MTW Exercise 25.5 b) - killing vectors

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter zn5252
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exercise Vectors
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Poisson bracket equation in the context of exercise 25.5 b) from MTW, focusing on the calculation and interpretation of Poisson brackets involving Killing vectors. Participants explore the complexities of the equation and clarify their understanding of the mathematical expressions involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an initial attempt at expanding the Poisson bracket but expresses confusion over the variables involved.
  • Another participant corrects the first by providing a clearer expression for the Poisson bracket, emphasizing the need to consider the nature of the variables as functions of phase space coordinates.
  • A later reply acknowledges the initial confusion and clarifies that the first commutation was based on a misunderstanding of the variables.
  • Further expansion of the expression is provided, leading to a discussion about the implications of certain terms vanishing due to the phase space coordinates.
  • Participants discuss the relative complexity of this exercise compared to showing that the commutator of two Killing fields is also a Killing field.
  • One participant suggests that the first and third terms in their expansion would vanish, leading to a conclusion about the overall result.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the clarity and complexity of the Poisson bracket expansion, with some agreeing on the need for careful consideration of the variables involved, while others highlight the confusion stemming from the initial expressions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to the problem.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made regarding the variables and the nature of the Poisson bracket versus the Lie bracket, which may affect the interpretations of the results.

zn5252
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
hi there,
In this Ex ( see attached snapshot ), point b), the poisson bracket equation is not so straightforward to obtain.
Please correct my Poisson Bracket expansion here :
The first one which is provided is simpler :
[ε,η] = εμδμηρ - ημδμερ = ζη

and the monster one :

[pε,pη] = [pμεμ,pβηβ] = (pμεμ)∂μ(pβηβ) -
(pμημ)∂μ(pβεβ)

Thanks,
 

Attachments

  • MTWExc25_5.png
    MTWExc25_5.png
    36.3 KB · Views: 814
Physics news on Phys.org
What you have written down doesn't make sense. Thankfully for you it's still quite simple :)

##[p_{\mu}\xi^{\mu},p_{\mu}\eta^{\mu}] = \frac{\partial }{\partial x^{\lambda}}(p_{\mu}\xi^{\mu})\frac{\partial }{\partial p_{\lambda}}(p_{\nu}\eta^{\nu})-\frac{\partial }{\partial p_{\lambda}}(p_{\mu}\xi^{\mu})\frac{\partial }{\partial x^{\lambda}}(p_{\nu}\eta^{\nu})## and keep in mind that ##\xi^{\mu}=\xi^{\mu}(x^{\nu})##, ##\eta^{\mu} = \eta^{\mu}(x^{\nu})## as well as ##\frac{\partial p_{\mu}}{\partial p_{\nu}} = \delta^{\nu}_{\mu}##. The rest is a straightforward calculation.

EDIT: I must admit that this entire exercise is a bit weird. Showing that the commutator of two killing fields is also a killing field is way more straightforward than this.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
hey Mate,
Thanks for your reply. Well it seems I got confused here. I had based my second commutation on the first one. In my very first attempt I had indeed written your expression but had forgotten that the other variable was x not either of the killing vectors ε or η...
Damn that got me wrong all the way !
At the beginning I had started with the Jacobi identity but did not check out ...
Thanks very much !
 
WannabeNewton said:
What you have written down doesn't make sense. Thankfully for you it's still quite simple :)

By the way, why it does not make sense. It does if it were a commutation relation and not a Poisson bracket. What do you think ?
 
Yeah what you wrote down is fine for a Lie bracket of vector fields on a smooth manifold but what you want is a Poisson bracket of scalar fields that are functions of phase space coordinates (cotangent bundle to the smooth manifold).

Did you get the final result by the way? Feel free to ask if you get stuck elsewhere.
 
Ok let us expand out your expression above :

(pμξμ)\frac{∂(p_{v}η^{v})}{∂p_{λ}}−(pvηv)\frac{∂(p_{v}ε^{v})}{∂p_{λ}} =
( pμεμ + pμεμ ) ( ηλ + pv\frac{∂(η^{v})}{∂p_{λ}} ) -
( pvηv + pvηv ) ( ελ + pv\frac{∂(ε^{v})}{∂p_{λ}} )
Now we have : \frac{∂(ε^{v})}{∂p_{λ}} = 0 = \frac{∂(η^{v})}{∂p_{λ}}
we are left with :
( pμεμ + pμεμ ) ( ηλ ) -
( pvηv + pvηv ) ( ελ )
This gives :
pμεμηλ + pμεμ ηλ - pvηvελ - pvηvελ

Now the second and the last term would yield the result (i.e. -pζ based on the commutation of ε and η) which means that the first and the third terms would add up to 0. How do you think ?
 
Remember that we are working in phase space coordinates ##\{x^{\mu},p_{\mu}\}## so ##\frac{\partial p_{\mu}}{\partial x^{\nu}} = 0##. This makes the first and third terms vanish.
 
WannabeNewton said:
EDIT: I must admit that this entire exercise is a bit weird. Showing that the commutator of two killing fields is also a killing field is way more straightforward than this.

Yes there is a much shorter version using Lie derivatives indeed...
 
WannabeNewton said:
WannabeNewton said:
Remember that we are working in phase space coordinates ##\{x^{\mu},p_{\mu}\}## so ##\frac{\partial p_{\mu}}{\partial x^{\nu}} = 0##. This makes the first and third terms vanish.

Well then it is done !

See you in another MTW Ex hopfully !
As a gift to you :http://www.webofstories.com/play/john.wheeler/76
Enjoy wheeler's stories by mighty Wheeler,
Thanks Sir.
 
  • #10
Haha thanks for the link bud. Take care and have fun!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K