A Solve Gravitational Interferometer & Geodesics

Salah93
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
I was trying to solve this excercise:

D1rhS.png


Now I was able to find the eq. of geodetics (or directly by Christoffel formulas calculation or by the Lagrangian for a point particle). And I verified that such space constant coordinate point is a geodetic.

Now, for the second point I considered$$ds^2=0$$

to isolate the$$dt$$ and find the time difference between the two routes. But I don't know how to solve for a generic path of a light ray. So I considered that maybe the text wants a light ray traveling along x-axis and the second along y axis.

I checked in other sources and all people make the same, by considering a light ray along x-axis and then setting$$dy=dz=0$$
.

But when I substitute these in my geodesic equations it turns out that they are not true even at first order in A! So these people that consider a light ray traveling along x-axis, such as in an interferometer, are not considering a light geodesic. All of this if and only if my calculations are true.

So I know that if$$ds^2=0$$
I have a light geodesic. And so it should solve my eq. of geodesics. But if I restrain my motion on x-axis what I can say is that the$$ds^2=0$$
condition now is on a submanifold of my manifold. So, the light wave that I consider doesn't not move on a geodesic of the original manifold but on one of the x axis. This is the only thing that came in my mind.

Is there any way to say that I can set

$$dy=dz=0$$
without worring? And if I can't set it how can I solve the second point?

I want also to ask is there other geodesics that go from the 3d point (0,0,0) to (L,0,0)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm working beyond my knowledge here (very much a beginner), but if you put ##dy=0## and ##dz=0## into the above, you still have ##ds^2 = - dt^2 + (1+ A cos( k(z+t))dx^2## and if ##ds^2 = 0## for light, you get a relationship between ##dt## and ##dx##.

To the admins, I hope that doesn't constitute too much of an answer, I'm hoping to test my own rudimentary knowledge too. I've deliberately left out the final step I think.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
I solved the excercise and made all the necessary calculations and obtained the correct results. What I asking is a more theoretical question, to justify what I did. If the question is not formulated well please tell me.
 
Salah93 said:
What I asking is a more theoretical question, to justify what I did.

You will need to show more of your work. In particular you should show explicitly what you did here:

Salah93 said:
when I substitute these in my geodesic equations it turns out that they are not true even at first order in A!
 
Ok, I write the equations that I obtain(one can use action variation with an affine parameter, or EL eq. with affine parameter or use directly geodesic eqs with affine parameter by first calculating Christoffel symbols):

$$\ddot{t}=\frac{Ak}{2}sin(k(z+t)) (\dot{x}^2-\dot{y}^2)$$

$$\ddot{t}=\frac{Ak \sin(k(z+t))}{1+Acos(k(z+t))} (\dot{z}+\dot{t})\dot{x}$$

$$\ddot{y}=-\frac{Ak \sin(k(z+t))}{1-Acos(k(z+t))} (\dot{z}+\dot{t})\dot{y}$$

$$\ddot{z}=-\frac{Ak}{2}sin(k(z+t)) (\dot{x}^2-\dot{y}^2)$$Now these eqs define a geodesic.

I know that taking $$ds^2=0$$ this defines a light geodesic(and I can use any monotone function to parametrize it). Now I can set freely $$dy=dz=0$$ and take a light ray that travels along x-axis form (0,0,0) to (L,0,0) and then obtain the result of the second point for this particular light ray.

My questions are:
1) if I substitute $$dy=dz=0$$ I correctly have the eq. for $$\ddot{y}$$ zero. But the ones for $$\ddot{t}$$, $$\ddot{x}$$ , $$\ddot{z}$$ are not zero(if I made calculations well). So or I made wrong calculations or I can't use these equations for the light ray.

2)I saw that all the books ,ex. Schultz for RG, that treat interference for light rays take directly I ray that travels along x or y-axis (with a gravitational wave propagating in the z direction). Now are there other light rays that can go from (0,0,0) to (L,0,0)?

I hope I posted better the question. Thank you
 
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Abstract The gravitational-wave signal GW250114 was observed by the two LIGO detectors with a network matched-filter signal-to-noise ratio of 80. The signal was emitted by the coalescence of two black holes with near-equal masses ## m_1=33.6_{-0.8}^{+1.2} M_{⊙} ## and ## m_2=32.2_{-1. 3}^{+0.8} M_{⊙}##, and small spins ##\chi_{1,2}\leq 0.26 ## (90% credibility) and negligible eccentricity ##e⁢\leq 0.03.## Postmerger data excluding the peak region are consistent with the dominant quadrupolar...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
Back
Top