How Do Killing Vector Fields Form a Basis on S2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter alexriemann
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Line element
alexriemann
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
I am asked to find the Killing vector fields on ##S^2## where the line element is given by ##ds^2=d\theta\otimes d\theta +\sin^2\theta d\phi\otimes d\phi##.

- Solve the Killing equation for the ##(\theta,\theta)## components, that is ##(\mathcal L_\xi g)_{\theta\theta}=0## and show that it gives a Killing vector field ##\xi^{(1)}## that is only a function of ##\phi##, ##\xi^{(1)}=F(\phi)##. Show that this function has to be periodic and assume that it has the simple form ##\xi^{(1)}=A\sin(\phi-\phi_0)##

- Integrate the other Killing component equations and obtain two more Killing vector fields ##\xi^{(2)}## and ##\xi^{(3)}## that will depend on integration constant ##\phi_0, c_1,c_2##. By giving these constants simples values, recover the **Killing operators** ##\xi_1,\xi_2,\xi_3## given in the directions associated to the **Killing vector fields** ##\xi^{(1)},\xi^{(2)},\xi^{(3)}##.
Relevant Equations
$$\mathcal L_\xi g=0$$

$$\xi_1=(-\sin\phi,-\cot\theta\cos\phi)$$
$$\xi_2=(\cos\phi,-\cot\theta\sin\phi)$$
$$\xi_3=(0,1)$$
I know how to solve this problem by considering the Killing equation, namely ##\mathcal L_\xi g=0## that gives three differential equations involving the components of ##\xi=(\xi^\theta,\xi^\phi)## that can be integrated. The result I get, which I know to be true because this is a common result that can be found anywhere on the web, is:

$$\xi^\theta=\nu\cos\phi-\mu\sin\phi$$
$$\xi^\phi=\delta-\cot \theta(\mu\cos\phi+\nu\sin\phi)$$

Where ##\mu,\nu,\delta## are integration constants. By setting these constants to ##(\mu,\nu,\delta)=\{(1,0,0),(0,1,0),(0,0,1)\}##, I obtain three independent vector fields that constitute a basis for the Killing Lie algebra on ##S^2##. These are, in the chart:

$$\xi_1=(-\sin\phi,-\cot\theta\cos\phi)$$
$$\xi_2=(\cos\phi,-\cot\theta\sin\phi)$$
$$\xi_3=(0,1)$$

So, this is no big deal. However, the directions of my assignment insist that we strictly stick to the following procedure to find ##\xi_1,\xi_2,\xi_3## (these are given in the directions and match the vectors I wrote above) which is the source of my confusion:

- Solve the Killing equation for the ##(\theta,\theta)## components, that is ##(\mathcal L_\xi g)_{\theta\theta}=0## and show that it gives a Killing vector field ##\xi^{(1)}## that is only a function of ##\phi##, ##\xi^{(1)}=F(\phi)##. Show that this function has to be periodic and assume that it has the simple form ##\xi^{(1)}=A\sin(\phi-\phi_0)##

- Integrate the other Killing component equations and obtain two more Killing vector fields ##\xi^{(2)}## and ##\xi^{(3)}## that will depend on integration constant ##\phi_0, c_1,c_2##. By giving these constants simples values, recover the **Killing operators** ##\xi_1,\xi_2,\xi_3## given in the directions associated to the **Killing vector fields** ##\xi^{(1)},\xi^{(2)},\xi^{(3)}##.

I must admit that I am very confused with what my teacher is saying. He is basically saying that solving the three Killing component equations ##(\mathcal L_\xi g)_{\theta\theta}=(\mathcal L_\xi g)_{\theta\phi}=(\mathcal L_\xi g)_{\phi\phi}=0## give three Killing vector fields that depend on integration constants whereas, to my understanding, those three equation are solved for the two components of one generic vector field ##\xi=(\xi^\theta,\xi^\phi)## that give rise to three independent Killing vector fields when the integration constants are given some values.

For example, the first Killing component equation reads : ##\partial_\theta\xi^\theta=0##, which tells us that the ##\theta##-component of the Killing vector field is a function that only depends on ##\phi##. This is very different compared to saying that this equation gives a Killing vector field, isn't it?

Can someone make sense of what my teacher is trying to say or is that just wrong overall? I really do think that the directions are not only confusing but wrong. Any insight would be very much appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top