Unraveling the Mysteries of the Riemann Curvature Tensor

QED_or_box?
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



(My first post on this forum)

Background: I am teaching myself General Relativity using Dirac's (very thin) 'General Theory of Relativity' (Princeton, 1996). Chapter 11 introduces the (Riemann) curvature tensor (page 20 in my edition).

Problem: Dirac lists several symmetry properties of the curvature tensor from its definition in terms of the Christoffel Symbols and then claims without proof that from these symmetry properties, the curvature tensor has 20 independent components (reduced from 256).

a) Any hints on how he got that?

b) How do you work out the number of independent tensor components in general, given whatever symmetry constraints on the indices?

Homework Equations



Definition: R^{\beta}_{\nu\rho\sigma} = \Gamma^{\beta}_{\nu\sigma,\rho} - \Gamma^{\beta}_{\nu\rho,\sigma} + \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\nu\sigma}\Gamma^{\beta}_{\alpha\rho} - \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\nu\rho}\Gamma^{\beta}_{\alpha\sigma}

Dirac's symmetry constraints:

(1) R^{\beta}_{\nu\rho\sigma} = -R^{\beta}_{\nu\sigma\rho}

(2) R^{\beta}_{\nu\rho\sigma} + R^{\beta}_{\rho\sigma\nu} + R^{\beta}_{\sigma\nu\rho} = 0

(3) R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} = -R_{\nu\mu\rho\sigma}

(4) R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} = R_{\rho\sigma\mu\nu} = R_{\sigma\rho\nu\mu}

The Attempt at a Solution



I tried to work out the general case first. A tensor of 2 indices in N dimensions has N^{2} components. If it is a symmetric tensor then it has \frac{1}{2}N(N+1) independent components and hence symmetry constrains \frac{1}{2}N(N-1) components. Similarly, if the tensor is antisymmetric then that constrains \frac{1}{2}N(N+1) components.

N = 4 here. Assuming what I said above is correct equations (1) and (3) will constrain 20 components in total.

Now I'm stuck because:

a) Should I treat equation (4) as three conditions?

b) If I do treat equation (4) as three conditions, am I correct in saying that R_{\rho\sigma\mu\nu} = R_{\sigma\rho\nu\mu} constrains 12 components because there are two pairs of symmetric indices?

c) How do I interpret things like R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} = R_{\rho\sigma\mu\nu} in the above context?

d) How should I interpret the cyclic sum of equation (2) in terms of what I said above?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org


1st: I don’t think all the symmetry constrains equations are independent. As: lower the upper indices in (1) using the metric tensor. Now apply 2nd equality of (4) to RHS and one gets (3). Hence I think you should only use (1), (2) & (4) or the set (2), (3) & (4) to derive the # of independent tensor elements.
2nd: I think (2) should be interpreted like a supermarket deal, ie “buy 2 get one free”. ie pick any two of the tensors, and then the third tensor is independent (or “free”) if you know (or have “bought”) the other two.

Hope this helps,
Mischa
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top