Make a Pseudo-Riemannian Metric Conformal

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the possibility of transforming a pseudo-Riemannian metric in two dimensions into a conformal form through a suitable coordinate change. Participants explore the differences between Riemannian and pseudo-Riemannian metrics, particularly focusing on the implications of complex functions in the transformation process.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a proof for Riemannian metrics and queries whether a similar statement holds for pseudo-Riemannian metrics in ##\mathbb{R}^2_1##.
  • Another participant notes that in the Lorentzian case, the determinant ##g## is negative, which introduces an extra factor of ##i## in the calculations.
  • A further comment suggests that in the Riemannian case, the function ##\lambda## can be complex, and this might be necessary for the transformation, while in the Lorentzian case, two independent real integrating factors ##\lambda_1, \lambda_2## are proposed.
  • The original poster expresses difficulty in applying the methods used for Riemannian metrics to pseudo-Riemannian metrics, particularly due to the absence of complex numbers in the factorization.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants appear to agree on the distinction between Riemannian and pseudo-Riemannian metrics and the role of complex functions in transformations, but the discussion remains unresolved regarding the feasibility of achieving a conformal form for pseudo-Riemannian metrics.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the approach to transforming pseudo-Riemannian metrics, particularly regarding the use of complex functions and the nature of the integrating factors required for the transformation.

tommyxu3
Messages
240
Reaction score
42
Hello everyone:

I studied in differential geometry recently and have seen a statement with its proof:
Suppose there is a Riemannian metric: ##dl^2=Edx^2+Fdxdy+Gdy^2,## with ##E, F, G## are real-valued analytic functions of the real variables ##x,y.## Then there exist new local coordinates ##u,v## for the surface in terms of which the induced metric takes the conformal form
$$dl^2=f(u,v)(du^2+dv^2).$$

The proof of this applied the complex method to construct a function ##\lambda(x,y)## such that
$$\lambda (\sqrt{E}dx+\frac{F+i\sqrt{g}}{\sqrt{E}}dy)=du+idv,$$
$$\lambda (\sqrt{E}dx+\frac{F-i\sqrt{g}}{\sqrt{E}}dy)=du-idv,$$
where ##g=EG-F^2,## the determinant of the first fundamental form, and find such ##\lambda## then ##f=\frac{1}{|\lambda|^2}## is what we want.

What confused me was that is there a corresponding statement for a pseudo-Riemannian metric, at least in ##\mathbb{R}^2_1?## That is, I want to prove:

A pseudo-Riemannian metric ##dl^2=Edx^2+Fdxdy+Gdy^2## (of type ##(1,1)##) with real analytic coefficients, takes the form
$$dl^2=f(t,x)(dt^2-dx^2)$$
after a suitable coordinate change.

I try to prove it in the similar way but it seems not feasible for I just can factorize ##dt^2-dx^2=(dt+dx)(dt-dx),## without ##i## in the factorization. Directly decomposing it as real function, I still cannot find an answer, so I ask for help here >< Could anyone give me any advice?

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not sure if this helps, but remember in the Lorentzian-signature case that your determinant ##g## is negative, hence your ##\sqrt{g}## will spit out an extra factor of ##i##.
 
Ah, a further comment. In the Riemannian case, there is no requirement that ##\lambda## be a real function. You can have (complex) ##\lambda## on one line and ##\bar \lambda## on the other, such that ##f(u,v) = 1/|\lambda|^2## appears in the metric. I have a feeling this might be necessary, actually.

Then, in the Lorentzian case, you actually have not just one integrating factor ##\lambda##, but two independent (real) ones, which you can call ##\lambda_1, \lambda_2##. Then your conformal factor will be ##f(t,x) = 1/(\lambda_1 \lambda_2)##.
 
Thanks for your help first!

I noticed that too! But then I felt hard to solve it. In the Riemannian case the complex number help me to separate the equation, and now I don't know how to have further result...

I'll keep trying~ thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
11K