Solve GHY Boundary Term Problem for Calculations

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the Gibbons-Hawking-York (GHY) boundary term in the context of general relativity. Participants are exploring the mathematical formulation and integration of this term into the Einstein-Hilbert action, with a focus on the trace of the extrinsic curvature and the use of specific metrics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their approach to calculating the trace of the extrinsic curvature, noting the specific form of the unit normal vector and the boundary condition.
  • Another participant inquires whether the first participant has checked the extrinsic curvature against a specific formula from a referenced paper and asks for the inverse metric used in their calculations.
  • The first participant confirms their intention to use a specific metric from the paper and provides their calculated inverse metric, seeking validation of their approach.
  • A later reply points out an error in the placement of a term in the metric, leading to a correction in the calculations of the first participant.
  • The first participant acknowledges the mistake and confirms that their calculations are now correct after the adjustment.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no explicit consensus reached in the discussion, but participants engage in correcting and refining each other's calculations. The initial disagreement regarding the metric components is resolved through collaborative input.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding specific calculations and the implications of their results. The discussion reflects a transition in expertise from quantum mechanics to general relativity, highlighting gaps in knowledge that are being addressed.

Zitter
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi everybody ! In one of my papers I need to add Gibbons-Hawking-York boundary term in order to calculate everything properly. I found a paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269316306530 ) in which authors included this term into the action. My problem is: I tried to calculate this term as a practice work, but I didn't obtain the same result as authors of paper. There is no point in posting my result, because my formula is much bigger than compact form from paper. I checked my hand-made calculations in Mathematica and they are the same, so probably there is a problem at the beginning of my thinking. Could somebody tell where is the error ?

1) Firstly, I calculated the trace of extrinsic curvature ##K=-\frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\partial_{\mu} (\sqrt{-g} n^{\mu})##, where ##n_{\mu}## is the unit vector normal to the boundary. The hyper-surface boundary is given by ##r=R_0##, where ##R_0## is constant. I obtained ##n_t=0,\ n_r=\sqrt{\frac{B}{A}},\ n_{\varphi}=0## and ##n^t=0,\ n^r=\sqrt{\frac{A}{B}},n^{\varphi}=0 ##.

2) In order to add GHY term into Einstein-Hilbert action I used Stokes theorem to change "surface" integral into "volume" integral. One can rewrite ##K## as ## \bar{K}^{\mu}n_{\mu}##, where ##\bar{K}^{\mu}## is vector ##(\bar{K}^t,\bar{K}^r,\bar{K}^{\varphi})=(0,\sqrt{\frac{A}{B}}K,0)##. By using Stokes theorem expression ##d^2x \sqrt{-h} K## is replaced by ##d^3x \sqrt{-g} \bar{K}^{\mu}_{;\mu}##, where ##\bar{K}^{\mu}_{;\mu}## is divergence of ##\bar{K}^{\mu}## vector.

3) Now, inside action integral we have ##\sqrt{-g}\left(\frac{1}{2\kappa}(R-2\Lambda)+\frac{1}{\kappa}\bar{K}^{\mu}_{;\mu}\right) ## plus ##\sigma##-model part.

Is this reasoning correct ? Thank you in advance for any help. Few months ago I changed my field of study from QM to GR and I have gaps in knowledge, which of course I try to reduce as hard as possible.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Zitter said:
1) Firstly, I calculated the trace of extrinsic curvature ##K=-\frac{1}{\sqrt{-g}}\partial_{\mu} (\sqrt{-g} n^{\mu})##, where ##n_{\mu}## is the unit vector normal to the boundary. The hyper-surface boundary is given by ##r=R_0##, where ##R_0## is constant. I obtained ##n_t=0,\ n_r=\sqrt{\frac{B}{A}},\ n_{\varphi}=0## and ##n^t=0,\ n^r=\sqrt{\frac{A}{B}},n^{\varphi}=0 ##.

Are you want to check extrinsic curvature of the formula (4) in the paper of Harms and Stern? Dis you calculate the inverse metric ##g^{\mu\nu}##? can you post it?
 
Yes. I want to calculate ##K## by using ansatz on metric given by formula (4) in the paper. The inverse metric I calculated is
$$\begin{pmatrix}
-\frac{1}{A+3r^2\Omega^2 }& 0 & \frac{2\Omega}{A+3r^2 \Omega^2} \\
0 & \frac{A}{B} & 0 \\
\frac{2 \Omega}{A+3r^2 \Omega^2} & 0 & \frac{A-r^2\Omega^2}{r^2A+3r^4 \Omega^2}
\end{pmatrix}$$
 
Zitter said:
Yes. I want to calculate ##K## by using ansatz on metric given by formula (4) in the paper. The inverse metric I calculated is
$$\begin{pmatrix}
-\frac{1}{A+3r^2\Omega^2 }& 0 & \frac{2\Omega}{A+3r^2 \Omega^2} \\
0 & \frac{A}{B} & 0 \\
\frac{2 \Omega}{A+3r^2 \Omega^2} & 0 & \frac{A-r^2\Omega^2}{r^2A+3r^4 \Omega^2}
\end{pmatrix}$$
The metic ##g_{\mu\nu}## can be written as
$$
\left[
\begin{array}{ccc}
-A+r^2\Omega^2 & 0 &0\\
0&\frac{B}{A} & r^2\Omega\\
0&r^2\Omega&r^2
\end{array} \right]
$$
Am I right?
 
The ##r^2\Omega## term should be in positions (1,3) and (3,1), but thanks to you I found error in my calculations. I forgot that it should be ##r^2\Omega## and not ##2r^2\Omega## :D. Now everything is ok and calculations are correct .
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
910
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
943
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K