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

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around demonstrating that a rank 2 co-tensor, denoted as ##T_{\mu\nu}##, can be derived from a rank 2 tensor ##T^{\mu\nu}## using a metric to lower the indices. The context is set within the framework of general relativity and tensor analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the transformation properties of tensors and co-tensors, questioning how to express the transformation of ##T_{\mu\nu}## in terms of the metric and the transformation matrices. There is discussion on the implications of index placement and the conventions used in transformations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights on the transformation of the indices and the implications of using different conventions for notation. There is an acknowledgment of the need for clarity regarding the placement of primes in the indices and the transformation matrices.

Contextual Notes

Participants note differing conventions in notation, particularly regarding the use of primes on indices and the definitions of transformation matrices, which may affect the clarity of the discussion.

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:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K