Lie Derivatives and Parallel Transport

PhizzyQs
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hi, I've begun learning about General Relativity, though I've already had some exposure to differential geometry.

In particular, I understand that Lie Differentiation is a more "primitive" process than Covariant Differentiation (in that the latter requires some sort of connection).

My question is this: parallel transport can be used to understand how a vector changes when you drag in along a curve on a certain surface. To be sure, you institute local coordinates, compute the metric, and then the connection (here, the connection being used, in this coordinate basis, are the Christoffel symbols), and then solve the differential equation.

In this way, you can find out, for instance, how much the vector changes its direction under a certain curve. But, is this information only encoded in the connection? That is to say, to find out how much the vector deviates, must I employ parallel transport, or is there some procedure, using only Lie Derivatives, to examine the change?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Lie derivatives also define a sort of transport. However, the covariant derivative does not depend on objects outside the curve, while the Lie derivative does. So in Lie transport, the curve must be specified as an integral curve of a vector field.
 
The absolute derivative of a vector uμalong a curve with tangent vector vμ is uμvν (this is zero for parallel transport), whereas the Lie derivative along the same curve is uμvν - vμuν.

I think what you mean by "outside the curve" is that the Lie derivative depends on the gradient of v, not just v itself.
 
Bill_K said:
I think what you mean by "outside the curve" is that the Lie derivative depends on the gradient of v, not just v itself.

Yes, so v must be a vector field, and not just the tangent vector to a curve.
 
Oh, I know that much. My main concern is calculating angular deviation from using Lie derivatives.

I tried this: I begin with a vector A, and there are points P, and Q. They are connected by a curve Y, parametrized by an affine parameter t, whose tangent vector is u = dY(t)/dt. Using the pullback on the isomorphism generated by u, I take the vector from P to Q. Then, I use the metric at P to find <A(Q), u(Q)>. I compare this with <A(P), u(P)>. Given affine parametrization, u does not change under parallel transport, so I think this would be accurate.

EDIT: I am a little bit querulous about my last assumption there, and am examining it now.
 
Last edited:
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top