Panda"Understand Relationship between Stress-Energy Tensor and Interval

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between the stress-energy tensor and the formulation of the interval in the context of general relativity. Participants explore the mathematical representation of these concepts, particularly focusing on a specific matrix derived from a homework problem related to the interval.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their approach to deriving a specific equation from a homework problem, detailing the structure of a matrix and its components.
  • Another participant notes that the matrix representation is similar to that of the stress-energy tensor, questioning whether this similarity indicates a deeper relationship between the two concepts.
  • Some participants propose that the formula discussed is a general result of the 1+3 block decomposition of any 4x4 symmetric matrix, suggesting it applies to any quadratic form in four dimensions.
  • There is mention that while the stress-energy tensor is rank-4 symmetric in general relativity, this may not hold in other theories.
  • A participant expresses uncertainty about the existence of a deeper connection between the stress-energy tensor and the interval, acknowledging their limited knowledge on the subject.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the mathematical properties of the matrix and its relation to the stress-energy tensor, but there is no consensus on whether a deeper connection exists between the stress-energy tensor and the interval.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention their lack of familiarity with certain mathematical concepts, such as block decomposition, which may limit their understanding of the discussion.

HeavyMetal
Messages
95
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

I have a homework question that I am almost 100% sure that I solved, so I do not believe that this post should go into the "Homework Questions" section. This thread does not have to do with the answer to that homework question anyways, but rather a curiosity about whether or not this formulation is related -- in some way -- to the stress-energy tensor.

I apologize if this is in the wrong section. Please let me know if this is improper.

The question, taken from "A First Course in General Relativity" by Bernard F. Schutz, asks us to derive equation 1.3 from equation 1.2.

1.2: \qquad \Delta \overline{s}^{\,2} = \sum_{\alpha=0}^3 \sum_{\beta=0}^3 M_{\alpha \beta} (\Delta x^\alpha) (\Delta x^\beta)
1.3: \qquad \Delta \overline{s}^{\,2} = M_{00} (\Delta r)^2 + 2(\sum_{i=1}^3 M_{0i} \Delta x^i) \Delta r + \sum_{i=1}^3 \sum_{j=1}^3 M_{ij} \Delta x^i \Delta x^j
where \qquad \Delta r = \sqrt{(\Delta x)^2 + (\Delta y)^2 + (\Delta z)^2} \qquad and \qquad \Delta r = \Delta t

My answer described this matrix:

<br /> \bеgin{vmatrix}<br /> t^2 &amp; tx &amp; ty &amp; tz\\<br /> xt &amp; x^2 &amp; xy &amp; xz\\<br /> yt &amp; yx &amp; y^2 &amp; yz\\<br /> zt &amp; zx &amp; zy &amp; z^2<br /> \end{vmatrix}<br />

I explained it in three terms, each explaining separate parts of the matrix:

<br /> \bеgin{vmatrix}<br /> (t^2) &amp; (tx &amp; ty &amp; tz)\\<br /> \\<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> xt\\<br /> yt\\<br /> zt\\<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br /> \begin{pmatrix}<br /> x^2 &amp; xy &amp; xz\\<br /> yx &amp; y^2 &amp; yz\\<br /> zx &amp; zy &amp; z^2<br /> \end{pmatrix}<br /> \end{vmatrix}<br />

Entry 00 is represented by M_{00} (\Delta r)^2; because there are two time entries, we observe two delta r terms. Entries 01, 02 and 03 are the transpose of entries 10, 20 and 30, and so they were just repeated with a two multiplying out front of that entire term. This was represented by 2(\sum_{i=1}^3 M_{0i} \Delta x^i) \Delta r; because these terms can be factored into t(xyz), there is a delta r for each. The remaining entries are represented by \sum_{i=1}^3 \sum_{j=1}^3 M_{ij} \Delta x^i \Delta x^j; because none of these entries are multiplied by time, the delta r term is absent from this part.

Please tell me if there is an error in my work.

Anyways, I can see that this matrix is broken up in the very same way as the stress-energy tensor (see image at the top of the Wikipedia page). I know virtually nothing about the stress-energy tensor, though! To learn about it was one of the main motivations for me to read this book. Is there a relationship between the stress-energy tensor and the interval? Or are all second-order matrices broken up in this way?

Thanks,
HeavyMetal
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not quite sure why my matrices weren't showing up properly in the above post.To reiterate, my answer described the matrix below:
\begin{pmatrix}
t^2 & tx & ty & tz\\
xt & x^2 & xy & xz\\
yt & yx & y^2 & yz\\
zt & zx & zy & z^2
\end{pmatrix}I explained it in three terms, each explaining separate parts of the matrix.Entry 00: \begin{pmatrix}
t^2
\end{pmatrix} which is represented by M_{00} (\Delta r)^2; because there are two time entries, we observe two delta r terms.Entries 01, 02 and 03: \begin{pmatrix}
tx & ty & tz\\
\end{pmatrix}and entries 10, 20 and 30: \begin{pmatrix}
xt\\
yt\\
zt\\
\end{pmatrix}are the transpose of each other, and equivalent due to the fact that M_{\alpha \beta} = M_{\beta \alpha}, and so they were just repeated with a two multiplying out front of that entire term. This was represented by 2(\sum_{i=1}^3 M_{0i} \Delta x^i) \Delta r; because these terms can be factored into t(xyz), there is a delta r for each.The remaining entries: \begin{pmatrix}
x^2 & xy & xz\\
yx & y^2 & yz\\
zx & zy & z^2
\end{pmatrix} are represented by \sum_{i=1}^3 \sum_{j=1}^3 M_{ij} \Delta x^i \Delta x^j; because none of these entries are multiplied by time, the delta r term is absent from this part.I hope no confusion was caused by my formatting issues.

I would also like to repeat that this thread is NOT about the interval, but rather the apparent similarity between this representation and the organization of the stress-energy tensor. The Wikipedia article states:

If Cartesian coordinates in SI units are used, then the components of the position four-vector are given by: x0 = t, x1 = x, x2 = y, and x3 = z, where t is time in seconds, and x, y, and z are distances in meters.

I'm not sure if this is a coincidence, or just a result of the 4 \times 4 nature of this matrix, along with the fact that they are both displayed in spacetime coordinates.
 
If I understand your question correctly, the formula is general in the sense that it results from the 1+3 block decomposition of any 4x4 symmetric matrix, and as such applies to any quadratic form in 4D (and generalizes to any dimension). The stress-energy tensor being rank-4 symmetric in GR, it applies there too (but not in theories where that tensor isn't symmetric). There may be a deeper connection but I don't know about that.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: HeavyMetal
wabbit said:
If I understand your question correctly, the formula is general in the sense that it results from the 1+3 block decomposition of any 4x4 symmetric matrix, and as such applies to any quadratic form in 4D (and generalizes to any dimension). The stress-energy tensor being rank-4 symmetric in GR, it applies there too (but not in theories where that tensor isn't symmetric). There may be a deeper connection but I don't know about that.

Oh yeah, you understood my question quite perfectly! I'm currently studying linear algebra from the Wikibook articles, and I haven't learned about block decomposition yet. I've been using it recently to answer physics questions, but I guess I just didn't know what the name for it was :rolleyes:.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K