Transformation of the metric tensor from polar to cartesian coords

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the transformation of the metric tensor from Cartesian coordinates to polar coordinates and back. The user successfully derived the polar metric as [1 0; 0 r^2] but encountered issues when attempting to revert to the original Cartesian metric [1 0; 0 1]. The confusion arose from the misapplication of the transformation equations and partial derivatives. Ultimately, the correct approach confirmed that the Cartesian metric can indeed be recovered using the relationship between r and the Cartesian coordinates.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of metric tensors in differential geometry
  • Familiarity with coordinate transformations, specifically between polar and Cartesian coordinates
  • Knowledge of partial derivatives and their application in tensor calculus
  • Basic proficiency in LaTeX for formatting mathematical expressions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of metric tensors in different coordinate systems
  • Learn about the implications of coordinate transformations in general relativity
  • Explore the use of LaTeX for typesetting mathematical documents
  • Investigate common pitfalls in tensor calculus and coordinate transformations
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for students and professionals in physics and engineering, particularly those studying general relativity or working with differential geometry and tensor calculus.

mokrunka
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I'm working on a problem that requires me to take the cartesian metric in 2D [1 0;0 1] and convert (using the transformation equations b/w polar and cartesian coords) it to the polar metric. I have done this without issue using the partial derivatives of the transformation equations and have come up with the metric in polar coordinates [1 0;0 r^2].

Just for grins, I decided to use the partial derivatives and convert back to cartesian using the polar metric, expecting to come up with the exact same thing I started with, namely [1 0;0 1]. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. Shouldn't this work? Can anyone help me in where my thought process is wrong here?

Note, this is not a HW question; I am a degreed engineer teaching myself relativity from a workbook.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mokrunka said:
Shouldn't this work? Can anyone help me in where my thought process is wrong here?

It should work, yes, but you will need to post more details before we can give any feedback on where you might have gone wrong.
 
For example, in the attached word file, I've given the equation to convert the metric from primed (r, theta) to unprimed (x, y) coordinates. I have also listed the partial derivatives I've used.

In this file, you can see gxx will not (unless my math is failing me) give 1, which would be the gxx component of the cartesian metric in 2D.
 

Attachments

mokrunka said:
In this file, you can see gxx will not (unless my math is failing me) give 1

Yes, it does. You have:

$$
g_{xx} = \left( \frac{\partial r}{\partial x} \right)^2 g_{rr} + \left( \frac{\partial \theta}{\partial x} \right)^2 g_{\theta \theta}
$$

We have (rewriting your equations slightly to make the math easier to see) ##\partial r / \partial x = x / r## and ##\partial \theta / \partial x = - y / r^2##, and the metric coefficients are ##g_{rr} = 1## and ##g_{\theta \theta} = r^2## (the latter may be where you went wrong in your math). Plugging everything in gives

$$
g_{xx} = \frac{x^2}{r^2} + \frac{y^2}{r^4} r^2 = \frac{x^2 + y^2}{r^2} = 1
$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Ahhh, I failed to see that I could use r and (x^2+y^2)^.5 interchangeably. Thank you very much for this clarification!

As a side note, how are you able to type the equations directly into the post?

Edit: nevermind, I've just discovered Latex.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
946
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K