How can we prove the covariant derivation of the Riemann-Christoffel tensor?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jinroh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Identity
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving the covariant derivation of the Riemann-Christoffel tensor, specifically transitioning from the definition of the covariant derivative of a first-order tensor to the expression for the Riemann-Christoffel tensor. The key formula presented is: R_{i,jk}^l = ∂_j Γ_{ik}^l - ∂_k Γ_{ij}^l + Γ_{ik}^r Γ_{jr}^l - Γ_{ij}^r Γ_{kr}^l. The proof aims to establish that ∇_t R_{i,rs}^l = ∂_{rt} Γ_{si}^l - ∂_{st} Γ_{ri}^l, which is essential for defining the Einstein tensor.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of covariant derivatives in differential geometry
  • Familiarity with the Riemann-Christoffel tensor and its properties
  • Knowledge of Christoffel symbols and their role in tensor calculus
  • Basic concepts of manifolds and geometric interpretations in general relativity
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Einstein tensor from the Riemann-Christoffel tensor
  • Explore the geometric interpretation of the Laplacian on a manifold
  • Learn about the properties and applications of Christoffel symbols in general relativity
  • Investigate advanced topics in differential geometry related to curvature and geodesics
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students specializing in differential geometry, general relativity, and tensor calculus will benefit from this discussion.

Jinroh
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Given the definition of the covariant derivation of one order tensor :

\nabla _j v_k = \partial _j v_k - v_i \Gamma _{kj}^i

How can we proove the covariant derivation of the Riemann-Christoffel tensor given by :


R_{i{\text{ }},{\text{ }}jk}^l = \partial _j \Gamma _{ik}^l - \partial _k \Gamma _{ij}^l + \Gamma _{ik}^r \Gamma _{jr}^l - \Gamma _{ij}^r \Gamma _{kr}^l

is :

\nabla _t R_{i,rs}^l = \partial _{rt} \Gamma _{si}^l - \partial _{st} \Gamma _{ri}^l

This could not be difficult but I'm afraid to make an error with the indices.

This proof will help me to define the Einstein tensor.

Thanks for your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hum...

perhaps by moving this post in Special and General Relativity Room I will have an answer... ?
 
Jinroh said:
perhaps by moving this post in Special and General Relativity Room I will have an answer... ?

Maybe. I was looking at your problem last night, and I think I should be able to have something for you by this evening or tomorrow morning (party tonight, so no guarantees for today...)

However, while we're on the topic of soliciting responses, do you have any ideas about my question of a geometric interpretation of the Laplacian on a manifold? How's that for a shameless plug!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K