Killing Vector and Ricci curvature scalar

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving the identity involving a Killing vector and the Ricci scalar in the context of general relativity, specifically referencing Carroll's textbook. The participants are exploring the implications of the Killing equation and the Bianchi identity on the relationship between the Killing vector and the Ricci scalar.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to manipulate the expression involving the Killing vector and Ricci scalar, questioning the validity of certain steps and the implications of the Killing equation. There is a focus on the symmetry of the Ricci tensor and its relationship to the Killing vector.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights and corrections regarding the manipulation of indices and the application of metric compatibility. There is an acknowledgment of potential errors in reasoning, and some participants are seeking clarification on specific steps in their derivations.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of self-study and are referencing specific identities and equations from general relativity, indicating a level of complexity in the problem that may require deeper exploration of the underlying concepts.

Psi-String
Messages
78
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I'm currently self-studying Carroll's GR book and get stuck by proving
the following identity:

[tex]K^\lambda \nabla _\lambda R = 0[/tex]

where K is Killing vector and R is the Ricci Scalar

Homework Equations



Mr.Carroll said that it is suffice to show this by knowing:

[tex]\nabla _\mu \nabla _\sigma K^\mu = R_{\sigma \nu}K^\nu[/tex]

Bianchi identity [tex]\nabla ^ \mu R_{\rho \mu} = \frac{1}{2} \nabla _\rho R[/tex]

and Killing equation [tex]\nabla _\mu K_\nu + \nabla _\nu K_\mu = 0[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



The work I done so far :

[tex]K^\lambda \nabla _\lambda R = 2 K^\lambda \nabla ^\mu R_{\mu \lambda} = 2 \left( \nabla ^\mu R_{\mu \lambda} K^\lambda -R_{\mu \lambda} \nabla ^\mu K^\lambda \right) = 2 \nabla ^\mu \nabla _\sigma \nabla _\mu K^\sigma[/tex]

Note that [tex]R_{\mu \lambda} \nabla ^\mu K^\lambda =0[/tex], since

[tex]R_{\mu \lambda} \nabla ^\mu K^\lambda = - R_{\mu \lambda} \nabla^\lambda K^\mu = -R_{\lambda\mu} \nabla^\lambda K^\mu = -R_{\mu \lambda} \nabla ^\mu K^\lambda[/tex]

And I can't get any further :cry:

Could someone help?? Thanks in advace
 
Physics news on Phys.org
[itex]\nabla ^\mu \nabla _\sigma \nabla _\mu K^\sigma = 0[/itex] in the same way that [itex]R_{\mu \lambda} \nabla ^\mu K^\lambda =0[/itex].
 
George Jones said:
[itex]\nabla ^\mu \nabla _\sigma \nabla _\mu K^\sigma = 0[/itex] in the same way that [itex]R_{\mu \lambda} \nabla ^\mu K^\lambda =0[/itex].

Hi~

[itex]R_{\mu \lambda} \nabla ^\mu K^\lambda =0[/itex]
is due to the Killing Equation and the symmetry of Ricci tensor [tex]R_{\mu \lambda} = R_{\lambda \mu}[/tex]

But it seems like
[tex]\nabla ^\mu \nabla _\sigma \nabla _\mu K^\sigma \neq \nabla _\sigma \nabla ^\mu \nabla _\mu K^\sigma[/tex] ??

Thanks for Reply!
 
Last edited:
Psi-String said:
Hi~

[itex]R_{\mu \lambda} \nabla ^\mu K^\lambda =0[/itex]
is due to the Killing Equation and the symmetry of Ricci tensor [tex]R_{\mu \lambda} = R_{\lambda \mu}[/tex]

But it seems like
[tex]\nabla ^\mu \nabla _\sigma \nabla _\mu K^\sigma \neq \nabla _\sigma \nabla ^\mu \nabla _\mu K^\sigma[/tex] ??

Thanks for Reply!

I think I figure it out! :redface:

[tex]\nabla ^\mu \nabla _\sigma \nabla _\mu K^\sigma[/tex]

[tex]= (g^{\mu \sigma} \nabla_\sigma) (g_{\sigma \mu}\nabla^\mu)(\nabla_\mu K^\sigma)[/tex]

[tex]= g^{\mu \sigma}g_{\sigma \mu} (\nabla _\sigma \nabla^\mu \nabla_\mu K^\sigma) + g^{\mu \sigma}(\nabla^\mu \nabla_\mu K^\sigma)(\nabla_\sigma g_{\sigma \mu})[/tex]

[tex]= \nabla_\sigma \nabla^\mu \nabla_\mu K^\sigma[/tex]

the second term of the third line vanishes due to metric compatibility.

Is the above correct??:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Psi-String said:
Is the above correct??:rolleyes:

Yes, metric compatibility is used, but be careful with the indices. You have used [itex]\mu[/itex] and [itex]\sigma[/itex] four times each in the product [itex](g^{\mu \sigma} \nabla_\sigma) (g_{\sigma \mu}\nabla^\mu)(\nabla_\mu K^\sigma)[/itex].
 
I noticed that. But I can't derive it out if I use different indices...

I don't know how to turn

[tex]g^{\mu \sigma}g_{\lambda \rho}(\nabla_\sigma \nabla^\rho \nabla _\mu K^\lambda)[/tex]

into

[tex]\nabla _\lambda \nabla^\mu \nabla_\mu K^\lambda[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
0
Views
1K