Graduate Proving $g(u,v)≠0$ with Linear Independence

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on proving that for a lightlike vector \( u \) (where \( g(u,u) = 0 \)), there exists a vector \( w \) such that \( g(u,w) \neq 0 \). The participants emphasize the importance of linear independence between vectors and the non-degeneracy of the pseudo-Riemannian metric \( g \). A proof by contradiction is suggested, where assuming \( g(u,w) = 0 \) for all \( w \) leads to the conclusion that \( u \) must be the zero vector, contradicting the initial condition that \( u \) is non-zero.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of pseudo-Riemannian metrics and their properties
  • Knowledge of linear independence in vector spaces
  • Familiarity with proof techniques, particularly proof by contradiction
  • Basic concepts of lightlike and timelike vectors in the context of relativity
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of pseudo-Riemannian metrics and their implications on vector spaces
  • Learn about the implications of linear independence in higher-dimensional spaces
  • Explore proof techniques in linear algebra, focusing on contradiction methods
  • Investigate the geometric interpretation of lightlike and timelike vectors in relativity
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students studying differential geometry or general relativity, particularly those interested in the properties of vector spaces and metrics.

isaacdl
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Contraction of a lightlike vector with another vector in a free coordinate scheme.
I'm trying to prove that there exist always a vector w whose contraction with a lightlike vector u (g(u,u)=0) it's always different from zero:
$g(u,v)≠0$I know how to do this with coordinates, but in a free cordinate scheme I'm totally lost.

Any help?

PD: Both vectors are linearly independent.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What have you tried so far?
How did you do it in a coordinate system?
Can you generalize that to work without coordinates?
 
  • Like
Likes isaacdl
In a coordinates it's straight forward. If u=(1,1,0,0) and w=(1,0,0,0) timelike or same to ligthlike, it's not difficult to prove they are colinear. But I don't know how to traduce it in a free coordinate way.
 
pseudo-Riemannian metrics are non-degenerate; can you argue by contradiction?
 
  • Like
Likes isaacdl
Mmm, I think I have to use the fact w and u are linearly independent. My first idea was to use the properties of bilinearity of the metric. So by contradiction you mean to consider g(u,v)=0 and get to u is not lightlike?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As in, if there were no ##\mathbf{w}## giving ##g(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{w}) \neq 0## that’s the same as saying ##g(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{w}) = 0## for all ##\mathbf{w} \in \mathbf{R}^4##. How does that mesh with the non-degeneracy condition on ##g##?
 
  • Like
Likes isaacdl and vanhees71
Consider the common plane for the two vectors…. Given the lightlike vector, can you write the “other vector” using it?
 
  • Like
Likes isaacdl
ergospherical said:
As in, if there were no ##\mathbf{w}## giving ##g(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{w}) \neq 0## that’s the same as saying ##g(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{w}) = 0## for all ##\mathbf{w} \in \mathbf{R}^4##. How does that mesh with the non-degeneracy condition on ##g##?
Ok, I was using proof by contradiction wrong. Ok, if ##g(\mathbf{u},\mathbf{w}) = 0## for all ##\mathbf{w} \in \mathbf{R}^4##, by non-degenacy condition if S is non-degenerated u is a null vector u=0. But I'm not sure if the space S or equiv, g | S is non-degenerate. The only info I have is that ##S=(v_1,...,u,..._w,...,v_m)## is a linearly independent set.

What I have to find now is that ##u## is not lightlike, right?PD: I don't know why LATEX is not showing properly.
 
robphy said:
Consider the common plane for the two vectors…. Given the lightlike vector, can you write the “other vector” using it?
Yes, I can see it graphically, but my problem is to show it in a free cordinate way.
 
  • #10
@isaacdl if ##g(\mathbf{u}, \mathbf{w}) = 0## for all possible ##\mathbf{w}## then the non-degeneracy of ##g## would imply that ##\mathbf{u} = 0##, but this is not true by assumption (##\mathbf{u}## is a non-zero lightlike vector).
 
  • Like
Likes isaacdl
  • #11
ergospherical said:
@isaacdl if ##g(\mathbf{u}, \mathbf{w}) = 0## for all possible ##\mathbf{w}## then the non-degeneracy of ##g## would imply that ##\mathbf{u} = 0##, but this is not true by assumption (##\mathbf{u}## is a non-zero lightlike vector)
Yeah totally understood that part, but what I said in the previous post is that I don't know if g in S is non-degenerated. It's not given in the exercise.

PD: Wait, u are totally right, we can use it, it's given in a previous part of the exercise! Thanks a lot.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K