Killing’s equation in a linear space

  • Thread starter Thread starter LCSphysicist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Linear Space
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around Killing's equation in the context of linear transformations and orthogonal groups, particularly focusing on the implications of determinants in relation to isometries and group properties.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the determinant of a transformation and the properties of groups formed by orthogonal transformations. Questions arise regarding the implications of a negative determinant and its effect on group structure.

Discussion Status

Some participants are clarifying the original problem statement and the definitions involved, while others are attempting to reconcile the concepts of determinants and group properties. There is an ongoing exploration of the implications of having a determinant of -1 and whether such a set can form a group.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential confusion stemming from the original text and the need for clearer definitions regarding the determinants of transformations and their relationship to group theory.

LCSphysicist
Messages
644
Reaction score
163
Homework Statement
I will post a print
Relevant Equations
N.
Be f a orthogonal transformation and g being in the canonical form.
$$[f^{-1}]^{t}[g][f^{-1}] = [g']$$
So this equation of isometries implies that the diagonal of g is +- 1, but, apparently, if it is minus one it can't be a group, and i don't know why.

To make the things clear, if det = +1, in the Lorentz metric the g is the Poincaré group
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I am not clear on your question. Your statement about the diagonal of g, and "it" being -1 doesn't make sense to me. Can you state the original text of the problem you are trying to solve?

Also your stated equation seems to me to be mixing two distinct identities. For the matrix representation ##[g]## of a bilinear form ##g##, its transformation under any linear transformation ##f## with matrix representation ##[f]## would be:

[tex]g\mapsto g' = [f^{-1}]^T [g][f^{-1}][/tex]
(or with ##f\leftrightarrow f^{-1}## reversed, depending on whether you think of the transformation as active or passive.)

That a linear transformation is orthogonal as defined by the metric means that it must leave the metric invariant and thus:
[tex][f^{-1}]^T [g][f^{-1}]=g[/tex]

The fact that the identity transformation is necessarily orthogonal and that composition of linear transformations is associative leads directly to the fact that all orthogonal transformations for a given metric forms a group. Call this group ##O(V,g)## where ##V## is the linear (vector) space on which ##g## is defined.

As to determinants, since matrix multiplication respects determinants (det of product is product of det's) you can make several statements about determinants of transformations. In particular:
[tex]det(g') = det(f^{-1})^2 det(g)[/tex]
and thus for orthogonal transformations ##det(f)^2 = +1##.

Review your question with the above in mind.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
Hi, it is not a question, it is a doubt about the text i was reading, probably this is a justification to the confusion in the OP, i am still trying to get the theory :)

Anyway, i think you give the det of f, but i am asking for the det of g, to be clear, i will post a image of the text, sorry any misunderstanding, i am trying to get it yet ;)
1602870600826.png

Do you see the why on the text?That is actually the question, why the negative det do not form a group.
 
Ok, i believe i get the answer, if we define a group of det (-1), and their elements A and B, the product of their owns elements leave outside the group, that is: det(AB) = det(A)det(B) = 1, so it is not a group at all.

@fresh_42 that is it??
 
LCSphysicist said:
Ok, i believe i get the answer, if we define a group of det (-1), and their elements A and B, the product of their owns elements leave outside the group, that is: det(AB) = det(A)det(B) = 1, so it is not a group at all.

@fresh_42 that is it??
This is true.

But I had a similar problem as @jambaugh since I didn't understand your wording.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: LCSphysicist

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K