Graduate How to Read Geodesic Equation: Vector, 3-D & EFE Solutions

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the interpretation of the geodesic equation in the context of general relativity, specifically regarding the 4-vector notation ##x^\mu## and its components. Participants clarify that ##x^\mu## represents four functions of the proper time parameter ##\tau##, rather than a traditional vector. The conversation also addresses the implications of using spherical coordinates and the Einstein Field Equations (EFE) in 3D versus 4D spacetime, emphasizing that spacetime is inherently four-dimensional and cannot be simplified to three dimensions without losing essential information.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of general relativity and the geodesic equation
  • Familiarity with 4-vectors and their components in physics
  • Knowledge of spherical and Cartesian coordinate systems
  • Basic grasp of the Einstein Field Equations (EFE)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the mathematical formulation of the geodesic equation in general relativity
  • Explore the implications of 4-dimensional spacetime on physical models
  • Learn about the covariant derivative and its role in general relativity
  • Investigate the relationship between the EFE and geodesic equations in various coordinate systems
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, mathematicians, and students of general relativity seeking to deepen their understanding of geodesic equations and the structure of spacetime.

jk22
Messages
732
Reaction score
25
In the formula : ##\frac{d^2 x^\mu}{d\tau^2}=-\Gamma^\mu_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\tau}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\tau}##

How is the ##x^\mu## understood : a 4-vector or the ##\mu##-st component simply ?

If it is a vector, how to write it in spherical coordinate with extra time dimension ?

Btw: why does one not solve EFE in 3 space timensions and then solve the geodesic equation with ##\tau\rightarrow t## ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jk22 said:
How is the understood

As a 4-vector function of ##\tau##, the proper time along the worldline. Then ##dx^\mu / d\tau## and ##d^2 x^\mu / d\tau^2## are 4-vectors giving the first and second derivatives of that 4-vector function with respect to ##\tau##. In other words, the equation you wrote is really four equations, one for each ##\mu = (0, 1, 2, 3)##.
 
Yes but the ith component of the second derivative of the vector is not the second derivative of the ith component, i.e. the ##\theta## component of ##\ddot{\vec{r}}## is not ##\ddot{\theta}## for example in spherical coordinates.

If one sees it 4 dimensionally then ##\vec{r}=r\vec{e}_r=r(\sin\theta\cos\phi,\sin\theta\sin\phi,\cos\theta)^T## is replaced by for example ##\vec{x}=r(\sin\theta\cos\phi,\sin\theta\sin\phi,\cos\theta\cosh\alpha,\cos\theta\sinh\alpha)^T## ?
 
jk22 said:
the ith component of the second derivative of the vector is not the second derivative of the ith component

No. That is not what is going on here. All four components are functions of the parameter ##\tau##. So the 4-vector ##x^\mu## is just 4 functions of ##\tau##; and the 4-vectors ##d x^\mu / d\tau## and ##d^2 x^\mu / d \tau^2## are just 4-tuples of the first and second derivatives of those 4 functions with respect to ##\tau##.
 
jk22 said:
##\vec{r}=r\vec{e}_r##

No, that is not what the 4-vector ##x^\mu## is. It is just 4 functions of ##\tau##. It is not a vector in the sense you appear to be thinking. In spherical coordinates the 4 functions would just be the 4 spherical coordinates as functions of ##\tau## instead of the 4 Cartesian coordinates as functions of ##\tau##.

Not all texts use the term "4-vector" in this context; perhaps that would be a better idea to avoid confusion. Unfortunately there is no other standard term for the thing that the notation ##x^\mu## denoting 4 functions of ##\tau## refers to. Possibly "4-tuple" would work.
 
  • Like
Likes cianfa72
I am confused, it it ##\frac{d(x^\mu)}{d\tau}## or ##\left(\frac{dx}{d\tau}\right)^\mu## ? It seems it lacks parentheses.

In fact I want to know what ##x^1## is : is it the 1st component of ##(ct,r,\theta,\phi)## or of ##(ct,r\cos(\phi)\sin(\theta),...)## ?
 
Last edited:
PeterDonis said:
As a 4-vector function of ##\tau##, the proper time along the worldline. Then ##dx^\mu / d\tau## and ##d^2 x^\mu / d\tau^2## are 4-vectors giving the first and second derivatives of that 4-vector function with respect to ##\tau##. In other words, the equation you wrote is really four equations, one for each ##\mu = (0, 1, 2, 3)##.
It's not four-vectors but four-vector components, and it's
$$u^{\mu} = \mathrm{d}_{\tau} x^{\mu}$$
but
$$a^{\mu} = \mathrm{D}_{\tau} u^{\mu} = \mathrm{d}_{\tau} u^{\mu} + {\Gamma^{\mu}}_{\nu \rho} u^{\nu} u^{\rho},$$
i.e., it's the covariant derivative of the vector components wrt. to the affine parameter ##\tau## (for massive particles usually one chooses ##\tau## to be the proper time, defined by the constraint ##g_{\mu \nu} u^{\mu} u^{\nu}=c^2##.
 
jk22 said:
I am confused, it it ##\frac{d(x^\mu)}{d\tau}## or ##\left(\frac{dx}{d\tau}\right)^\mu## ? It seems it lacks parentheses.

In fact I want to know what ##x^1## is : is it the 1st component of ##(ct,r,\theta,\phi)## or of ##(ct,r\cos(\phi)\sin(\theta),...)## ?
If you're working in spherical polar coordinates ##(ct,r,\theta,\phi)## then
$$
\frac{\mathrm{d}x^\mu}{\mathrm{d}\tau} = \left(
\frac{\mathrm{d}(ct)} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}r} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}\theta} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}\phi} {\mathrm{d}\tau}
\right) \, ,
$$
so the answer to your question is ##x^1=r##.

If you're working in cartesian coordinates ##(ct,x,y,z)## then
$$
\frac{\mathrm{d}x^\mu}{\mathrm{d}\tau} = \left(
\frac{\mathrm{d}(ct)} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}x} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}y} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}z} {\mathrm{d}\tau}
\right) \, .
$$
 
  • Like
Likes jk22
Let say it is like above. Then I tried to solve EFE in 3 spatial dimension only, with the unknown metric being spherically symmetric :
$$g_{ij}=diag(A(r),B(r),C(r)\sin^2\theta)$$

I got

##C(r)=\sqrt{2\beta+4r}##
##B(r)=\alpha C(r)##
##A(r)=\alpha C'(r)^2/C(r)##

Now is it a way to compute the geodesic for ##\dot{\theta}=\dot{\phi}=0 ## and to make the approximation for weak field (large r) being the Newton equation of motion ?

In doing in 3+0 dimensions then I thought that :

1) timelike loops are avoided
2) there is only one time and not coordinate vs. proper time
3) one can do find the transformation of coordinate from ##\mathbb{R}(3,0)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}(3,1)## s.t. the curved metric is obtained by scalar product of the basis vectors (exterior geometry like for surfaces but for a 3d space embedded in 4-spacetime and not 5-spacetime like in (3,1) metric.I would like to seek for courses that do that way (if it exists?).
 
  • #10
jk22 said:
Then I tried to solve EFE in 3 spatial dimension only

This makes no sense. Spacetime is 4-dimensional, not 3-dimensional.

Also, are you asking about the Einstein Field Equation, or the geodesic equation? They're not the same. Your OP in this thread asked about the geodesic equation along a timelike curve; but any timelike curve will have only one point in a spacelike 3-surface, so looking at "3 spatial dimensions" tells you nothing at all about the timelike curve except for a single point on it.

I suggest keeping this thread focused on the geodesic equation. If you want to ask questions about the EFE you should start a separate thread. But first think carefully about what "spacetime is 4-dimensional, not 3-dimensional" means.

jk22 said:
In doing in 3+0 dimensions then I thought that :

1) timelike loops are avoided

It's perfectly possible to have a spacelike 3-surface in a 4-dimensional spacetime that has closed timelike curves.

jk22 said:
there is only one time

No, there is no time in a spacelike 3-surface.

jk22 said:
one can do find the transformation of coordinate from s.t. the curved metric is obtained by scalar product of the basis vectors (exterior geometry like for surfaces but for a 3d space embedded in 4-spacetime and not 5-spacetime like in (3,1) metric.

You are very confused. (3, 1) spacetime is not embedded in anything; it's just a curved 4-dimensional manifold with (3, 1) signature. The curvature of (3, 1) spacetime is intrinsic, not extrinsic. Curvature has nothing to do with transformations of coordinates or scalar products of basis vectors.
 
  • Like
Likes jk22
  • #11
DrGreg said:
If you're working in spherical polar coordinates ##(ct,r,\theta,\phi)## then
$$
\frac{\mathrm{d}x^\mu}{\mathrm{d}\tau} = \left(
\frac{\mathrm{d}(ct)} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}r} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}\theta} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}\phi} {\mathrm{d}\tau}
\right) \, ,
$$
so the answer to your question is ##x^1=r##.

If you're working in cartesian coordinates ##(ct,x,y,z)## then
$$
\frac{\mathrm{d}x^\mu}{\mathrm{d}\tau} = \left(
\frac{\mathrm{d}(ct)} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}x} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}y} {\mathrm{d}\tau},
\frac{\mathrm{d}z} {\mathrm{d}\tau}
\right) \, .
$$

If this were the case then with the 3dimensional above computed metric we would get :

$$\ddot{\theta}=\frac{1}{2\beta+4r}\dot{\theta}\dot{r}-\sin\theta\cos\theta\dot{\phi}^2/\alpha$$

Would this mean a change of orientation of the ecliptic plane ?(i never heard of such a phenomenon)
 
  • #12
jk22 said:
with the 3dimensional above computed metric

Which, as I said, makes no sense. You should not be doing anything further with it; it will only mislead you even more than you are already misled.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
836
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K