}T^{\alpha\beta}## defined in this way is in fact a co-vector. Is that your interpretation of the problem as well?

In that case, by changing a coordinate system, we should have still ##T_{\mu'\nu'} = g_{\mu'\alpha'}g_{\nu'\beta'}T^{\alpha'\beta'}##. What does the right hand side of this equation look like in terms of un-primed indices?
 
Ok so then we can express the right-side in terms of the unprimed terms using
$$g_{\mu'\alpha'}=(\Lambda^{-1})_{\mu}^{\delta}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\alpha}^{\epsilon}g_{\delta\epsilon}$$
$$g_{\nu'\beta'}=(\Lambda^{-1})_{\nu}^{\eta}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\beta}^{\kappa}g_{\eta\kappa}$$
And we'll get
$$
T_{\mu'\nu'}=g_{\mu'\alpha'}g_{\nu'\beta'}T^{\alpha'\beta'}=(\Lambda^{-1})_{\mu}^{\delta}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\alpha}^{\epsilon}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\nu}^{\eta}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\beta}^{\kappa}g_{\delta\epsilon}g_{\eta\kappa}T^{\alpha'\beta'}=(\Lambda^{-1})_{\mu}^{\delta}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\nu}^{\eta}g_{\delta\epsilon}g_{\eta\kappa}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\alpha}^{\epsilon}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\beta}^{\kappa}T^{\alpha'\beta'}
$$ $$
=(\Lambda^{-1})_{\mu}^{\delta}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\nu}^{\eta}g_{\delta\epsilon}g_{\eta\kappa}T^{\epsilon\kappa}=(\Lambda^{-1})_{\mu}^{\delta}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\nu}^{\eta}T_{\delta\eta}
$$

So we see that ##T_{\mu'\nu'}## transforms as ##T_{\mu'\nu'}=(\Lambda^{-1})_{\mu}^{\delta}(\Lambda^{-1})_{\nu}^{\eta}T_{\delta\eta}## which means that it's a co tensor!
 
Some of your indices should still be primed. Each ##(\Lambda^{-1})^\mu_{~~\nu'}## should have a prime on the bottom index (or else they wouldn't sum over with the T indices in the 3rd and 4th parts of the expression, and they wouldn't match the primped indices on the left hand side of the equation),. Also, usually one would be a bit more general and just leave it in terms of ##\frac{\partial x^\mu}{\partial x^{\nu'}}## so that we can consider more than just Lorentz transformations. But other than that, it looks fine to me.
 
You're right.
My prof has a convention where you only write the primes on the object instead of the indices (so ##T_{\mu\nu}'## instead of ##T_{\mu'\nu'}## and he also defined the transformation ##\Lambda## so that ##\Lambda## has a prime on the top and ##\Lambda^{-1}## has a prime on the bottom:
##\Lambda_{\nu}^{\mu}=\frac{\partial x'^{\mu}}{\partial x^{\nu}}## and ##(\Lambda^{-1})_{\nu}^{\mu}=\frac{\partial x^{\mu}}{\partial x'^{\nu}}##

I prefer priming the indices instead because then you don't have to remember that ##\Lambda^{-1}## has primes on the bottom and vice versa
 
Last edited:
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...
Back
Top