Linearized Gravity and the smalness of the pertubation

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter center o bass
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity Pertubation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on linearized gravity, specifically the perturbation of the Minkowski metric represented as $$g_{\mu \nu} = \eta_{\mu \nu} + h_{\mu \nu}$$, where the perturbation $$|h_{\mu \nu}| << 1$$ indicates weak gravitational fields. The participants argue that perturbing around a flat metric does not adequately address curvature, suggesting instead to perturb about a metric with vanishing second derivatives to better capture the contributions to the Riemann tensor. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the implications of metric perturbations in the context of Einstein's equations and references Wald's "General Relativity" for a deeper exploration of perturbations in curved backgrounds.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of linearized gravity concepts
  • Familiarity with the Minkowski metric and its properties
  • Knowledge of the Riemann tensor and its relation to curvature
  • Basic principles of perturbation theory in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the perturbation theory in the context of general relativity
  • Read section 7.5 of Wald's "General Relativity" for advanced insights
  • Explore the implications of second derivatives of the metric on curvature
  • Investigate alternative approaches to linearized gravity and their applications
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, graduate students in general relativity, and researchers interested in the mathematical foundations of gravitational theories.

center o bass
Messages
545
Reaction score
2
The approach taken in linearized gravity seems to be to 'perturb' the 'Minkowski metric' such that

$$g_{\mu \nu} = \eta_{\mu \nu} + h_{\mu \nu}$$

where ##|h_{\mu \nu}| <<1##. As I've understood it, the goal is to get an approximate theory for gravity, i.e. for weak gravitational fields and thus for small curvature. However the perturbation above seems more to be about choice of basis. After all if we had ##g_{\mu \nu} = \eta_{\mu \nu}## everywhere, that would say nothing about the curvature of spacetime, but rather that we had chosen to use an orthonormal basis everywhere. In this light the perturbation above seems more like the demand that we are only allowing 'almost orthonormal bases' than a demand on the weakness of gravity.

Would it not be more sensible to perturb about a ##g_{\mu \nu}## with vanishing second derivatives and demand that the second derivatives of the perturbation be small, since it is the second derivatives of the metric that contribute to the Riemann tensor?
Has approaches like this been tried somewhere?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well the point is that given any physical system, we can form a dimensionless constant ##\hat{G}## out of the characteristic length scale of the system, its characteristic time scale, Newton's constant, and the speed of light. Linearized gravity is the regime containing first order corrections to the ##\hat{G} \rightarrow 0## regime. In such a case it's extremely intuitively obvious that you can apply perturbation theory to ##g_{\mu\nu}## and expand about a parameter ##\epsilon## up to accuracy ##O(\epsilon^2)## i.e. ##g_{\mu\nu} = \eta_{\mu\nu} + \epsilon h_{\mu\nu} + O(\epsilon^2)## because you're assuming that the solution ##g_{\mu\nu}## is very close to ##\eta_{\mu\nu}## in the space of solutions to Einstein's equation (by which I mean we have a one-parameter family of solutions ##g_{\mu\nu}(\lambda)## with ##g_{\mu\nu}(0) = \eta_{\mu\nu}## and we restrict ourselves to solutions such that ##\lambda << 1##).

Furthermore your statement is incorrect. If ##g_{\mu\nu} = \eta_{\mu\nu}## everywhere then the space-time is trivially flat. I have no idea why you think this is just a statement about a choice to use an orthonormal basis. It seems you're confusing this with the fact that at a given event ##p\in M## in an arbitrary space-time ##(M,g_{\mu\nu})##, we can find a basis ##\{e_{a}\}## for ##T_p M## such that ##g_{\mu\nu}(e_a)^{\mu}(e_b)^{\nu} = \eta_{ab}##. This is obviously not the same thing as saying that ##g_{\mu\nu} = \eta_{\mu\nu}, \forall p\in M## because that would obviously trivially imply that ##M## is flat.

If you want a more rigorous explanation of what's going on then check out section 7.5 of Wald "General Relativity"; it deals with the more general case of perturbing about a curved background ##g^0_{\mu\nu}## and should eradicate your doubts/concerns.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
816
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K