Orthogonal Lines and their line element

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of line elements in the context of orthogonal lines on a sphere, as introduced in Hartle's "Gravity." It explores whether the distance between points on two orthogonal lines can be expressed using a Pythagorean-like equation. The conversation delves into the mathematical formulation of distances on a spherical surface using spherical coordinates, highlighting the derivation of the line element through quadratic forms. The absence of mixed terms in the distance equation indicates that the coordinate curves are orthogonal. Overall, the discussion confirms the validity of representing distances in this manner on a spherical surface.
Vorde
Messages
786
Reaction score
0
In one of the early chapters of Gravity by Hartle, he is developing the line element on a sphere in preparation for developing the concept of a spacetime interval. Whilst finishing up the proof Hartle sort of implicitly says that if two lines are orthogonal the line element connecting two points on the two lines can be given by a pythagorean-like equation (the distance)2=(position on one line)2+(position on the other)2.

Is the more general question of a line element being the sum of the squares of the two orthogonal lines true?

Sorry if this question is a bit messy.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In general, if you have a "surface" or "space" with a coordinate system with coordinates x^1, x^2, ..., x^n, then the distance is given by a quadratic form \sum a_{ij}dx^idx^j.

Is that what you are talking about?
cgv
In particular, on the surface of a sphere of radius, R, we can identify each point by using spherical coordinates with the radial coordinate, \rho, fixed as the constant, R.

x= Rcos(\theta)sin(\phi) so that dx= -Rsin(\theta)sin(\phi)d\theta+ Rcos(\theta)cos(\phi)d\phi
y= Rsin(\theta)sin(\phi) so that dy= Rcos(\theta)sin(\phi)d\theta+ Rsin(\theta)cos(\phi)d\phi
z= R cos(\phi) so that dz= -R sin(\phi)d\phi

And now,
dx^2= R^2cos^2(\theta)sin^2(\phi)d\theta^2- 2R^2sin(\theta)cos(theta)sin(\phi)cos(\phi)d\theta d\phi+ R^2cos^2(\theta)cos^2(\phi)d\phi^2
dy^2= R^2sin^2(\theta)sin^2(\phi)d\theta^2+ 2R^2 sin(\theta)cos(\theta)sin(\phi)cos(\phi)d\theta d\phi+ R^2sin^2(\theta)cos^2(\phi)d\phi^2
so that dx^2+ dy^2= R^2sin^2(\phi)d\theta^2+ R^2cos^2(\phi)d\phi^2

And dz^2= R^2 sin^2(\phi) d\phi^2 so that dx^2+ dy^2+ dz^2= R^2sin^2(\phi)d\theta^2+ R^2d\phi^2

That can be written as \sum g_{ij}dx^idx^j or, as a matrix product, in this particular coordinate system,
\begin{pmatrix}d\theta & d\phi\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}R^2sin^2(\phi) & 0 \\ 0 & R^2\end{pmatrix}\begin{pmatrix}d\theta \\ d\phi\end{pmatrix}

There is no "d\theta d\phi" term, and the matrix is diagonal, precisely because the constant \theta and constant \phi curves are always orthogonal.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think I followed that, and I do think that is what I was talking about.

Thank you.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top