I MTW exercise 21.26: junction conditions for a thin shell of dust

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving specific equations related to a thin shell of dust in a vacuum, particularly the second equation concerning the 4-accelerations of the shell's inner and outer sides. Participants highlight that while equations (a), (c), and (d) are manageable, equation (b) presents challenges, as it relates to the symmetry of forces on the shell. The use of Gaussian Normal Coordinates (GNC) is emphasized for deriving these equations, with a particular focus on the implications of the vacuum surrounding the shell. The conversation suggests that demonstrating certain conditions at the shell's faces is crucial for completing the derivation of equation (b). Overall, the thread underscores the complexities involved in applying theoretical concepts to practical equations in general relativity.
JimWhoKnew
Messages
240
Reaction score
128
TL;DR
see below
I need help with exercise 21.26 in MTW. The question goes like this:

For a thin shell of dust surrounded by vacuum ( ##[T^{in}]=0## , ##\mathbf{t}=0## ), derive the following equations$$\frac{d\sigma}{d\tau}=-\sigma^b{}_{|b}\;\; ,\tag{21.175a}$$$$\mathbf{a}^+ +\mathbf{a}^- =0 \;\; ,\tag{21.175b}$$$$\mathbf{a}^+ -\mathbf{a}^- =4\pi\sigma\mathbf{n} \;\; ,\tag{21.175c}$$$$\mathbf{\gamma}=8\pi\sigma\left(\mathbf{u}\otimes\mathbf{u}+\frac12 \mathbf{g}\right) \;\; .\tag{21.175d}$$Here ##\mathbf{a}^+## and ##\mathbf{a}^-## are the 4-accelerations as measured by accelerometers that are fastened onto the outer and inner sides of the shell, and ##\mathbf{g}## is the 3-metric of the shell.

It's not hard to derive equations a, c & d. The second ( ##\mathbf{a}^+ +\mathbf{a}^- =0## ) is where I get stuck. Intuitively, I understand it as proportional to the "total non-gravitational force" exerted on the shell element between the accelerometers, and therefore it should vanish. But I fail to spot how it can be derived from the equations in section 21.13 and exercise 21.25.

Please help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
JimWhoKnew said:
The second ( ##\mathbf{a}^+ +\mathbf{a}^- =0## ) is where I get stuck.
What do you get if you add the second and third equations?
 
PeterDonis said:
What do you get if you add the second and third equations?
##\mathbf{a}^\pm=\pm 2\pi\sigma\mathbf{n}## , which looks like the well known result in electrostatics. If the accelerometers were not fastened to the shell, they would have followed a geodesic and measure 0. So the shell exerts a force on them which is symmetric on both its faces. But can we show it from the equations?
 
JimWhoKnew said:
##\mathbf{a}^\pm=\pm 2\pi\sigma\mathbf{n}## , which looks like the well known result in electrostatics. If the accelerometers were not fastened to the shell, they would have followed a geodesic and measure 0. So the shell exerts a force on them which is symmetric on both its faces.
Yes, that's the physical interpretation of the result.

JimWhoKnew said:
Can we show it from the equations?
How did you derive equation (c)?
 
PeterDonis said:
How did you derive equation (c)?
The book uses Gaussian Normal Coordinates (GNC) in this section, so I do too.
First I derived equation (d) out of equation (21.168b). The equation numbering follows that of the book.
Then I used the condition that the shell is surrounded by vacuum (see OP) in equation (21.173) to get ##a_j=0## (Greek letters are used for 4D, roman for 3D). In GNC this means ##a^j=0## also, so ##~\hat{\mathbf{a}}=\hat{\mathbf{n}}## . From the identity$$\left(u^\nu u_\mu n^\mu\right)_{;\nu}=0$$I get$$\mathbf{a}\cdot\mathbf{n}=\mathbf{K}\left(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{u}\right)\;\; .\tag{1}$$Using this in equation (d) yields (c).
In GNC we have$$K_{ij}=-\frac12 g_{ij,n} \;\; ,\tag{2}$$so following (1), to get equation (b) I have to argue that ##\left| u^i u^j g_{ij,n}\right|## are the same on both faces of the shell in vacuum. That's where I get stuck.

Alternatively, following post #3, If I could show ##~-\frac12 u^i u^j g_{ij,n}=\pm2\pi\sigma~## at the faces, then the derivation of (b) will be completed. But I don't know how to show that either.
 
The solution can be found in "Problem Book in Relativity and Gravitation" (Lightman, Press, Price & Teukolsky). Needs a little debugging.
 
Moderator's note: Spin-off from another thread due to topic change. In the second link referenced, there is a claim about a physical interpretation of frame field. Consider a family of observers whose worldlines fill a region of spacetime. Each of them carries a clock and a set of mutually orthogonal rulers. Each observer points in the (timelike) direction defined by its worldline's tangent at any given event along it. What about the rulers each of them carries ? My interpretation: each...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
334
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K