Question about reverse tracing the Einstein field equations

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the reverse trace form of the Einstein field equations, focusing on the mathematical manipulation involved in deriving this form and the implications of sign conventions. Participants explore the steps taken to arrive at different expressions for the scalar curvature R in relation to the energy-momentum tensor T.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that multiplying both sides of the Einstein field equations by gab leads to a specific form of the equations, ultimately proposing R = 2kT.
  • Another participant points out that the summation of the metric tensor components results in g^{ab}g_{ab} = 4, which alters the derivation.
  • Following this, a participant derives R = -kT, questioning the reason for the negative sign and suggesting it may relate to the sign signature used.
  • A later reply confirms the derivation of R = -kT and references external lecture notes by Baez that may clarify the process further.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct form of the scalar curvature R, with some arriving at R = 2kT and others at R = -kT. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of the negative sign and the correctness of the derivations.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding assumptions about the metric signature and the implications of the summation of the metric tensor components, which are not fully explored.

space-time
Messages
218
Reaction score
4
From what I know, to get the reverse trace form of the Einstein field equations, you must multiply both sides by gab (I didn't have a lot of time to make this thread so I did not spend time finding the Greek letters in the latex).

This turns:

Rab- [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]gabR= kTab (where k= (8[itex]\pi[/itex]G)/c4)

into this:

R- [itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]R = kT

which equals:

[itex]\frac{1}{2}[/itex]R = kT

which yields

R= 2kT= LT (I set L= 2k).

However, many sources say that the reverse trace is:

R= -LT

Why is it negative? Is it based on sign signature?

Note that I general, I use (- + + +) signature.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your problem is that ##g^{ab}g_{ab}=4## when you do the summation.
 
Last edited:
Nugatory said:
Your problem is that ##g^{ab}g_{ab}=4## when you do the summation.

So then this yields:

R-2R= kT

which equals

-R = kT

which yields:

R = -kT

I presume that this is the correct process. Is this what you are getting at? If so then I get it now. Thank you.
 
space-time said:
So then this yields:

R-2R= kT

which equals

-R = kT

which yields:

R = -kT

I presume that this is the correct process. Is this what you are getting at? If so then I get it now. Thank you.

It looks right. I think Baez has some lecture notes that do the derivation online that go through this, if you haven't seen them already (I suspect it could be your source).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
959
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K