Using parallel propagator to derive Riemann tensor in Sean Carroll's

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the Riemann tensor using the parallel propagator as presented in Sean Carroll's text. Participants explore the application of the parallel propagator to compute the components of the Riemann tensor, particularly in the context of Exercise 7 from Chapter 3. The focus is on the mathematical intricacies involved in the process, including the handling of indices and the implications of curvature.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the correctness of multiplying four parallel propagators, each involving terms from the series expression, to derive final vector components based on initial components at point A.
  • Another participant describes a method of parallel-transporting a vector W around a parallelogram formed by vectors U and V, noting that different paths yield different results in curved space, which relates to the curvature tensor.
  • It is suggested that the result of parallel-transporting W depends on the path taken, with the difference being proportional to the curvature tensor.
  • A later reply mentions that comparing the result of parallel-transport in one direction to the other can yield additional quadratic terms in U and V, complicating the proof of the cancellation of these effects.
  • Participants discuss the need to restore indices in the expression for the Riemann tensor after deriving the difference in transported vectors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying viewpoints on the methodology for deriving the Riemann tensor using parallel transport, with no consensus reached on the correctness of specific steps or the implications of the results.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential complications, such as the need to account for changing connection coefficients and the challenge of closing the parallelogram accurately, which may affect the derivation.

victorvmotti
Messages
152
Reaction score
5
Hello all,

In Carroll's there is a brief mention of how to get an idea about the curvature tensor using two infinitesimal vectors. Exercise 7 in Chapter 3 asks to compute the components of Riemann tensor by using the series expression for the parallel propagator. Can anyone please provide a sketch of the solution? When I use the parallel propagator on a vector to move from A to B and then from B to C the the vectors that make the infinitesimal loop do appear in the integrals but the indices of Christoffel symbol doesn't match with the equation 3.109. Is it correct to multiply four parallel propagators, each involving at least two terms in the series expression, to find the final vector components based on the initial components at A?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
victorvmotti said:
Hello all,

In Carroll's there is a brief mention of how to get an idea about the curvature tensor using two infinitesimal vectors. Exercise 7 in Chapter 3 asks to compute the components of Riemann tensor by using the series expression for the parallel propagator. Can anyone please provide a sketch of the solution? When I use the parallel propagator on a vector to move from A to B and then from B to C the the vectors that make the infinitesimal loop do appear in the integrals but the indices of Christoffel symbol doesn't match with the equation 3.109. Is it correct to multiply four parallel propagators, each involving at least two terms in the series expression, to find the final vector components based on the initial components at A?

parallelogram.jpg

Imagine a parallelogram, with one side being the vector [itex]U[/itex], and the other side being the vector [itex]V[/itex]. Now, what we're going to do is to parallel-transport a third vector [itex]W[/itex] from one corner of the parallelogram to the opposite corner. There are two different paths to get to the opposite corner:

  1. Go around counter-clockwise:
    • Start at point [itex]\mathcal{P}_0[/itex].
    • Go along side [itex]U[/itex] to get to point [itex]\mathcal{P}_1[/itex].
    • Then go along side [itex]V_1[/itex] to get to point [itex]\mathcal{P}_2[/itex]. Note, [itex]V_1[/itex] is not the same as vector [itex]V[/itex], but is instead the result of parallel-transport of [itex]V[/itex] along [itex]U[/itex].
  2. Go around clockwise:
    • Start at point [itex]\mathcal{P}_0[/itex].
    • Go along side [itex]V[/itex] to get to point [itex]\mathcal{P}_3[/itex].
    • Then go along side [itex]U_3[/itex] to get to point [itex]\mathcal{P}_4[/itex]. Note, [itex]U_3[/itex] is not the same as vector [itex]U[/itex], but is instead the result of parallel-transport of [itex]U[/itex] along [itex]V[/itex].

Note: [itex]\mathcal{P}_4[/itex] and [itex]\mathcal{P}_2[/itex] are not precisely the same point, but they are close enough for the calculations that we're going to do.

If space if flat then the result of parallel-transporting [itex]W[/itex] will be the same, no matter which path you took. If space is curved, then the two paths will produce different results, and the difference will be proportional to the curvature tensor.

So how do we parallel-transport vector [itex]W[/itex]? Well, pick a coordinate system, and let [itex]W^\mu[/itex] be the components of [itex]W[/itex] in this coordinate system.

In terms of components, the result of transporting a vector [itex]A[/itex] along a vector [itex]B[/itex] produces a new vector [itex]A'[/itex] whose components are related to those of [itex]A[/itex] through:

[itex]A'^\mu = -\Gamma^\mu_{\nu \lambda} B^\nu A^\lambda[/itex]

where [itex]\Gamma[/itex] is the connection coefficients. Because it's such a pain to write all those superscripts and subscripts, I'm just going to write the symbols, and hope that I can later figure out what the superscripts and subscripts are supposed to be. So I'll write:

[itex]A' = -\Gamma B A[/itex]

So at point [itex]\mathcal{P}_0[/itex], we have vectors
[itex]U, V, W[/itex] and we have a connection coefficient [itex]\Gamma[/itex]

At point [itex]\mathcal{P}_1[/itex], we have vectors
[itex]U_1, V_1, W_1[/itex] and we have a connection coefficient [itex]\Gamma_1[/itex]
It's a different [itex]\Gamma[/itex], because the connection coefficients in general change from point to point. We compute these new values (approximately) by:

[itex]U_1 = U - \Gamma U U[/itex]
[itex]V_1 = V - \Gamma U V[/itex]
[itex]W_1 = W - \Gamma U W[/itex]
[itex]\Gamma_1 = \Gamma + (\partial \Gamma) U[/itex]

where in the last term, I'm again dropping superscripts and subscripts; it really should be [itex](\Gamma_1)^\mu_{\nu \tau}[/itex] [itex]= \Gamma^\mu_{\nu \tau} + (\partial_\lambda \Gamma^\mu_{\nu \tau}) U^\lambda[/itex]

At point [itex]\mathcal{P}_2[/itex], we have:

[itex]W_2 = W_1 - \Gamma_1 V_1 W_1 = W - \Gamma U W - \Gamma V W - (\partial \Gamma) U V W +\Gamma (\Gamma U V) W + \Gamma V (\Gamma U W) + \ldots[/itex]
(where [itex]\ldots[/itex] means higher-order terms involving three or more factors of [itex]U[/itex] or [itex]V[/itex])

Going around the other way (I'm going to skip to the answer), the result of parallel-transport of [itex]W[/itex] to [itex]\mathcal{P}_3[/itex] and then to [itex]\mathcal{P}_4[/itex] gives:

[itex]W_4 = W - \Gamma V W - \Gamma U W - (\partial \Gamma) V U W +\Gamma (\Gamma V U) W + \Gamma U (\Gamma V W) + \ldots[/itex]

So the difference between going counterclockwise and going clockwise is:

[itex]\delta W = W_2 - W_4 = - (\partial \Gamma) U V W +\Gamma (\Gamma U V) W + \Gamma V (\Gamma U W) + (\partial \Gamma) V U W - \Gamma (\Gamma V U) W - \Gamma U (\Gamma V W) + \ldots[/itex]

Since [itex]\Gamma V U = \Gamma U V[/itex], this simplifies a little to:

[itex]\delta W = - (\partial \Gamma) U V W + (\partial \Gamma) V U W<br /> + \Gamma V (\Gamma U W) + - \Gamma U (\Gamma V W) + \ldots[/itex]

Now, the trick is to restore the stupid superscripts and subscripts. Then the Riemann tensor [itex]R[/itex] is defined via:

[itex]\delta W = R U V W + \ldots[/itex]

with the appropriately restored indices.
 
stevendaryl said:
parallelogram.jpg

I should point out that if, instead of comparing the result of parallel-transport in one direction to parallel-transport in the other direction, you can parallel transport [itex]W[/itex] completely around the loop and compare the transported vector with the initial vector. If you do that, you'll get some extra terms that are quadratic in [itex]U[/itex] and [itex]V[/itex]. Also, there's the problem that you don't end up precisely at the same place you started, so you have to throw in another line segment to "close the parallelogram". These two effects actually cancel exactly (if you ignore higher-order terms), but it's a little messy to prove that.
 
Very helpful indeed. Thanks a lot.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K