Some questions about the derivation steps in the Gravitational deflection of light section in Schutz

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the derivation of equation (11.53) from equation (11.49) in the context of gravitational deflection of light as presented in Schutz's work. The user initially misunderstands the neglect of the term ##2Mu^3##, assuming ##Mu \ll 1## leads to ##y \approx u##. The correct approach involves recognizing that the term ##O(M^2u^2)## arises from the expansion of ##(1-2Mu)^{-1}## and the relationship between ##y^2## and ##u^2##, ultimately leading to the correct formulation of equation (11.53).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of gravitational lensing principles
  • Familiarity with differential calculus and derivatives
  • Knowledge of Taylor series expansions
  • Proficiency in interpreting mathematical equations in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of gravitational lensing equations in Schutz's "A First Course in General Relativity"
  • Learn about Taylor series and their applications in physics
  • Explore the implications of small mass approximations in general relativity
  • Investigate the mathematical techniques for analyzing differential equations in physics
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in physics, particularly those focusing on general relativity, gravitational lensing, and mathematical physics. This discussion is beneficial for anyone seeking to deepen their understanding of the derivation processes in theoretical physics.

MathematicalPhysicist
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
4,662
Reaction score
372
TL;DR
My question is referring to some derivation from pages 293-294 of Schutz's second edition (2009) of A First Course in GR.
In the screenshots below there are the equations (11.49) and (11.53).

I don't understand how did he derive equation (11.53) from Eq.(11.49)?
From (11.49) I get: ##d\phi/dy= d\phi/du du/dy = (1/b^2-u^2+2Mu^3)^{-1/2}(1+2My)##.
It seems he neglected the ##2Mu^3## since ##Mu\ll 1##, so ##y\approx u##, but how do we get the added term of ##O(M^2u^2)##?

schutz2.pngschutz1.png
schutz1.png
schutz2.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would have thought\begin{align*}
\dfrac{d\phi}{dy} = \dfrac{d\phi}{du} \left( \dfrac{dy}{du} \right)^{-1} &= \dfrac{( 1 - 2Mu)^{-1} }{\left( b^{-2} - u^2(1-2Mu) \right)^{1/2}}
\end{align*}then because ##y^2 = u^2(1-Mu)^2 \sim u^2(1-2Mu)## and also ##(1-2Mu)^{-1} \sim 1+2Mu + O(M^2u^2) \sim 1 + 2My + O(M^2u^2)## you get ##\mathrm{11.53}##...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix and MathematicalPhysicist
ergospherical said:
I would have thought\begin{align*}
\dfrac{d\phi}{dy} = \dfrac{d\phi}{du} \left( \dfrac{dy}{du} \right)^{-1} &= \dfrac{( 1 - 2Mu)^{-1} }{\left( b^{-2} - u^2(1-2Mu) \right)^{1/2}}
\end{align*}then because ##y^2 = u^2(1-Mu)^2 \sim u^2(1-2Mu)## and also ##(1-2Mu)^{-1} \sim 1+2Mu + O(M^2u^2) \sim 1 + 2My + O(M^2u^2)## you get ##\mathrm{11.53}##...
It seems I got it wrong. Thanks for correcting me.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K