Modeling Path of Object in General Relativistic/Riemannian Geom

  • Thread starter Thread starter Philosophaie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Path
Philosophaie
Messages
456
Reaction score
0
I want to use the Earth and/or Sun to model a General Relativistic or Riemannian Geometric path of an object with an initial velocity coming into a gravitational field until it comes into contact with the ground or skips off in another direction. Does anyone have any suggestion where to start?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Start by writing down the Schwarzschid metric for a spherically symmetric, nonrotating body:
<br /> ds^2 = -\left( 1 - \frac{2GM}{r} \right) \textrm{d} t^2 + \left( 1 - \frac{2GM}{r} \right)^{-1} \textrm{d} r^2 + r^2 ( \textrm{d} \theta^2 + \sin^2(\theta) \textrm{d} \varphi^2 ) \textrm{.}<br />
To get the geodesic equations from this, you can either calculate all the Christoffel symbols (long and tedious, but straightforward) or use the calculus of variations (my favorite method). In either case, I'd suggest setting e^{f(r)} = \left( 1 - \frac{2GM}{r} \right) for ease of notation. You'll end up with four very ugly-looking equations (one for each of t, r, \theta, and \varphi). By symmetry, you can set \theta = \frac{\pi}{2} (i.e., \theta&#039; = 0). The t equation will then give you e^{f(r)} t&#039; = E, where E is a constant of motion. The \varphi equation will give r^2 \varphi&#039; = L, where L is another constant of motion ("angular momentum"). The r equation gives
<br /> e^{-f(r)} (r&#039;)^2 + \frac{L^2}{r^2} - e^{-f(r)} E^2 = \epsilon \textrm{,}<br />
where \epsilon is another consant of motion. For massive particles, you can set \epsilon = -1 without loss of generality (why?). Then you can rearrange the above equation to get
<br /> \frac{1}{2} (r&#039;)^2 + V(r) = \mathcal{E} \textrm{,}<br />
where V(r) = \frac{1}{2} \left(1 + \frac{L^2}{r^2} \right) e^{f(r)} is a "potential energy" and \mathcal{E} = \frac{1}{2} E^2 is a "total energy." This looks exactly like the form of a classical equation of motion, and you can analyze it using similar techniques. In particular, determining values for E, L, and r_{0} that lead to bounded or unbounded paths is straightforward.
 
Last edited:
The Schwarzschild metric is:

ds^{2}=-(1-2GM/r)dt^{2}+(1-2GM/r)^{-1}dr^{2}...

I already calculated Affinity (Torsion=0), Riemann Tensor and the Ricci Tensor from the metric. I got the four ugly looking equations from the diagonal of the Geodesic Equation. This is where I get stuck. I would like to have more than just \theta=\pi/2. Is there a solution or a set of solution to these four Geodesic Equations no matter how difficult for all \theta?
 
The Schwarzschild metric is:

LaTeX Code: ds^{2}=-(1-2GM/r)dt^{2}+(1-2GM/r)^{-1}dr^{2} ...

Yeah...sorry about that. \facepalm

Due to spherical symmetry, you can always change coordinates so that \theta = \frac{\pi}{2}, \theta&#039; = 0. Briefly, this is because, since we have invariance under rotations, the "direction of angular momentum" is conserved, hence the motion of a particle must be planar. (More rigorously, to each Killing vector on a manifold we can associate a constant of geodesic motion. The timelike Killing vector of Schwarzschild yields conservation of "energy," while the three spherical Killing vectors yield conservation of the three components of the "angular momentum.")

I don't know of any analytical solutions to these equations, except for very special cases. Like I said, however, they're (fairly) straightforward to analyze nonetheless; for example, you can derive, without too much work, the rate of precession of the perihelion of a planet using perturbation theory (to a first approximation). You should get \Delta \varphi = \frac{6 \pi G^2 M^2}{L^2}, where \Delta \varphi indicates the amount the perihelion advances per orbital period.
 
Thanks for the info!
 
Last edited:
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
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...
Back
Top