Understanding GR Perturbations: J. Albert's Guide

  • Thread starter Thread starter rawsilk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gr
rawsilk
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I have recently completed two courses in general relativity and am well versed in things like the ray chaudhuri equation, tetrads, etc. I had to give a 2hr talk on gravitational radiation to my class and so understand GWs at some relatively respectable level. What I am inquiring about is the formulation of the perturbation metric in a precise sense. What literature normally says is, $$g_{ab} = \eta_{ab} + h_{ab},$$ where $$h_{ab}\ll \eta_{ab}$$ for non-zero elements. What I want to know is whether there is a more precise definition of "small". More to the point is there a more fundamental point of view for using perturbation theory and when it is valid in differential geometry or math in general. Feel free to use big words ;)

J. Albert
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually this is not entirely true. We usually express the perturbation from a known scenario (metric in GR, fundamental states in QM) in terms of a parameter which contains the <smallness>. So the h ab is small but the radiation field can be <normal>.

g_{\mu_\nu} = \eta_{\mu\nu} + \lambda h_{\mu\nu}.

so that |\lambda| &lt;&lt;1 and the components of h have the same order of magnitude as the components of h.
 
I have seen that form too in quantum perturbation theory and Gr lit. Thanks for your input, I'm just curious if there are any other constraints on the perturbation. Of course it must live in the same space as the background metric and can only be specified after choosing a coord map. But certainly there must be other constraints on when it may be used or else there wouldn't exist things like second order perturbation theories. It arises from a Taylor approximation to be sure.
 
What the smallness of the metric perturbation means physically is somewhat application-dependent. If you're doing a post-Newtonian expansion, that's an expansion in orders of v, the typical velocities in your gravitational system. If you're dealing with gravitational radiation far away from any source, you can do a post-Minkowskian expansion, which means you expand in G, the gravitational constant. When calculating actual waveforms from e.g. inspiraling compact binaries, what is done is taking these two expansions, further expanding them into multipoles and then matching the two (the post-Newtonian expansion only works near the source and the post-Minkowskian one only far away, but there is some overlap where you can match them.)
 
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
Thread 'Relativity of simultaneity in actuality'
I’m attaching two figures from the book, Basic concepts in relativity and QT, by Resnick and Halliday. They are describing the relativity of simultaneity from a theoretical pov, which I understand. Basically, the lightning strikes at AA’ and BB’ can be deemed simultaneous either in frame S, in which case they will not be simultaneous in frame S’, and vice versa. Only in one of the frames are the two events simultaneous, but not in both, and this claim of simultaneity can be done by either of...

Similar threads

Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top