A cone has all the same local geometrical properties as a plane, so if you take a piece of graph paper and form it into a cone, [itex]\partial_x[/itex] and [itex]\partial_y[/itex] still satisfy the Killing equation. On the other hand, the cone has intrinsic geometrical properties that are different from those of the plane, e.g., parallel transport around a loop enclosing the tip will cause a vector to rotate. This singles out the tip and gives it a special geometrical role, which is clearly not consistent with translational symmetry. Does this mean that we can have a field that satisfies the Killing equation without being a Killing vector, or is the Killing equation violated at the tip of the cone? Does it matter if you extend the cone to make a double cone, so that orbits of a Killing vector can pass smoothly through the tip?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Satisfies Killing equation, but not a Killing field?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**