Learning Tensor Basics: Overcoming Difficulties

grzz
Messages
1,030
Reaction score
26
I am learning about tensors. Can somebody give me some help. Thanks.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
What you did was correct. You used<br /> \frac{\partial X^\mu}{\partial x^\alpha} \, \frac{\partial X^\nu}{\partial x^\beta} R_{\mu \nu} = r_{\alpha \beta}<br />and put r_{\alpha \beta} = 0 to prove R_{\mu \nu} = 0. You could have done it the other way round, i.e. put R_{\mu \nu} = 0 to prove r_{\alpha \beta} = 0. As we are talking about two arbitrary coordinate systems, that is equally valid.
 
You can kind of see this directly. If all of the tensor components are zero in one coordinate system, they must be zero in all others as well. So to show this, just show that the tensor itself is zero,

R = R_{\mu \nu} (dx^{\mu} \otimes dx^{\nu}) = 0

and since the tensor itself is a geometric, coordinate independent object, you're done.
 
Here's another way of doing the problem. Write the starting equation out in component form. You will realize before you are finished writing that the starting equation represents a set of 16 linear homogeneous algebraic equations in 16 unknowns (the 16 components of R). Since the equations are homogeneous, the only solution to this set of equations is for each and every unknown to be zero.

chet
 
DrGreg said:
What you did was correct. You used<br /> \frac{\partial X^\mu}{\partial x^\alpha} \, \frac{\partial X^\nu}{\partial x^\beta} R_{\mu \nu} = r_{\alpha \beta}<br />and put r_{\alpha \beta} = 0 to prove R_{\mu \nu} = 0. You could have done it the other way round, i.e. put R_{\mu \nu} = 0 to prove r_{\alpha \beta} = 0. As we are talking about two arbitrary coordinate systems, that is equally valid.

So to remove \frac{∂X^{μ}}{∂x^{α}}\frac{∂X^{σ}}{∂x^{β}} from the lhs of \frac{∂X^{μ}}{∂x^{α}}\frac{∂X^{σ}}{∂x^{β}} R_{μσ} = 0, do I have to show all the steps as I did before (see the pdf in my origianal post) or can I just say that I divided both sides by \frac{∂X^{μ}}{∂x^{α}}\frac{∂X^{σ}}{∂x^{β}}?

Thanks everybody for all your help.
 
If you have 16 linear algebraic equations in 16 unknowns, and the right hand sides of all the equations are equal to zero, what is the solution for the unknowns?
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...

Similar threads

Back
Top