Surface gravity calculation, where am I wrong?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion revolves around the calculation of surface gravity as defined in Sean M. Carroll's book, "Space Time and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity." The user, hjq1990, expresses confusion over discrepancies in their calculations involving the equations $\chi^\mu\nabla_\mu\chi^\nu=-\kappa\chi^\nu$, $\nabla(_\mu\chi_\nu)=0$, and $\chi_{[\mu\nabla_\nu\chi_\sigma]}=0$. The user attempts to prove that $\kappa^2=-1/2(\nabla_\mu \chi_\nu)(\nabla^\mu\chi^\nu)$ but arrives at an incorrect conclusion. Another user provides assistance by formatting the equations correctly for clarity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of general relativity concepts, specifically surface gravity.
  • Familiarity with tensor calculus and the notation used in differential geometry.
  • Proficiency in LaTeX for typesetting mathematical equations.
  • Knowledge of the properties of covariant derivatives and their applications.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of surface gravity in general relativity, focusing on the equations presented in Carroll's book.
  • Learn how to properly format mathematical expressions in LaTeX to avoid common pitfalls.
  • Explore the implications of the covariant derivative in the context of general relativity.
  • Investigate the relationship between surface gravity and black hole thermodynamics.
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in physics, particularly those studying general relativity, as well as anyone interested in mathematical physics and LaTeX formatting.

hjq1990
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
On Page 245 of book <<space time and geometry: an introduction of general relativity>> by Sean M. Carroll, the author gave the definition surface gravity and gave its property. I tried to do the calculation for several times, only to find the result different. So could you please take a look and tell me where I have make a mistake. Thanks a lot.
Provided:
$\chi^\mu\nabla_\mu\chi^\nu=-\kappa\chi^\nu$ (1)\\
$\nabla(_\mu\chi_\nu)=0$ (2)\\
$\chi_[\mu\nabla_\nu\chi_\sigma]=0$ (3)\\
Prove: $\kappa^2=-1/2(\nabla_\mu \chi_\nu)(\nabla^\mu\chi^\nu)$\\
I calculated it as follows:\\
from (2) and (3),\\
$\chi_\mu\nabla_\nu\chi_\sigma+\chi_\nu\nabla_\sigma\chi_\mu+\chi_\sigma\nabla_\mu\chi_\nu=0$ (4)\\
thus,\\
$\kappa^2\chi^\mu\chi_\mu=(-\chi^\mu\nabla_\mu\chi^\nu)(-\chi^\sigma\nabla_\sigma\chi^\nu)$\\
$=(\chi^\sigma\nabla^\mu\chi^\nu)(\chi_\mu\nabla_\sigma\chi_\nu)$\\
$=(\chi^\sigma\nabla^\mu\chi^\nu)(-\chi_\sigma\nabla_\nu\chi_\mu-\chi_\nu\nabla_\mu\chi_\sigma)$\\
$=(\chi^\sigma\nabla^\mu\chi^\nu)(\chi_\sigma\nabla_\mu\chi_\nu)+(-\chi^\sigma\nabla^\nu\chi^\mu)(\chi_\nu\nabla_\sigma\chi_\mu)$\\
$=\chi^\sigma\chi_\sigma\nabla^\mu\chi^\nu\nabla_\mu\chi_\nu-(\chi^\sigma\nabla_\sigma\chi^\mu)(\chi_\nu\nabla^\nu\chi^\mu)$\\
$=\chi^\sigma\chi_\sigma\nabla^\mu\chi^\nu\nabla_\mu\chi_\nu-\kappa^2\chi^\mu\chi_\mu$\\
thus,\\
$\kappa^2=1/2(\nabla_\mu\chi_\nu)(\nabla^\mu\chi^\nu) \hfil \square$

Sorry for being lazy, but I really hate it of typing the codes to this site again. I wondering why it is not compatible with latex. I hope you could view the picture I uploaded, if you do not want to copy the code into your editor and compile it.

PS: I am a freshman as for Latex, thus if I put any code not proper, please point them out and give me some advice, if possible.
 

Attachments

  • surface gravity calculation.JPG
    surface gravity calculation.JPG
    40.6 KB · Views: 678
Physics news on Phys.org
QUOTE BY hjq1990

On Page 245 of book <<space time and geometry: an introduction of general relativity>> by Sean M. Carroll, the author gave the definition surface gravity and gave its property. I tried to do the calculation for several times, only to find the result different. So could you please take a look and tell me where I have make a mistake. Thanks a lot.
Provided:
\chi^ \mu \nabla_ \mu \chi^ \nu=- \kappa \chi^ \nu \hspace{10 mm} (1)
\hspace{10 mm} \nabla(_ \mu \chi_ \nu)=0 \hspace{10 mm} (2)
\hspace{10 mm} \chi_{[ \mu \nabla_ \nu \chi_ \sigma]}=0 \hspace{10 mm} (3)
Prove: \kappa^2=-1/2( \nabla_ \mu \chi_ \nu)( \nabla^ \mu \chi^ \nu)
I calculated it as follows:
from (2) and (3),
\hspace{10 mm} \chi_ \mu \nabla_ \nu \chi_ \sigma+ \chi_ \nu \nabla_ \sigma \chi_ \mu+ \chi_ \sigma \nabla_ \mu \chi_ \nu=0 \hspace{10 mm} (4)
thus,
\kappa^2 \chi^ \mu \chi_ \mu=(- \chi^ \mu \nabla_ \mu \chi^ \nu)(- \chi^ \sigma \nabla_{ \sigma} \chi^ \nu)
=( \chi^ \sigma \nabla^ \mu \chi^ \nu)( \chi_ \mu \nabla_ \sigma \chi_ \nu)
=( \chi^ \sigma \nabla^ \mu \chi^ \nu)(- \chi_ \sigma \nabla_ \nu \chi_ \mu- \chi_ \nu \nabla_ \mu \chi_ \sigma)
=( \chi^ \sigma \nabla^ \mu \chi^ \nu)( \chi_ \sigma \nabla_ \mu \chi_ \nu)+(- \chi^ \sigma \nabla^ \nu \chi^ \mu)( \chi_ \nu \nabla_ \sigma \chi_ \mu)
= \chi^ \sigma \chi_ \sigma \nabla^ \mu \chi^ \nu \nabla_ \mu \chi_ \nu-( \chi^ \sigma \nabla_ \sigma \chi^ \mu)( \chi_ \nu \nabla^ \nu \chi^ \mu)
= \chi^ \sigma \chi_ \sigma \nabla^ \mu \chi^ \nu \nabla_ \mu \chi_ \nu- \kappa^2 \chi^ \mu \chi_ \mu
thus,

\kappa^2=1/2( \nabla_ \mu \chi_ \nu)( \nabla^ \mu \chi^ \nu) \hspace{100 mm}\square


Sorry for being lazy, but I really hate it of typing the codes to this site again. I wondering why it is not compatible with latex. I hope you could view the picture I uploaded, if you do not want to copy the code into your editor and compile it.

PS: I am a freshman as for Latex, thus if I put any code not proper, please point them out and give me some advice, if possible.

END QUOTE

Hello. Does this look a little closer to what you were trying to post? I basically just replaced the $'s with [/tex] and and added spaces before the symbols so they show properly. You can use &quot;quote&quot; on this post to see what I did.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
943
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K