Solving Schwarzschild Field Equations in this Form

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving the Schwarzschild field equations using a specific form of the Ricci curvature derived from vielbein forms. Participants explore the implications of their calculations and the differences from standard approaches in general relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a derivation of the Ricci curvature components from the vielbein forms and poses a question about solving the equation \( R_{\mu \nu} = 0 \) with the resulting expressions.
  • Another participant suggests that the last equation can be solved by separating variables, implying a potential method to find a solution.
  • A third participant expresses surprise that the derived equation does not reduce to a total derivative as expected, suggesting the possibility of needing integrating factors to solve it.
  • A later reply clarifies a distinction between the forms of the equations being discussed, noting that the usual form involves \( R_{\theta\theta}=0 \) while the current discussion involves \( R^\theta_{\;\;\theta}=0 \).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the method of solving the equations, with differing views on the implications of the derived equations and their forms.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the assumptions made in the derivation of the Ricci curvature and the specific conditions under which the equations are being analyzed.

bolbteppa
Messages
300
Reaction score
41
Applying Cartan's first and second structural equations to the vielbein forms
\begin{align}
e^t = A(r) dt , \ \ \ \ \ e^r = B(r) dr , \ \ \ \ \ e^{\theta} = C(r) d \theta , \ \ \ \ \ e^{\phi} = C(r) \sin \theta d \phi ,
\end{align}
taken from the metric
\begin{align}
ds^2 = A^2(r) dt^2 - B^2(r) dr^2 - C^2(r) d \theta^2 - C^2(r) \sin^2 (\theta) d \phi^2 , \ \ \ \ C(r) = r,
\end{align}
we end up with the Ricci curvature in the form
\begin{align}
R^t \, _t &= - \frac{1}{B^2}[\frac{A''}{A} - \frac{A'B'}{AB} + 2 \frac{A'}{Ar}] \\
R^r \, _r &= - \frac{1}{B^2}[\frac{A''}{A} - \frac{A'B'}{AB} - 2\frac{B'}{Br}] \\
R^{\theta} \, _{\theta} &= - \frac{1}{B^2}[- \frac{B'}{rB} + \frac{A'}{Ar} + \frac{1}{r^2}] + \frac{1}{r^2}= R^{\phi} \, _{\phi}.
\end{align}
This is the result in Zee's gravity, page 611, and at around 46 mins in this video (on setting ##C = r##).

My question is solving the equation
\begin{align}
R_{\mu \nu} = 0
\end{align}
with the Ricci curvature in this form to find the Schwarzschild line element, noting the curvature is a bit different from the usual form. By subtracting ##R^r \, _r## from ##R^t \, _t## we find
\begin{align}
\frac{A'}{A} + \frac{B'}{B} = 0,
\end{align}
but now using this in the ##R^{\theta} \, _{\theta}## curvature term, we get
\begin{align}
0 &= - \frac{1}{B^2}[- \frac{B'}{rB} + \frac{A'}{Ar} + \frac{1}{r^2}] + \frac{1}{r^2} \\
&= - \frac{1}{B^2}[- \frac{B'}{rB} - \frac{B'}{Br} + \frac{1}{r^2}] + \frac{1}{r^2} \\
&= - \frac{1}{B^2}[- 2 \frac{B'}{rB} + \frac{1}{r^2}] + \frac{1}{r^2} \\
&= \frac{1}{B^2}[2r \frac{B'}{B} - 1] + 1 \\
&= 2r \frac{B'}{B} - 1 + B^2 \\
&= 2rB' - B + B^3
\end{align}
which does not reduce to a total derivative (as it usually should) allowing us to solve the equations.

What has gone wrong and how does one solve the equations in this form?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If all the calculations a correct, the last equation can be solved. You can separate the variables.
 
In the link that you call the usual form the equations is ##R_{\theta\theta}=0##, here you are looking at ##R^\theta_{\;\;\theta}=0##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K