Question from Weinberg's cosmology text

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter blueeyedblond
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cosmology Text
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding specific equations from Steven Weinberg's cosmology text, particularly the transition from equation 5.3.3 to 5.3.4 and the implications of equation 5.3.5. Participants seek clarification on the derivation and meaning of these equations within the context of gauge issues in cosmology.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how to derive equation 5.3.4 from 5.3.3 in Weinberg's text.
  • Another participant asserts that the derivation does not occur as the first participant expects, clarifying that the goal is to show how 5.3.5 reduces to 5.3.4 in the absence of gravitation and that 5.3.5 is a scalar.
  • A later reply indicates that the first part of the assertion is obvious and references earlier equations (5.2.12 and 5.2.13) for further reasoning.
  • One participant clarifies that they were referring to the newer "Cosmology" text and not the older "Gravitation and Cosmology," which led to some confusion.
  • Another participant explains that equation 5.3.4 represents the minus Lie derivative of the unperturbed metric with respect to a vector field, describing the rate of change of the metric along certain trajectories.
  • A subsequent reply confirms the previous explanation and suggests that the key to deriving 5.3.4 is found in unnumbered equations below 10.9.6 in the older text.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the derivation process, with some asserting that the derivation does not occur as expected while others provide insights into the nature of the equations involved. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the clarity of the derivation from 5.3.3 to 5.3.4.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific equations and concepts from Weinberg's texts, indicating a reliance on prior knowledge and definitions that may not be fully articulated in the discussion. There are also references to different editions of Weinberg's work, which may affect interpretations.

blueeyedblond
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am trying to learn gauge issues in cosmology from Weinberg's "Cosmology". However, I am completely stumped at how he gets 5.3.4 from 5.3.3. I was doing great until that point and now I'm going crazy. Any help would be highly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
He doesn't.

He wants to show that 5.3.5 (i) reduces to 5.3.4 in the absence of gravitation (ii) further that 5.3.5 is a scalar. (i) is obvious, (ii) he follows the reasoning 5.2.12 and 5.2.13.
 
atyy said:
He doesn't.

He wants to show that 5.3.5 (i) reduces to 5.3.4 in the absence of gravitation (ii) further that 5.3.5 is a scalar. (i) is obvious, (ii) he follows the reasoning 5.2.12 and 5.2.13.


atyy,

Thanks so much for taking the time to reply!

However, I was referring to the recent book "Cosmology" by Weinberg and not the older "Gravitation and Cosmology" which is what you seem to be referring to to. (For a moment I thought you're a crazy person!)

I think I've figured out the answer to my question, but if you have any insights on that you're very welcome to let me know.

Sorry for the confusion!
 
Ah ha ha ha! Sorry about that! (But I am a crazy person :smile:)
 
I don't know if this will help you or not, but (5.3.4) is nothing but the minus Lie derivative of the unperturbed metric with respect to the vector field [tex]\epsilon^\lambda(x)[/tex]. So it describes the rate of change of the metric dragged along the trajectories of [tex]\epsilon[/tex] with respect to the original metric.
 
Last edited:
arkajad said:
I don't know if this will help you or not, but (5.3.4) is nothing but the minus Lie derivative of the unperturbed metric with respect to the vector field [tex]\epsilon^\lambda(x)[/tex]. So it describes the rate of change of the metric dragged along the trajectories of [tex]\epsilon[/tex] with respect to the original metric.

That is absolutely correct. And the key to deriving it is to use the two unnumbered equations below 10.9.6 in Weinberg's "Gravitation and Cosmology" book.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K