Stress-energy tensor and pressure

jostpuur
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
19
I learned that stress-energy tensor is defined in first place to be a 16-component object T^{\mu\nu}, where the first row T^{0\nu} tells the energy density current, and the three other rows T^{i\nu} tell the momentum density currents.

The Carrol introduces a stress-energy tensor where off diagonal terms are zero, and T^{00} and T^{ii} (the same value for all i=1,2,3) have some fixed values. He then merely says, that "we can choose to call T^{ii} the pressure". Okey, does this have anything to do with earlier pressure concept that we know from elementary physics? If it does, how do you justify that, because it doesn't seem very obvious to me. Those diagonal terms in the first place were supposed to be components momentum currents, and I don't see how they could be interpreted as pressure.

(This question continues were discussion in "photon gas and relativity" lead, but I didn't want to spoil the original topic with my own problems more.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The short answer is that in the rest frame of the body, T^{ij} is equivalent to the classical stress tensor for i,j = 1..3 Or equivalently, the relativistic stress-energy tensor is the relativistic generalization of the classical stress tensor.

Solids can support "shear stresses", simpler ideal fluid models will have a diagonal stress tensor, and hence can be summarized by a single scalar, P, which is the pressure of the fluid.

If you consider a rod under pressure, it does transport momentum across the rod. You can consider T^11 to be the "flow" of x momentum in the x direction, for example (though I find this not very intuitive).

See for instance http://people.hofstra.edu/Stefan_Waner/diff_geom/Sec12.html

The current wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stress-energy_tensor&oldid=131240365
also covers this and seems fairly sane.

If you have MTW, see pg 131-132, especially box 5.1
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just realized, that p_1 momentum traveling in x_1-direction, and -p_1 momentum traveling in -x_1-direction, give a contribution to the momentum current with the same sign. :biggrin: Okey, I'll have to think more about those currents...
 
As Stefan Waner says (in the link provided by pervect)

T^{11}=\frac{\Delta p^1}{\Delta v}

where \Delta p^1 is the x component of the momentum contained in a 3-volume element with normal vector pointing in x direction i. e. \Delta v = \Delta t \Delta y \Delta z. If an observer sits there for time \Delta t, he will see the fluid crossing the perpendicular area \Delta y \Delta z carrying x-momentum \Delta p^1. Recall that in 4D spacetime, 3-volume elements are parts of hypersurfaces, hence have normal 4-vectors to them. So we get

T^{11}=\frac{\Delta p^x}{\Delta t \Delta y \Delta z }=\frac{F^x}{\Delta y \Delta z}= pressure
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
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...
Back
Top