I Intuition regarding Riemann curvature tensor

Hill
Messages
735
Reaction score
575
TL;DR Summary
"Why" there are terms quadratic in first derivatives of metric?
The Riemann curvature tensor contains second derivatives of metric and squares of the first derivatives. The second derivatives have to be there because they are the ones that cannot be eliminated locally by a choice of coordinates. But other than being a mathematical artifact, is there a meaning for the squares of the first derivatives to be there?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The first derivatives tell you directions. Curvature can be different in different directions. And the curvature in one direction can change as you move in a different direction
 
  • Like
Likes Hill and vanhees71
Hill said:
The second derivatives have to be there because they are the ones that cannot be eliminated locally by a choice of coordinates.
If you look at how this actually works, you find that in Riemann normal coordinates, which are the ones that eliminate everything that can be eliminated by a choice of coordinates, the first derivatives are zero at the origin of coordinates, i.e., at the point the coordinates are "centered" on. So at that point, the first derivatives indeed do not appear at all in the Riemann tensor.

But as soon as you move away from the origin, the first derivatives are no longer zero (because the second derivatives weren't zero at the origin), and they will be different depending on which direction you move. So you do need them to capture the complete behavior once you are away from the origin.
 
  • Like
Likes Hill and Dale
PeterDonis said:
But as soon as you move away from the origin, the first derivatives are no longer zero (because the second derivatives weren't zero at the origin)
lndeed, a zero second derivatives w.r.t. a coordinate basis at the origin, would mean constant first derivatives in a neighborhood of the origin, but first derivatives by definition vanish at the origin in Riemann normal coordinates centered on it.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top