Understanding curvature tensor equation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the equation related to the transformation of tensor components, particularly in the context of the metric tensor and its relation to curvature tensors. Participants explore the mathematical representation of tensors, the implications of the metric tensor, and how these concepts apply to specific geometrical contexts, such as the surface of a sphere.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the equation presented has incorrect free indices, suggesting a need for clarity in notation.
  • Others propose that the equation relates to the transformation between covariant and contravariant components of a tensor, emphasizing its definition rather than its connection to curvature tensors.
  • A participant explains that the metric tensor provides a linear map between cotangent and tangent spaces, noting the distinction between degenerate and non-degenerate cases.
  • There is a discussion about the fixed nature of the components of the metric tensor, with some arguing that they do not depend on the specific components of a one-form.
  • Participants present a numerical example involving the metric of a two-sphere, detailing the transformation of a one-form into a vector using the metric tensor.
  • Concerns are raised about the notation used for indices, with some participants pointing out potential ambiguities and the importance of proper index handling.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the relevance of the transformation to the Riemann curvature tensor.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the relationship between the discussed equation and the curvature tensor. There are multiple competing views regarding the interpretation of the metric tensor and the implications of its components.

Contextual Notes

Discussions include limitations related to notation clarity, assumptions about the metric tensor's properties, and the implications of degeneracy in the context of the transformation between tensor components.

avery
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
hi,


I am trying to understand the meaning of the following equation in the simplest way possible
thanks in advance
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your equation is incorrect because the free indices don't match. Anyway, the simplest way to think about it would probably be a matrix multiplication of the 1x4 row vector A with the 4x4 matrix g. I'm also not really sure what this has to do with the curvature tensor.
 
Last edited:
As elfmotat suggests, what you want is
A^\sigma= g^{\sigma\mu}A_{\mu}

And, as he says, this is not directly related to the curvature tensor, it is simply the relation between the covariant and contravariant components of a tensor. In fact, it can be considered the definition of "contravariant components".
 
Or it can be understood as: metric tensor gives us a particular linear map between cotangent and tangent spaces, the spaces of of forms and the spaces of tangent vectors. In this particular case the contravariant metric can be even degenerate, like it is the case for Newton-Galilei space-times. If it is nondegenerate, then we have an isomorphism, if it is degenerate, we gave only morphism (general linear map).
 
thank you Elfmotat and HallsofIvy and arkajad

from what I understand its a matrix that transform a 1xn row vector
if Aμ is a (1x2 row vector) in the two dimensional surface of the sphere.
how can I understand the following equation with a simple numerical example

(gμμ) has a fixed valued? or it depends on Aμ

thanks in advance
 
Last edited:
One possible meaning can be: suppose the metric is diagonal. Then you look at the general formula:

A^\mu= g^{\mu\sigma}A_{\sigma}

where you have to sum over sigma. But only one term is nonzero, where sigma=mu. This is your equation.

Or, if you prefer: if the matrix is diagonal, then each component of the transformed (row) vector is proportional to the corresponding component of the column vector.
 
Last edited:
avery said:
https://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pUFOQhbheBgnPFLHsIS8DGoDPSxjHliKQuwCM-4X-HjvFLZRt9iw0ajJNPQkun1dVZ8U0gyH4p2hVyfxNA-YpPg/x.png?psid=1

Don't overload your indices. An index shouldn't appear more than twice in any term. Valid ways of writing your original equation would be:

A^\mu =g^{\sigma \mu}A_{\sigma }
A^\rho =g^{\mu \rho}A_{\mu}
A^\nu =g^{\lambda \nu }A_{\lambda }

etc.

avery said:
if Aμ is a (1x2 row vector) in the two dimensional surface of the sphere.
how can I understand the following equation with a simple numerical example

Taking t=constant and r=constant, the metric of a two-sphere is:

ds^2=r^2(d\theta ^2+sin^2\theta d\phi^2)

Written as a matrix:

g_{\mu \sigma}=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> r^2 &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp; r^2sin^2\theta <br /> \end{bmatrix}

where μ,σ range from θ to ϕ.

The inverse metric is therefore:

g^{\mu \sigma}=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> r^{-2} &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp; r^{-2}csc^2\theta <br /> \end{bmatrix}


If the components of the one-form A are A_\mu=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> a &amp; b<br /> \end{bmatrix}, then the components of the vector A are given by:

A^{\sigma}=g^{\mu \sigma}A_{\mu}=<br /> \begin{bmatrix}<br /> a &amp; b<br /> \end{bmatrix}<br /> \begin{bmatrix}<br /> r^{-2} &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp; r^{-2}csc^2\theta <br /> \end{bmatrix} =<br /> \begin{bmatrix}<br /> ar^{-2} &amp; br^{-2}csc^2\theta<br /> \end{bmatrix}

avery said:
(gμμ) has a fixed valued? or it depends on Aμ

The components of the (inverse) metric tensor are independent of the components of any particular one-form.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
elfmotat said:
A free index shouldn't appear more than twice in any term.

Well, here it appears. That means it is no longer free! It is arbitrary, but fixed.
 
avery said:
(gμμ) has a fixed valued? or it depends on Aμ

thanks in advance

(gμμ) has a fixed value. It is mu-th diagonal element of the metric. It should not depend Aμ, thou mu in (gμμ) and in Aμ should be the same.
 
  • #10
avery said:
thank you Elfmotat and HallsofIvy and arkajad

from what I understand its a matrix that transform a 1xn row vector
if Aμ is a (1x2 row vector) in the two dimensional surface of the sphere.
how can I understand the following equation with a simple numerical example
https://public.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pUFOQhbheBgnPFLHsIS8DGoDPSxjHliKQuwCM-4X-HjvFLZRt9iw0ajJNPQkun1dVZ8U0gyH4p2hVyfxNA-YpPg/x.png?psid=1
(gμμ) has a fixed valued? or it depends on Aμ

thanks in advance
I feel compelled to point out that a tensor can be represented by a matrix, in a given coordinate system, in the same sense that a velocity vector can be represented as, say &lt;v_x, v_y, v_z&gt;. But neither the tensor nor the vector is that representation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
arkajad said:
Well, here it appears. That means it is no longer free! It is arbitrary, but fixed.

It doesn't matter. First of all, gμμ doesn't really make sense. It's also not clear which index is being summed over (first or second) which would matter if the metric wasn't symmetric.
 
  • #12
thank you all for your help
 
  • #13
HallsofIvy said:
But neither the tensor nor the vector is that representation.

Except for the case of \mathbf{R}^n, where we often define vector as an n-tuple of numbers (x_1,...,x_n).
 
  • #14
elfmotat said:
Taking t=constant and r=constant, the metric of a two-sphere is:

ds^2=r^2(d\theta ^2+sin^2\theta d\phi^2)

Written as a matrix:

g_{\mu \sigma}=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> r^2 &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp; r^2sin^2\theta <br /> \end{bmatrix}

where μ,σ range from θ to ϕ.

The inverse metric is therefore:

g^{\mu \sigma}=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> r^{-2} &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp; r^{-2}csc^2\theta <br /> \end{bmatrix}


If the components of the one-form A are A_\mu=\begin{bmatrix}<br /> a &amp; b<br /> \end{bmatrix}, then the components of the vector A are given by:

A^{\sigma}=g^{\mu \sigma}A_{\mu}=<br /> \begin{bmatrix}<br /> a &amp; b<br /> \end{bmatrix}<br /> \begin{bmatrix}<br /> r^{-2} &amp; 0\\ <br /> 0 &amp; r^{-2}csc^2\theta <br /> \end{bmatrix} =<br /> \begin{bmatrix}<br /> ar^{-2} &amp; br^{-2}csc^2\theta<br /> \end{bmatrix}
hi elfmotat
is this transformation needed in "Riemann curvature tensor" ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
924
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K