How Do You Derive Christoffel Symbols from These Equations?

m.medhat
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
hello,
i have a question about christoffel symbols . if we have :-
[PLAIN]http://www.tobikat.com
how can I derive these equations :-
[PLAIN]http://www.tobikat.com
please i want the answer be clear .


with very thanks...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
m.medhat said:
hello,
i have a question about christoffel symbols . if we have :-
[PLAIN]http://www.tobikat.com
how can I derive these equations :-
[PLAIN]http://www.tobikat.com
please i want the answer be clear .


with very thanks...

You can have two different approaches in finding the components of geodesic equation, as arranged in the bottom picture. One is to calculate these all through tedious and lengthy geodesic equations or to simply take the path of Lagrange and utilize his equations to obtain what you want. But this latter one needs the line-element and since I don't see any (though I can guess what it could be), so you only seem to be left with the first method. So given those Christoffel symbols, just use the equations

[PLAIN]http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/d/f/9/df9964e9250e597ed0f1f23f3d1ddb21.png.[/URL]

Remember that here you must take the affine parameter \lambda in place of t.

Ask where you feel stuck.

AB
 
Last edited by a moderator:
thank you very much
 
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