Reconciling units for the Einstein and Landau-Lifshitz pseudotensors

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the reconciliation of units for the Einstein and Landau-Lifshitz pseudotensors, specifically the equations governing their conservation laws. The Einstein pseudotensor ##{t_\mu}^\nu## and the Landau-Lifshitz pseudotensor ##t^{\mu\nu}## both represent energy-momentum density, but their unit compatibility depends on the conventions adopted by each author. Key differences include Dirac's assumption of ##G=c=1## and the treatment of the Ricci tensor. Understanding these conventions is crucial for resolving potential ambiguities in their applications.

PREREQUISITES
  • Familiarity with general relativity concepts, particularly pseudotensors.
  • Understanding of the metric tensor and its determinant, specifically in the context of energy-momentum density.
  • Knowledge of the conventions used in theoretical physics, such as those by Dirac and Landau-Lifshitz.
  • Basic grasp of tensor calculus and differential geometry.
NEXT STEPS
  • Investigate the implications of adopting different conventions in general relativity.
  • Learn about the derivation and applications of the Einstein pseudotensor in detail.
  • Explore the differences between Dirac's and Landau-Lifshitz's approaches to gravitational energy-momentum.
  • Study the properties and applications of the Ricci tensor in various coordinate systems.
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, researchers in general relativity, and students studying gravitational theories who seek to understand the nuances of pseudotensors and their unit conventions.

Kostik
Messages
274
Reaction score
32
TL;DR
Examining a discrepancy in the energy-momentum conservation law expressed using the Einstein(-Dirac) and Landau-Lifshitz pseudotensors
The Einstein (or Einstein-Dirac) pseudotensor ##{t_\mu}^\nu## satisfies
$$\left[ \sqrt{-g}({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu) \right]_{,\nu}=0$$ (see Dirac, "General Theory of Relativity", eq. 31.2)). Similarly, the Landau-Lifshitz pseudotensor ##t^{\mu\nu}## satisfies
$$\left[ (-g)(t^{\mu\nu} + T^{\mu\nu}) \right]_{,\nu}=0$$ (see L-L, "Classical Theory of Fields" 4th Ed., eq. (96.10)).

In both cases, the authors deduce that the conservation equation implies that the quantity in square brackets represents the density of total energy and momentum of the matter-energy fields plus the gravitational field (curvature of space).

But surely the quantities in square brackets have different units. How can they both be energy-momentum density?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That depends very much on the conventions that one adopts. You need to look carefully into each author's conventions. They may not be the same or even compatible.

One possible convention is that ##g## is dimensionless. Then ##t## and ##T## could have the same units and both author's expressions would be consistent and compatible. However, that may not be the case, in which case the different authors will ascribe different units to the various quantities.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis
Dale said:
That depends very much on the conventions that one adopts. You need to look carefully into each author's conventions. They may not be the same or even compatible.

One possible convention is that ##g## is dimensionless. Then ##t## and ##T## could have the same units and both author's expressions would be consistent and compatible. However, that may not be the case, in which case the different authors will ascribe different units to the various quantities.
I don't think that's the issue. There is no ambiguity in the metric ##ds^2 = g_{\mu\nu} dx^\mu dx^\nu##. There are some differences between Dirac and L-L; for example, Dirac assumes ##G=c=1## while L-L carries these constants throughout. Also, Dirac's Ricci tensor is the opposite of L-L's. But none of these enter into the derivation of their pseudo-tensors.
 
Why don't you start with the familiar case that all
$$x^0,x^1,x^2,x^3$$
have dimension of length. All the metric tensor components, thus its determinant g also, are dimensionless.
Then you may investigate more general case, e.g., cylindrical or polar type coordinates, if you wish.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kostik

Similar threads

  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
454
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
934