Varying an Action in Zee's GR Book

  • Thread starter Thread starter dm4b
  • Start date Start date
dm4b
Messages
363
Reaction score
4
Hi,

I'm reading Zee's new GR book right now and ran across an action I am having trouble "varying". It's the first term in Eq (9), page 244. Looks like this:

S=-m\int d\tau \sqrt{-\eta _{\mu \nu }\frac{dx^{\mu }}{d\tau }\frac{dx^{\nu }}{d\tau }}

I'm familiar with the trick that gets rid of the square root as outlined by guys like Carrol, as well as Zee. But, I want to tackle this thing head on the hard way w/o the trick ;-)

But, I'm getting stuck reproducing what Zee has in Eq (10)

\delta \left ( -m\int d\tau \sqrt{-\eta _{\mu \nu }\frac{dx^{\mu }}{d\tau }\frac{dx^{\nu }}{d\tau }} \: \right )=m\int d\tau \; \eta _{\mu \nu }\frac{dx^{\mu }}{d\tau }\frac{d\delta x^{\nu }}{d\tau }

I get the same thing, but with a 1/L included, because the root won't go away.

Anybody know the trick? Or does Zee have a typo? Can't be me, right? ;-)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I figured out what is going on here, but it only raised another question.

On page 128 he varies the exact same action, but with the Minkowski metric replaced with the full-blown GR metric dependent upon X.

Sure enough, he has the 1/L factor here and the exact same result I get when I start to vary this action too.

But he then goes on to say we should exploit the freedom in choosing the parametrization, by choosing length parametrization, thereby making L=1.

I don't get why that makes L = 1, in either problem. Although, I guess it explains where it went to in the equations I cited in the OP.

Anybody know why L=1 here?
 
I don't know, but maybe this helps...

http://home.comcast.net/~peter.m.brown/gr/geodesic_equation.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I actually ended up figuring this out, the answer was in the beginning of Chapt 2. Page 125.
 
Write
d \lambda = \left( d x_{ \mu } d x^{ \mu } \right)^{ \frac{ 1 }{ 2 } }
then
<br /> \delta ( d \lambda ) = \frac{ d x_{ \mu } }{ d \lambda } \ \delta ( d x^{ \mu } ) = \frac{ d x_{ \mu } }{ d \lambda } \ \frac{ d }{ d \lambda } \left( \delta x^{ \mu } \right) \ d \lambda<br />
Now, (because of reparameterization invariance of the action) you can set \lambda = \tau in the integrand on the RHS.

Sam
 
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top