Wald Problem 6.3: Reissner-Nordstrom Metric

  • Thread starter Thread starter WannabeNewton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Metric
WannabeNewton
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
5,848
Reaction score
552
Hi guys. This question is related to Problem 6.3 in Wald which involves deriving the Reissner-Nordstrom (RN) metric. We start with the source free Maxwell's equations ##\nabla^{a}F_{ab} = 0,\nabla_{[a}F_{bc]} = 0## in a static spherically symmetric space-time which, in the coordinates adapted to the hypersurface orthogonal time-like killing vector field and the spherical symmetry, takes the form ##ds^2 = -f(r)dt^{2} + h(r)dr^2 + r^2d\theta^{2} + r^2\sin^{2}\theta d\phi^{2}##. The solution to Maxwell's equations, in these coordinates, takes the form ##F_{ab} = 2A(r)(e_{0})_{[a}(e_{1})_{b]} + 2B(r)(e_{2})_{[a}(e_{3})_{b]}## which one can justify on physical grounds; in addition we are only concerned with the case ##B(r) = 0##. The only relevant orthonormal basis fields from the tetrad are given by ##(e_{0})_{a} = f^{1/2}(dt)_{a}, (e_{1})_{a} = h^{1/2}(dr)_{a}##.

Hence, in the tetrad basis, the solution takes the form ##F_{\mu\nu} = A(r)f^{1/2}h^{1/2}(\delta^{t}_{\mu}\delta^{r}_{\nu} - \delta^{t}_{\nu}\delta^{r}_{\mu})##. It's pretty clear from this that the only non-vanishing components will be ##F_{rt} = -F_{tr}## hence we can just look at ##F_{rt} =-A(r)f^{1/2}h^{1/2} ##. Using Maxwell's equations, ##\nabla^{\mu}F_{\mu t} = g^{\mu t}\nabla_{\mu}F_{tt} + g^{\mu r}\nabla_{\mu}F_{rt} + g^{\mu \theta}\nabla_{\mu}F_{\theta t} + g^{\mu \phi}\nabla_{\mu}F_{\phi t} = g^{tt}\nabla_{t}F_{tt} + g^{rr}\nabla_{r}F_{rt} + g^{\theta \theta}\nabla_{\theta}F_{\theta t} + g^{\phi \phi}\nabla_{\phi}F_{\phi t}##. Now, ##\nabla_{t}F_{tt} = -\Gamma ^{\alpha}_{tt}F_{\alpha t} -\Gamma ^{\alpha}_{tt}F_{t\alpha} = 0##, ##g^{\theta \theta}\nabla_{\theta}F_{\theta t} = -\frac{1}{r^{2}}\Gamma^{r}_{\theta \theta}F_{r t} = \frac{1}{r}g^{rr}F_{rt} = g^{\phi \phi}\nabla_{\phi}F_{\phi t}##, and ##\nabla_{r}F_{rt} = \partial _{r}F_{rt} - \Gamma ^{r}_{rr}F_{r t} - \Gamma ^{t}_{tr}F_{rt} = \partial _{r}F_{rt} - \frac{1}{2}F_{rt}h^{-1}\partial _{r}h - \frac{1}{2}F_{rt}f^{-1}\partial _{r}f##.

Putting all this together gives us ##\nabla^{\mu}F_{\mu t} = -\partial _{r}(Af^{1/2}h^{1/2}) + \frac{1}{2}Af^{1/2}h^{-1/2}\partial _{r}h + \frac{1}{2}Af^{-1/2}h^{1/2}\partial _{r}f -\frac{2}{r}Af^{1/2}h^{1/2} = 0## which, after performing the derivative, yields ## -\partial _{r}A -\frac{2}{r}A = 0##. Since ##A = A(r)## the solution to this is just ##A = \frac{C}{r^{2}}## for some undetermined constant ##C##. Now Wald says the solution is supposed to be ##A = -\frac{q}{r^{2}}## where ##q## "may" be interpreted as the total charge. How exactly would I get this from my solution for ##A##? I figured since we are dealing with a static spherically symmetric field from a source of compact support in an asymptotically flat space-time, if I go far away from the source i.e. ##r\rightarrow \infty## I should recover the classical coloumb field ##A(r) = -\frac{q}{r^{2}}## where ##q## is the total charge as measured far away from the source (so measured at infinity). I am not sure about this argument however. Could someone comment on all this? Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have you tried logarithms?
 
I'm not sure what the question is so I'll assume it's about interpreting the constant C that comes from the integration. The clincher is that the SET got from the Einstein tensor is that of a point charge with q = C.
 
Mentz114 said:
The clincher is that the SET got from the Einstein tensor is that of a point charge with q = C.
How are we supposed to know this before solving Einstein's equations? That's why I used my limiting case argument above; I just wasn't content with the non-rigorous nature of the argument.
 
I figured since we are dealing with a static spherically symmetric field from a source of compact support in an asymptotically flat space-time, if I go far away from the source i.e. r→∞ I should recover the classical coloumb field A(r)=−qr2 where q is the total charge as measured far away from the source (so measured at infinity). I am not sure about this argument however. Could someone comment on all this?
Sure, that's valid. You've found the static spherically symmetric solution of Maxwell's source-free equations, and all that remains is to fix the constant in front, as you've done.
 
Bill_K said:
Sure, that's valid. You've found the static spherically symmetric solution of Maxwell's source-free equations, and all that remains is to fix the constant in front, as you've done.
Cool, thanks Bill!
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top