Is this the only form of the Minkowski metric?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kent davidge
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Form Metric Minkowski
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the form of the Minkowski metric and whether it can include off-diagonal terms without affecting the speed of light as observed by inertial observers. Participants explore the implications of different coordinate systems on the metric and the behavior of light within those frameworks, touching on theoretical and conceptual aspects of spacetime metrics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the Minkowski metric for inertial observers is given by ##ds^2 = -c^2 dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2## and question the effects of off-diagonal terms on the speed of light.
  • Others propose that if the metric includes off-diagonal terms, it may lead to different coordinate speeds of light, suggesting that light may not travel at speed ##c## under such conditions.
  • A participant mentions that the coordinate speed of light can be derived by setting ##ds = 0## and solving for ##dx/dt##, providing examples with modified metrics.
  • Some participants emphasize the need for specific assumptions about coordinates to analyze the implications of off-diagonal terms in the metric.
  • There is a discussion about the physical significance of off-diagonal elements, with some arguing that they arise from coordinate choices and do not affect the underlying physics.
  • One participant raises the concern that using a coordinate system where a particle appears to accelerate may not accurately represent an inertial frame.
  • Another participant clarifies that any observer can choose any coordinate system, but this choice may not always align with the representation of an inertial frame.
  • There is a debate about whether other coordinate systems can equally represent an inertial frame, with some asserting that standard Minkowski coordinates are the definitive representation.
  • Ambiguity is noted regarding the term "Minkowski metric," which can refer to either the metric tensor or its components in specific coordinates.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of off-diagonal terms in the Minkowski metric, with no consensus reached on whether such terms can coexist with the invariant speed of light or how they affect the representation of inertial frames.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of assumptions regarding the flatness of spacetime and the constancy of metric components when discussing the implications of off-diagonal elements.

  • #31
kent davidge said:
the additional assumption that should be made is that light travels with the same speed in all directions. This is enough to kill off the non diagonal terms in the metric.

It's certainly sufficient, but it's stronger than necessary. Try considering my previous post first. (Hint: the geodesic equation applies to null geodesics, that light travels on, as well.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
PeterDonis said:
for all possible combinations of indices ##\beta## and ##\gamma##
but what if say, ##dx^1 / d\tau = 0##? Then ##\Gamma^\alpha{}_{1 \delta}## could be different from zero.
 
  • #33
kent davidge said:
what if say, ##dx^1 / d\tau = 0##? Then ##\Gamma^\alpha{}_{1 \delta}## could be different from zero

Free particles can travel in all directions, and you must meet the conditions for all possible 4-velocities for a free particle. That means you can't pick out any particular component of ##dx / d\tau## and say it's zero. You must allow for the possibility of all of them being nonzero (because there are free particle 4-velocities for which all of them are nonzero).
 
  • #34
PeterDonis said:
Free particles can travel in all directions, and you must meet the conditions for all possible 4-velocities for a free particle. That means you can't pick out any particular component of ##dx / d\tau## and say it's zero. You must allow for the possibility of all of them being nonzero (because there are free particle 4-velocities for which all of them are nonzero).
Ah, I got it. But since the ##\Gamma## are a sum of derivatives of the metric, wouldn't ##\Gamma = 0## only imply that the sum of these terms is zero? (And not necessarily the terms themselves, that is, the derivatives).
 
  • #35
kent davidge said:
since the ##\Gamma## are a sum of derivatives of the metric, wouldn't ##\Gamma = 0## only imply that the sum of these terms is zero?

For a single ##\Gamma##, yes, that's all you could conclude. But we have that all of the ##\Gamma## are zero.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K