I Understanding Papapetrou's Spinning Test Particles in GR

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the motivation behind the definitions in Papapetrou's paper on spinning test particles in general relativity, specifically the distinction between worldline coordinates (X^α) and arbitrary spacetime coordinates (x^α). Participants highlight the relationship between the energy-momentum tensor and gravitational fields, drawing parallels to electrodynamics through a Cartesian multipole expansion. The conversation also addresses the implications of vanishing higher moments in the context of particle structure, differentiating between single-pole and pole-dipole particles based on the behavior of integrals involving the energy-momentum tensor. Clarifications on these concepts are sought to deepen understanding of the framework presented in the paper. Overall, the discussion underscores the complexities of modeling spinning test particles in general relativity.
ergospherical
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,100
Reaction score
1,387
I'd appreciate some clarification of this passage in the paper Spinning test particles in general relativity by Papapetrou,

1630061195931.png


The definition is easy enough to understand, but what's the motivation? ##X^{\alpha}## are the coordinates of points on the worldline whilst ##x^{\alpha}## are presumably arbitrary spacetime coordinates (of points near the worldline).

n.b. ##\mathfrak{T}^{\mu \nu} = \sqrt{-g} T^{\mu \nu}## and\begin{align*}
\nabla_{\nu} T^{\mu \nu} = \partial_{\nu} T^{\mu \nu} + \Gamma^{\nu}_{\sigma \nu} T^{\mu \sigma} + \Gamma^{\mu}_{\sigma \nu} T^{\sigma \nu} &= 0 \\ \\

\implies \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{-g}} \partial_{\nu} \left( \sqrt{-g} T^{\mu \nu} \right) + \Gamma^{\mu}_{\sigma \nu} T^{\sigma \nu} &= 0\\

\partial_{\nu} \left( \sqrt{-g} T^{\mu \nu} \right) + \Gamma^{\mu}_{\sigma \nu} \sqrt{-g} T^{\sigma \nu} &= 0 \\

\partial_{\nu} \mathfrak{T}^{\mu \nu} + \Gamma^{\mu}_{\sigma \nu}\mathfrak{T}^{\sigma \nu} &= 0
\end{align*}
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It looks like a Cartesian multipole expansion similar as in electrodynamics, where you have the electric current density ##J^{\mu}## as a source, while here it's of course the energy-momentum tensor as a source of the gravitational field.

BTW: The scans via JSTOR are much better in quality:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/98893
 
  • Like
Likes ergospherical
ergospherical said:
I'd appreciate some clarification of this passage in the paper Spinning test particles in general relativity by Papapetrou,

View attachment 288176

The definition is easy enough to understand, but what's the motivation? ##X^{\alpha}## are the coordinates of points on the worldline whilst ##x^{\alpha}## are presumably arbitrary spacetime coordinates (of points near the worldline).
If beside \int d^3x \sqrt{-g} T^{\mu\nu} \neq 0, you have a vanishing higher moments, \int d^3x \sqrt{-g} \delta x^{\rho}T^{\mu\nu} = 0 for all \rho, \mu, \nu, then the object has no structure, i.e., a single-pole particle. And if the first moment does not vanish, i.e. for some values of the indices, \int d^3x \sqrt{-g} \delta x^{\rho}T^{\mu\nu} \neq 0, the object has a structure, i.e., pole-dipole particle. See equations 6,7 and 8 in
https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...-the-stress-energy-tensor.547502/post-3616065
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and ergospherical
The Poynting vector is a definition, that is supposed to represent the energy flow at each point. Unfortunately, the only observable effect caused by the Poynting vector is through the energy variation in a volume subject to an energy flux through its surface, that is, the Poynting theorem. As a curl could be added to the Poynting vector without changing the Poynting theorem, it can not be decided by EM only that this should be the actual flow of energy at each point. Feynman, commenting...