Show that the metric tensor is independent of coordinate choice

PrecPoint
Messages
15
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
Let [itex]\overline{x^j}, \overline{\overline{x^j}} [/itex] denote the coordinates of an arbitrary point P of [itex]E_n[/itex] referred to two distinct rectangular coordinate systems. An arbitrary curvlinear system in [itex]E_n[/itex] is related to the two rectangular systems according to:
Relevant Equations
[itex]\overline{x^j}=\overline{x^j}(x^h),\qquad \overline{\overline{x^j}}=\overline{\overline{x^j}}(x^h)[/itex]

Show that:

[tex]\frac{\partial{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{x^h}} \frac{\partial{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{x^k}}=\frac{\partial{\overline{\overline{x^j}}}}{\partial{x^h}} \frac{\partial{\overline{\overline{x^j}}}}{\partial{x^k}}[/tex]
I need to use some property of the relalation between the coordinate systems to prove that g_{hk} is independent of the choice of the underlying rectangular coordinate system.

I will try to borrow an idea from basic linear algebra. I expect any transformation between the rectangular systems to be orthogonal and hence should be able to use orthogonality. To illustrate my idea, I expect something along these lines (in linear algebra pseudocode):

\overline{\overline{x}}=A\overline{x},\quad A^TA=I,\quad (AJ)^T(AJ)=J^TA^TAJ=J^TJ

Lets try:

\overline{x}^j=\frac{\partial{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{\overline{\overline{x^m}}}}\overline{\overline{x^m}}

Now the part where I get stuck

\frac{\partial{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{x^h}}=\frac{\partial{^2\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{x^h}\partial{\overline{\overline{x^m}}}}\overline{\overline{x^m}}+\frac{\partial{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{\overline{\overline{x^m}}}}\frac{\partial{\overline{\overline{x^m}}}}{\partial{x^h}}

And likewise for the other factor. But a) I am very unsure of the derivates (this is my first tensor problem) and b) there is no easy identity- or delta quantity to be found. I suspect I am on the wrong track :(

Edit: btw, this is not a homework problem, but posted here anyway since there were no other suitable place to be found. The problem is from the book on Tensors by Lovelock and Rund
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Suggestions:

Use ##\overline{\overline{x}}=A\overline{x}## to show that ##\large \frac{\partial{\overline{\overline{x^j}}}}{\partial{\overline{x^r}}}## is a particular matrix element of ##A##.

Use the chain rule to express ##\large \frac{\partial{\overline{\overline{x^j}}}}{\partial{x^h}} ## in terms of partial derivatives of ##\overline{\overline{x^j}}## with respect to the ##\overline{x^r}##'s and the partial derivatives of the ##\overline{x^r}##'s with repsect to ##x^h##
 
  • Like
Likes PrecPoint
Thank you very much TSny!

Using your suggestions I first thought about "matrix A" which should be:

A_{jr}=\frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{\overline{x^r}}}

Now, using my analogy A^TA=I (the transformation is orthogonal) we note that:

\frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{\overline{x^r}}}\frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{\overline{x^t}}}=\delta_{rt}

\frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{x^h}}=<br /> \frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{\overline{x^r}}}\frac{\partial\overline{x^r}}{\partial{{x^h}}},\quad \frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{x^k}}=<br /> \frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{\overline{x^t}}}\frac{\partial\overline{x^t}}{\partial{{x^k}}}<br />

Applying this to the RHS of the original statement:

\frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{x^h}}\frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{x^k}}=\frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{\overline{x^r}}}\frac{\partial\overline{x^r}}{\partial{x^h}}\frac{\partial\overline{\overline{x^j}}}{\partial{\overline{x^t}}}\frac{\partial\overline{x^t}}{\partial{x^k}}=\delta_{rt}\frac{\partial\overline{x^r}}{\partial{x^h}}\frac{\partial\overline{x^t}}{\partial{x^k}}=\frac{\partial\overline{x^t}}{\partial{x^h}}\frac{\partial\overline{x^t}}{\partial{x^k}}

Which is what we wanted.
 
Looks good!
 
To solve this, I first used the units to work out that a= m* a/m, i.e. t=z/λ. This would allow you to determine the time duration within an interval section by section and then add this to the previous ones to obtain the age of the respective layer. However, this would require a constant thickness per year for each interval. However, since this is most likely not the case, my next consideration was that the age must be the integral of a 1/λ(z) function, which I cannot model.
Back
Top