Interpretation of [itex]\partial_\nu T^{\mu \nu}[/itex]

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mjordan2nd
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interpretation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the interpretation of the equation \(\partial_\nu T^{\mu \nu} = Q^\mu\) within the context of the dust energy-momentum tensor in general relativity. Participants explore the physical meaning of the spatial vector \(Q^i\) and its relation to the components of the energy-momentum tensor.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant attempts to manipulate the expression \(\partial_\nu T^{\mu \nu}\) to derive an interpretation for \(Q^i\) using the dust energy-momentum tensor \(T^{\mu \nu} = \rho U^\mu U^\nu\).
  • There is a discussion about the algebraic manipulation of the equations, with some participants questioning the validity of changing the number of free indices in the equations presented.
  • Another participant suggests that understanding the physical meaning of the energy-momentum tensor components could lead to a clearer interpretation of the derivative, hinting at a continuity equation.
  • One participant expresses difficulty in isolating \(Q\) in their equations while analyzing the dust energy-momentum tensor.
  • Another participant provides clarification on how to express \(Q^i\) in terms of the components of the energy-momentum tensor, suggesting that \(Q^i\) can be interpreted as sources or sinks in the continuity equation.
  • Participants discuss specific components of the energy-momentum tensor, such as \(T^{01}\) representing the flux of energy density, and the challenges in interpreting \(T^{ij}\).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the interpretation of \(Q^i\) and its physical significance. Multiple viewpoints and interpretations are presented, indicating an ongoing debate.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the manipulation of indices and the physical interpretation of the energy-momentum tensor components, which may depend on their understanding of the underlying physics.

mjordan2nd
Messages
173
Reaction score
1
I am working on Sean Carroll's problem 1.8.

If \partial_\nu T^{\mu \nu}=Q^\mu, what physically does the spatial vector Q^i represent? Use the dust energy momentum tensor to make your case.

The dust energy momentum tensor is

T^{\mu \nu}= \rho U^\mu U^\nu,

where U is the four-velocity and \rho the energy density in the rest frame.

Trying to manipulate \partial_\nu \rho U^\mu U^\nu directly didn't give me anything I could reasonably interpret. I then tried to look at U_\mu Q^\mu following the example in the textbook to see if I could possibly factor the final expression into giving me an answer I could interpret. What I got was

U_\mu \partial_\nu \rho U^\mu U^\nu=-U^\nu \partial_\nu \rho-\rho \partial_\nu U^\nu=U_\mu Q^\mu.

I can't factor four-velocity out of the second term since it is inside the derivative, so I'm not too sure that I can simplify this into something that I can interpret for Q.

I also tried to consider the part of this equation that was orthogonal to the four velocity. To do this, I multiplied the expression by the following projection vector:

P^\sigma_\nu=\delta^\mu_\nu+U^\sigma U_\nu.

This gives

P^\sigma_\mu Q^\mu = P^\sigma_\mu \partial_\nu (\rho U^\mu U^\nu),

P^\sigma_\mu \partial_\nu (\rho U^\mu U^\nu) =U^\nu \rho \partial_\nu U^\sigma,

P^\sigma_\mu Q^\mu =Q^\sigma + U^\sigma U_\mu Q^\mu,

U^\nu \rho \partial_\nu U^\sigma = Q^\sigma + U^\sigma U_\mu Q^\mu.

From here, if we plug in -U^\nu \partial_\nu \rho-\rho \partial_\nu U^\nu=U_\mu Q^\mu into the final expression above, we get the original expression: \partial_\nu T^{\mu \nu}=Q^\mu. This indicates that I have done all of the algebra correctly, however it doesn't help me interpret what the spatial part of Q is physically. Can anyone help me out on where to go from here?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
really how did you end up [in your 2nd equation] with somethin with no free-index when you began with something with 1 free index?
 
ChrisVer said:
really how did you end up [in your 2nd equation] with somethin with no free-index when you began with something with 1 free index?

Not sure what you mean when you say second equation. If it's the one I think you mean, it's because I'm projecting the equation along the four-velocity.
 
But that doesn't allow you to change the number of free indices in an equation.
 
Ahh, I forgot to write a factor up there.
George Jones said:
But that doesn't allow you to change the number of free indices in an equation.

Ahh, I forgot to write a factor up there. Is it better now?
 
Well, have you been introduced to what physically a energy-momentum tensor T^{\mu \nu} stands for?
Like what its components are...[I guess that's a better way to make use of the dust E-M tensor].
If you get what the T stands for, it's straightforward to get a physical interpretation of its derivative [which will give you something like a "continuity equation": a relation of the flow with time and space of the T quantitiy].
In particular you want to look at:
Q^i = \partial_\mu T^{\mu i}
So you'll only need to know what's T^{i0} and T^{ij}.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that I don't know how to isolate Q in my equations above when trying to look at the dust energy-momentum tensor.
 
mjordan2nd said:
The problem is that I don't know how to isolate Q in my equations above when trying to look at the dust energy-momentum tensor.
what do you mean by isolate?
 
I mean you have:
Q^i = \partial_\mu T^{\mu i}
Q^i = \partial_0 T^{0 i } + \partial_j T^{ji}
which is 3 equations:
Q^1 = \partial_0 T^{0 1} + \partial_j T^{j1}
Q^2 = \partial_0 T^{0 2} + \partial_j T^{j2}
Q^3 = \partial_0 T^{0 3} + \partial_j T^{j3}
I gave you hints when I referred to a continuity equation... Qs are supposed to play the role of sources/sinks in the equation... the only thing you need to interpret then are the Energy-Momentum components [which you can obtain directly from the dust equation you gave]...as an example I tell you that the T^{01}= \rho U^1 U^0 = \gamma^2 \rho u^1 = \rho' u^1 is the flux of energy density along the 1-axis [pretty much proportional to the 1-momentum]. T[ij] can be a little more tricky at least if you haven't seen a stress tensor from your mechanics course (or in general the flux of a vector along the 3 directions which would be the gradF for the whole derivative quantity).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
703
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K