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
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
Back
Top