Obtaining the matter Lagrangian from the stress energy tensor

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the relationship between the stress-energy tensor and the matter Lagrangian in the context of general relativity. Participants explore whether it is possible to derive the matter Lagrangian from the known stress-energy tensor and discuss the implications of various mathematical approaches, including the integration of equations and the use of variational methods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the stress-energy tensor can be expressed in terms of the Lagrangian density through variations with respect to the metric tensor.
  • Others argue that while the Einstein-Hilbert action provides a way to derive the Lagrangian density, the reverse process of obtaining the Lagrangian from the stress-energy tensor is not straightforward.
  • A participant mentions that the Ricci scalar can be calculated from the stress-energy tensor if the metric is known, but questions the mathematical relationship between them.
  • There is a discussion about the distinction between taking a derivative and a variation, with some participants clarifying that the equation cannot be integrated in the way initially suggested.
  • One participant describes a method for deriving the matter Lagrangian density from the stress-energy tensor, proposing a specific mathematical expression involving the trace of the stress-energy tensor.
  • Another participant corrects a previous statement, emphasizing the need to refer to the matter Lagrangian rather than the density in their derivation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the matter Lagrangian can be derived from the stress-energy tensor. There are multiple competing views regarding the mathematical methods and interpretations involved in this process.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential misunderstanding of the relationship between variations and derivatives, as well as the complexity of integrating the variational equations. The discussion also highlights the need for clarity in distinguishing between the Lagrangian and Lagrangian density.

Bishal Banjara
Messages
93
Reaction score
3
TL;DR
Generally, the Stress energy tensor is obtained from the Lagrangian. But is it possible to obtain matter Lagrangian (Lm) from the Stress energy tensor?
Basically, the stress energy tensor is given by $$T_{uv}=-2\frac{\partial (L\sqrt{-g})}{\partial g^{uv}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}.$$ It makes easy to calculate stress energy tensor if the variation of Lagrangian with the metric tensor is known. But it is possible to retrieve matter Lagrangian if the stress energy tensor is known? Is one of the possible way to solve is taking the integration of the above equation?

[Moderator's note: Some off topic content has been deleted.]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you are supposed to take the variation of the lagrangian with respect to the metric. But I think you can derive the Lagrangian density from the Einstein Hilbert action which is a functional of the metric tensor and Ricci scalar. The Ricci scalar can be calculated directly from the stress-energy tensor if you know the metric.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Bishal Banjara
dsaun777 said:
I think you are supposed to take the variation of the lagrangian with respect to the metric.
Yes, that's correct. That's what the equation in the OP describes.

dsaun777 said:
I think you can derive the Lagrangian density from the Einstein Hilbert action
The "Einstein-Hilbert action" is the Lagrangian density (technically the "action" is the integral over spacetime of the Lagrangian density, but that just means you read off the Lagrangian density from the integrand; there's no "derive" needed).

dsaun777 said:
which is a functional of the metric tensor and Ricci scalar.
Yes.

dsaun777 said:
The Ricci scalar can be calculated directly from the stress-energy tensor if you know the metric.
You don't even need the stress-energy tensor; the Ricci scalar is a function of the metric and its derivatives.
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: Bishal Banjara
Bishal Banjara said:
taking the integration of the above equation
As @dsaun777 points out, that equation is for the variation of the Lagrangian density with respect to the metric. That is not the same thing as a derivative and so the equation cannot be integrated the way you are thinking.
 
dsaun777 said:
I think you are supposed to take the variation of the lagrangian with respect to the metric.
If this is solved, rest is simple.
 
Bishal Banjara said:
If this is solved, rest is simple.
As far as obtaining the stress-energy tensor from the Lagrangian, yes.

But in the OP you are asking about obtaining the Lagrangian from the stress-energy tensor. See post #4.
 
dsaun777 said:
The Ricci scalar can be calculated directly from the stress-energy tensor if you know the metric.
I know the metric, then what is the mathematical relation between the Ricci scalar and stress energy tensor?
 
PeterDonis said:
As far as obtaining the stress-energy tensor from the Lagrangian, yes.

But in the OP you are asking about obtaining the Lagrangian from the stress-energy tensor. See post #4.
Yes, I am asking to retrieve the case. But if there is way to explore the variation of matter Lagrangian density with metric tensor resolving the variation, then don't this makes sense to solve the problem?
 
PeterDonis said:
That is not the same thing as a derivative and so the equation cannot be integrated the way you are thinking
That was my mistake that I apparently saw partial differentiation in my own post. It is even mistake at this time also, please make it as variation. I have no edit option.
 
  • #10
Bishal Banjara said:
I know the metric, then what is the mathematical relation between the Ricci scalar and stress energy tensor?
The Einstein Field Equation relates the Ricci tensor, Ricci scalar, and stress-energy tensor.

Bishal Banjara said:
if there is way to explore the variation of matter Lagrangian density with metric tensor resolving the variation, then don't this makes sense to solve the problem?
What you are describing here is, again, deriving the stress-energy tensor from the Lagrangian using the variational method. If you use the full Lagrangian (including the Einstein-Hilbert term as well as the matter Lagrangian), the variational method just gives you the Einstein Field Equation. That has been known since 1915, when Hilbert published his derivation of the EFE by this method.

However, the "problem" that you say you are trying to solve is going in reverse--start with the stress-energy tensor and figure out what Lagrangian it came from by "integrating" the variational equation. But the variational equation is not a differential equation and can't be integrated that way.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
  • #11
I followed the reverse back derivation of $$T_{\mu\nu}$$ in the equation $$T_{\mu\nu}=\frac{2\delta(\sqrt{-g}\mathcal{L}_m)}{\sqrt{-g}\delta{g^{\mu\nu}}}$$ multiplying by $$\sqrt{-g}/2$$ and reintroducing the intergand. Further, we get variation of matter action as $$\delta{S_M}=\dfrac12\int{T_{\mu\nu}\sqrt{-g}d^4x\delta{g^{\mu\nu}}}$$.This would lead to the expression of matter Lagrangian density as $$L_m=\dfrac12\int{T\sqrt{-g}d^3x}$$ where $T$ is trace stress energy tensor. This follows the lagrangian density $$\mathcal{L}_m =\dfrac T2$$ where, $T$ is obtained by contraction with $$g^{\mu\nu}$$. In terms of $$T_{\mu\nu}$$, we could extend this equation as $$\mathcal{L}_m=\dfrac12g^{\mu\nu}T_{\mu\nu}$$.
Is it correct?
 
  • #12
Bishal Banjara said:
This would lead to the expression of matter Lagrangian density as
Correction: This would lead to the expression of matter Lagrangian (not density) as
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K