Killing vector in kruskal coordinates

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the transformation of a Killing vector expressed in Kruskal coordinates to exterior Schwarzschild coordinates. Participants explore the mathematical relationships and derivatives involved in this transformation, focusing on the implications of the metric and the definitions of the coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the Kruskal coordinates and the associated metric, defining the Killing vector as ξ=-U∂U+V∂V.
  • Another participant suggests using the chain rule and implicit differentiation to express the basis vectors in Schwarzschild coordinates.
  • A participant shares their attempt at differentiating the relationships between U, V, r, and t, arriving at expressions for the derivatives of r and t with respect to U and V.
  • Concerns are raised about the correctness of the derivatives calculated for t with respect to U and V.
  • After recalculating, a participant finds new expressions for the derivatives of t and revises their earlier calculations, concluding that the Killing vector simplifies to ξ=4m∂t.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correctness of the derivatives and the simplification process. While one participant arrives at a conclusion regarding the Killing vector, there is no consensus on the initial calculations and transformations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential errors in the differentiation process and the implications of the implicit definitions of U and V, which may affect the final expressions for the Killing vector.

cristo
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Messages
8,145
Reaction score
75
Let [itex](U,V,\theta, \phi)[/itex] be Kruskal coordinates on the Kruskal manifold, where [tex]-UV=\left(\frac{r}{2m}-1\right)e^{r/2m},\hspace{1cm} t=2m\ln\left(\frac{-V}{U}\right)[/tex] and [itex]\theta[/itex] and [itex]\phi[/itex] are the usual polar angles. The metric is [tex]ds^2=\frac{-32m^3}{r}e^{\frac{-r}{2m}}dUdV+r^2d\Omega^2[/tex]. The vector [tex]\xi=-U\partial_U+V\partial_V[/tex] is a Killing vector.

I need to express [itex]\xi[/itex] in exterior Schwarzschild coordinates, however I'm not sure how to go about doing this. I guess I need to transform the basis vectors [itex]\partial_U[/itex] and [itex]\partial_V[/itex] into basis vectors in the Schwarzschild coordinates, but can't see how to, as U and V are defined implicitly.

Any help would be much appreciated!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
cristo said:
Let [itex](U,V,\theta, \phi)[/itex] be Kruskal coordinates on the Kruskal manifold, where [tex]-UV=\left(\frac{r}{2m}-1\right)e^{r/2m},\hspace{1cm} t=2m\ln\left(\frac{-V}{U}\right)[/tex] and [itex]\theta[/itex] and [itex]\phi[/itex] are the usual polar angles. The metric is [tex]ds^2=\frac{-32m^3}{r}e^{\frac{-r}{2m}}dUdV+r^2d\Omega^2[/tex]. The vector [tex]\xi=-U\partial_U+V\partial_V[/tex] is a Killing vector.

I need to express [itex]\xi[/itex] in exterior Schwarzschild coordinates, however I'm not sure how to go about doing this. I guess I need to transform the basis vectors [itex]\partial_U[/itex] and [itex]\partial_V[/itex] into basis vectors in the Schwarzschild coordinates, but can't see how to, as U and V are defined implicitly.

Any help would be much appreciated!

Does it work out if you use the chain rule, for example,

[tex]\frac{\partial}{\partial U} = \frac{\partial r}{\partial U} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \frac{\partial t}{\partial U} \frac{\partial}{\partial t},[/tex]

and implicit differentiation?
 
Well, I've tried that; here's my attempt: [tex]-UV=\left(\frac{r}{2m}-1\right)e^{r/2m},\hspace{1cm} t=2m\ln\left(\frac{-V}{U}\right)[/tex]. Differentiating the first wrt U gives [tex]-V=\frac{\partial}{\partial U}\left[\frac{r}{2m}-1\right]e^{r/2m}=\frac{r}{4m^2}e^{r/2m}\frac{\partial r}{\partial U} \boxed{\Rightarrow \frac{\partial r}{\partial U}=\frac{-4m^2V}{r}e^{-r/2m}}[/tex]. Differentiating the second wrt U gives [tex]\boxed{\frac{\partial t}{\partial U}=\frac{2m}{UV}}[/tex]. Doing a similar thing for V gives [tex]\boxed{\frac{\partial r}{\partial V}=\frac{-4m^2U}{r}e^{-r/2m}}[/tex] and [tex]\boxed{\frac{\partial t}{\partial V} =\frac{-2mU}{V}}[/tex]. And so, [tex]-U\partial_U+V\partial_V=-U\left[\frac{-4m^2V}{r}e^{-2m/r}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}+\frac{2m}{UV}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right]+V\left[\frac{-4m^2U}{r}e^{-r/2m}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}-\frac{2mU}{V}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right][/tex] and this simplifies to give [tex]\xi =\frac{4m^2}{r}e^{-r/2m}(V-U)\frac{\partial}{\partial r}-2m\left(\frac{1-UV}{V}\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial t}[/tex]

However, now I can't get rid of the U's and V's in the answer, since I don't have explicit definitions for them (well, obviously, the UV in the last term could be eliminated, but this won't help the fact that there are other U's and V's in the first term, and in the denominator of the second). Have I made a mistake somewhere? Thanks for helping, by the way!
 
Last edited:
Your derivatives of [itex]t[/itex] with respect to [itex]U[/itex] and [itex]V[/itex] don't look right.
 
Ok, I've recalculated the derivatives of time, and get [tex]\frac{\partial t}{\partial U}=-\frac{2m}{U}[/tex] and [tex]\frac{\partial t}{\partial V}=-\frac{2m}{V}[/tex]. I also noted a mistake when calculating the last line; namely that I didn't multiply U and V (respectively) into the brackets. Doing so, causes the term in r to disappear, so we end up with [tex]\xi=4m\frac{\partial}{\partial t}[/tex]. I think this makes sense, since [itex]\partial_t[/itex] is a Killing vector in the Schwarzschild metric.

Thanks a lot for your help, George!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K