- #1

- 25

- 0

##ds^2 = (1-2\phi(r)) dt^2 - (1+2\phi(r)) dr^2 - r^2(d\theta^2 + sin^2(\theta) d\phi^2)##, where ##|\phi(r)| \ll1## reduces to the Newton's equation, what exactly am I supposed to prove?

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- I
- Thread starter dwellexity
- Start date

So the EFE can still be written in this form, and the only difference is that the trace term is now on the RHS. Not necessarily. Take a look at Carroll's notes. The short version: there is an alternate way of writing the EFE, which moves the trace term from the LHS to the RHS:$$R_{\mu \nu} = 8 \pi \left( T_{\mu \nu} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\mu \nu} T \right)$$

- #1

- 25

- 0

##ds^2 = (1-2\phi(r)) dt^2 - (1+2\phi(r)) dr^2 - r^2(d\theta^2 + sin^2(\theta) d\phi^2)##, where ##|\phi(r)| \ll1## reduces to the Newton's equation, what exactly am I supposed to prove?

Physics news on Phys.org

- #2

Mentor

- 43,697

- 21,196

- #3

- 13,316

- 2,681

- #4

- 25

- 0

I have got ##G_{tt} = - \frac{2(-1+2\phi)(\phi + 2 \phi^2 +r \phi')}{(r+2r\phi)^2}##PeterDonis said:

How do I proceed from here? I am getting a first derivative of ##\phi## instead of second derivative.

- #5

Mentor

- 43,697

- 21,196

dwellexity said:I have got ##G_{tt} = - \frac{2(-1+2\phi)(\phi + 2 \phi^2 +r \phi')}{(r+2r\phi)^2}##

Yes, this looks ok.

dwellexity said:I am getting a first derivative of ##\phi## instead of second derivative.

Yes, but remember that the Einstein tensor has two pieces: ##G_{\mu \nu} = R_{\mu \nu} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\mu \nu} R##, where ##R_{\mu \nu}## is the Ricci tensor, and ##R## is the Ricci scalar. So the EFE is really ##R_{\mu \nu} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\mu \nu} R = 8 \pi T_{\mu \nu}##. You might try calculating the two pieces separately to see if there are second derivatives there.

Also, you might take a look at Carroll's online lecture notes on GR, chapter 4, which has a discussion of this calculation.

- #6

- 25

- 0

PeterDonis said:Yes, but remember that the Einstein tensor has two pieces: ##G_{\mu \nu} = R_{\mu \nu} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\mu \nu} R##, where ##R_{\mu \nu}## is the Ricci tensor, and ##R## is the Ricci scalar. So the EFE is really ##R_{\mu \nu} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\mu \nu} R = 8 \pi T_{\mu \nu}##. You might try calculating the two pieces separately to see if there are second derivatives there.

I don't understand how this would affect anything. Even if Ricci tensor and Ricci Scalar have second derivatives, what ultimately matters is this particular sum.

- #7

Mentor

- 43,697

- 21,196

dwellexity said:Even if Ricci tensor and Ricci Scalar have second derivatives, what ultimately matters is this particular sum.

Not necessarily. Take a look at Carroll's notes. The short version: there is an alternate way of writing the EFE, which moves the trace term from the LHS to the RHS:

$$

R_{\mu \nu} = 8 \pi \left( T_{\mu \nu} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\mu \nu} T \right)

$$

For the case under discussion only the 0-0 component of this equation is significant, and only ##T_{00}## is significant in the trace ##T##.

Share:

- Replies
- 9

- Views
- 536

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 710

- Replies
- 8

- Views
- 629

- Replies
- 42

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 4

- Views
- 674

- Replies
- 18

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 18

- Views
- 1K

- Replies
- 62

- Views
- 3K

- Replies
- 9

- Views
- 698