How Does Topological Action Simplify with Levi-Civita Tensor Contractions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jinbaw
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Topological
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on simplifying an action involving the Levi-Civita tensor contractions in the context of general relativity. The specific term analyzed is levicivita_[a,b,c,d]*levicivita^[mu,nu,rho,sigma]*R^[a,b]_[mu,nu]*R^[c,d]_[rho,sigma. The participant identifies that when indices a and c are equal, the Levi-Civita tensor evaluates to zero, but questions arise regarding the non-zero results when other indices match. The conclusion emphasizes that while the expansion leads to cancellations of terms, it is not computationally optimal due to the redundancy in the expressions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Levi-Civita tensor properties and contractions
  • Familiarity with Riemann curvature tensors and their indices
  • Knowledge of tensor calculus in general relativity
  • Experience with mathematical simplifications in theoretical physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the Levi-Civita tensor in detail
  • Learn about Riemann curvature tensor contractions and their implications
  • Explore computational techniques for simplifying tensor expressions
  • Investigate the role of permutations in tensor algebra
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, mathematicians specializing in differential geometry, and graduate students studying general relativity who seek to deepen their understanding of tensor contractions and simplifications in complex actions.

jinbaw
Messages
65
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to simplify an action that has the term: levicivita_[a,b,c,d]*levicivita^[mu,nu,rho,sigma]*R^[a,b]_[mu,nu]*R^[c,d]_[rho,sigma]

where a,b,c, and d are flat indices and mu nu rho sigma are curved indices

I got the term: 4*e^mu_a*e^nu_b*e^rho_c*e^sigma_d*R^a,b_mu,nu*R^c,d_rho,sigma

My question is if i have for example a=c levicivita_[a,b,c,d] is 0. however if i have a =c and mu=rho in the answer i got... i won't get a zero. is there some wrong in my computations? thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the magic is that, for instance, [tex]4{R^{12}}_{12}{R^{12}}_{12}[/tex] indeed appears in your term, but it will also appear in those five other terms that you call "permutations" - and they will cancel out. The point of your expansion is to get nice contractions in the formulas, but it is not computationally optimal in the sense that there will be many cancellations of terms. In other words: you are adding and subtracting the same terms in order to get certain nice expressions like square of the scalar curvature etc.

Does it make sense?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
42
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K