Transpose Inverse Property (Dual Vectors)

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the transformation properties of dual vectors under Lorentz transformations in the context of general relativity. Participants explore the mathematical relationships and proofs related to dual vectors and their transformation, as well as the implications of these transformations on covectors.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the transformation of dual vectors under Lorentz transformations is provable or taken as given, suggesting a relationship to the expression \(\Lambda = \eta L \eta^{-1}\).
  • Another participant provides a detailed explanation of the relationship between linear operators and matrices, emphasizing the need for understanding dual spaces and bases to grasp the transformation properties of vectors and dual vectors.
  • A third participant introduces a method for transforming covectors using the metric, proposing a transformation formula that involves converting covectors to vectors and back, leading to a specific expression for the transformation of covectors under Lorentz transformations.
  • Some participants express frustration with technical issues related to rendering LaTeX, which may affect their ability to engage with the mathematical content of the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the proof of the transformation properties of dual vectors, and multiple approaches and interpretations are presented. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the clarity and completeness of the transformation relationships.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential misunderstandings of the relationships between different bases and the transformations involved, as well as the dependence on the definitions of dual spaces and metrics. Some mathematical steps remain unresolved or are presented in a way that may not be fully accessible to all participants.

PhyAmateur
Messages
103
Reaction score
2
Hello,

While studying dual vectors in general relativity, it was written as we all know that dual vectors (under Lorentz Transformation) transform as follows:

[itex]\tilde{u}[/itex][itex]_{a}[/itex] = [itex]\Lambda[/itex][itex]^{b}_{a}[/itex]μ[itex]_{b}[/itex]

where [itex]\Lambda[/itex][itex]^{b}_{a}[/itex]= η[itex]_{ac}[/itex]L[itex]^{c}[/itex][itex]_{d}[/itex]η[itex]^{db}[/itex]

I was wondering if one can prove the latter or we take it as is.

This to a certain extend can be related to [itex]\Lambda[/itex] = ηLη[itex]^{-1}[/itex], so is it that they took this relation and placed indices in a way if they are summed over we get [itex]\Lambda[/itex][itex]^{b}_{a}[/itex]? Or is there any clearer procedure?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I know I have proved this several times in this forum, but now I can't find it. Oh well, here we go again... (I should probably turn this into a FAQ post).

I will use the notation ##M^\mu{}_\nu## for the component on row ##\mu##, column ##\nu## of an arbitrary 4×4 matrix M. To understand this post, you will need to understand the relationship between linear operators and matrices explained in https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/matrix-representations-of-linear-transformations.694922/ . You also need to understand dual spaces and dual bases. In our notation, the definition of matrix multiplication is ##(AB)^\mu{}_\nu =A^\mu{}_\rho B^\rho{}_\nu##. The vectors in this post are elements of a 4-dimensional vector space over ##\mathbb R##. I will denote the vector space by V, and its dual space by V*. V is either ##\mathbb R^4## or the tangent space of spacetime at some event, depending on whether you prefer to define Minkowski spacetime as a vector space or as a manifold. The statements I make that involve an index that isn't summed over are "for all" statements, even if I don't say so explicitly. For example, when I say that ##x'^\mu=\Lambda^\mu{}_\nu x^\nu##, I mean that this equality holds for all ##\mu\in\{0,1,2,3\}##.

Let ##\Lambda## be a Lorentz transformation. Let ##(e_\mu)_{\mu=0}^3## and ##(e'_\mu)_{\mu=0}^3## be ordered bases. Let v be an arbitrary vector. Let x be the matrix of components of v with respect to ##(e_\mu)_{\mu=0}^3##. Let x' be the matrix of components of v with respect to ##(e'_\mu)_{\mu=0}^3##. We have ##v=x^\mu e_\mu =x'^\mu e'_\mu##.

Suppose that these ordered bases are such that the relationship between x' and x is given by ##x'=\Lambda x##, where ##\Lambda## is a Lorentz transformation. The component form of this is ##x'^\mu=\Lambda^\mu{}_\nu x^\nu##. We will determine the relationship between the two ordered bases. Let T be the unique linear operator such that ##e'_\mu=Te_\mu##. We will express the right-hand side as a linear combination of the ##e_\mu##, and then use the formula for the components of a linear operator with respect to an ordered basis.
$$e'_\mu=Te_\mu=(Te_\mu)^\nu e_\nu =T^\nu{}_\mu e_\nu.$$ This implies that
$$v=x^\mu e_\mu =x'^\mu e'_\mu =\Lambda^\mu{}_\rho x^\rho T^\sigma{}_\mu e_\sigma.$$ Since a basis is linearly independent, this implies that
$$x^\rho =\Lambda^\mu{}_\rho x^\rho T^\sigma{}_\mu = T^\sigma{}_\mu \Lambda^\mu{}_\rho x^\rho =(T\Lambda)^\sigma{}_\rho x^\rho.$$ Since v (and therefore x) is arbitrary, this implies that ##(T\Lambda)^\sigma{}_\rho=\delta^\sigma_\rho##, i.e. that ##T\Lambda=I##. This implies that ##T=\Lambda^{-1}##. So we have ##e'_\mu=(\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\mu e_\nu =\Lambda_\mu{}^\nu e_\nu##. The notation ##\Lambda_\mu{}^\nu## is explained in this post.

The next step is to determine the relationship between the two dual ordered bases. This is very similar to the above. Let S be the unique linear operator such that ##e'^\mu=Se^\mu##. We have
$$e'^\mu=Se^\mu =(Se^\mu)_\nu e^\nu = S^\nu{}_\mu e^\nu =(S^T)^\mu{}_\nu e^\nu,$$ and
$$\delta^\mu_\nu =e^\mu(e_\nu)=e'^\mu(e'_\nu)=(S^T)^\mu{}_\rho e^\rho \big((\Lambda^{-1})^\sigma{}_\nu e_\sigma\big) =(S^T)^\mu{}_\rho(\Lambda^{-1})^\sigma{}_\nu \delta^\rho_\sigma =(S^T)^\mu{}_\rho(\Lambda^{-1})^\rho{}_\nu = (S^T\Lambda^{-1})^\mu{}_\nu.$$ This implies that ##S^T=\Lambda##. So we have ##e'^\mu =\Lambda^\mu{}_\nu e^\nu##.

Now let ##\Omega\in V^*## be arbitrary. Let ##\omega## be the matrix of components of ##\Omega## with respect to the ordered basis ##(e^\mu)_{\mu=0}^3##. Let ##\omega'## be the (4×1) matrix of components of ##\Omega## with respect to the ordered basis ##(e'^\mu)_{\mu=0}^3##. We will determine the relationship between ##\omega## and ##\omega'##. We have
$$\Omega=\omega_\mu e^\mu =\omega'_\mu e'^\mu =\omega'_\mu \Lambda^\mu{}_\nu e^\nu.$$ This implies that ##\omega_\nu=\Lambda^\mu{}_\nu \omega'_\mu##. This is the component form of ##\omega^T=(\omega')^T\Lambda##. This implies that ##(\omega')^T=\omega^T\Lambda^{-1}##. This implies that
$$\omega'=(\omega^T\Lambda^{-1})^T =(\Lambda^{-1})^T\omega.$$ The component form is
$$\omega'_\mu=((\Lambda^{-1})^T)^\mu{}_\nu \omega_\nu =(\Lambda^{-1})^\nu{}_\mu \omega_\nu =\Lambda_\mu{}^\nu \omega_\nu.$$
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
A sort-of interesting relation that I came up with by fooling around with indices:

To make the distinction between the primed and unprimed basis clear, let me use Latin characters for primed indices, and Greek characters for unprimed. Then the Lorentz transform taking unprimed vectors to primed vectors is:

[itex]\Lambda^a_\mu v^\mu = v'^a[/itex]

Now, suppose I want to know how a covector [itex]w_\mu[/itex] transforms under Lorentz transformations. What I can do is first convert it to a vector using the metric, then transform that vector, then transform back using the metric again:

[itex]g^{\mu \nu} w_\mu = w^\nu[/itex]
[itex]\Lambda^b_\nu g^{\mu \nu} w_\mu = \Lambda^b_\nu w^\nu = w'^b[/itex]
[itex]g_{ab} \Lambda^b_\nu g^{\mu \nu} w_\mu = g_{ab}w'^b = w'_a[/itex]

So the transform for covectors is

[itex](\Lambda^{-1})^\mu_a = g_{ab} \Lambda^b_\nu g^{\mu \nu}[/itex]
 
Wow. I don't know whether it's the new PF software, or my home computer, or my browser, or what, but it takes a LONG time for my computer to render LaTex. Roughly 30 seconds. (which is an eternity in cyberspace)
 
Greg is aware of that, but he's sleeping now.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 89 ·
3
Replies
89
Views
15K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K