Help computing Christoffel coefficient

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the computation of Christoffel coefficients in the context of general relativity. Participants are attempting to clarify their understanding of the derivation and notation involved in the equations presented.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are discussing the differentiation of the Christoffel symbol and the implications of various indices. There are questions about the notation used, particularly regarding the relationship between different forms of the delta symbol and the handling of dummy indices.

Discussion Status

Several participants have provided insights and corrections regarding the notation and potential typos in the expressions. There is an ongoing exploration of the signs and terms involved in the equations, with some participants expressing uncertainty about specific steps in the derivation.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the assumption that there may be typographical errors in the provided expressions, which complicates the discussion. The context of a previous general relativity course is noted, suggesting a foundational understanding of the subject matter.

S.P.P
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
Not so much a homework problem, more needing help understanding where something comes from. I've attached a jpg file with what I need help on.

I've done a general relativity course at uni but can't seem to work out what should be a very simple problem.
 

Attachments

  • gr.JPG
    gr.JPG
    30.7 KB · Views: 435
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I get this,

[tex]\Gamma^i_{0j} = \frac{1}{2}g^{i\nu}\partial_0(g_{\nu j})[/tex] with [tex]\nu[/tex] running over 1,2,3.

Differentiating
[tex]\Gamma^i_{0j} = \frac{1}{2}g^{i\nu}(2aa'\eta_{\nu j} + 2aa'h_{\nu j} + a^2\partial_0 h_{\nu j})[/tex]

which gives
[tex]\Gamma^i_{0j} = (\eta^{i\nu}-h^{i\nu})(\frac{a'}{a}\eta_{\nu j} + \frac{a'}{a}h_{\nu j} + \frac{1}{2}\partial_0 h_{\nu j})[/tex]


and so
[tex]\Gamma^i_{0j} = \frac{a'}{a}g^{i\nu}g_{\nu j} + \frac{1}{2}g^{i\nu}\partial_0 h_{\nu j})[/tex]

summing we get,
[tex]\Gamma^i_{0j} = \frac{a'}{a}\delta^i_j + \frac{1}{2}h'^i_j[/tex]


Which is not quite the right answer !
 
Last edited:
That's a bit closer than I can get. Does [tex]\delta^i_j = \delta_{ij}[/tex]?
 
[tex]\delta^i_j = g^{ik}\delta_{kj}[/tex]

which requires a summation. I hope you don't mind me asking, but do you know how to raise and lower indexes ? I notice in your equ 5 you've lost the dummy index.
 
I'm starting to think that the answer I've been given has a typo, and should read [tex]\delta^i_j[/tex] instead of [tex]\delta_{ij}[/tex].

I've lost the dummy indices as I've summed over [tex]v[/tex]. When [tex]v=0[/tex] everything equalled zero, so the next index was j (where j = 1,2,3). Is this not the way to proceed?

Also, I understand that [tex]g_{iv}g^{vj}=\delta^i_j[/tex], but [tex](\eta_{iv}+h_{iv})*(\eta^{vj}-h^{vj})=0[/tex]?
 
Last edited:
Aha - yes, I made an error, so my answer should have [tex]\delta_{ij}[/tex].
Don't know why I wrote a mixed index there. That still leaves the sign and the prime on h.
 
there should be a prime on h, that was a typo on my part.
 
Well, if you can track down the why the sign disagrees, it's mission accomplished.

I'm busy right now but I'll check it a little later.
 
There's another typo in your doc. The expression you quote as the answer is wrong. The first delta must have one upper and one lower index like the other terms.

So I stand my earlier result because

[tex]g^{ik}g_{kj} = g_j^i = \delta_j^i[/tex]

I haven't tracked down the sign yet.
 
  • #10
aha! got it.

[tex]\Gamma^i_{0j} = \frac{a'}{a}\delta^{ij}+\frac{1}{2}g^{i\nu}\partial_0(h_{\nu j})[/tex].

If I expand the last term out,

[tex]\frac{1}{2}(\eta^{i\nu}-h^{i\nu})\partial_0(h_{\nu j})[/tex].

Ignore higher order terms (ie h^2), using the metric signiture (+,-,-,-) coupled with the fact that only the spatial part is non zero, then,

[tex]\eta^{i\nu} = \eta^{ij}=-\delta^{ij}[/tex]

Thanks for the help :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • #11
I'm glad you're content. I don't follow your last step, but I suppose it's time to move on ...
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K