Wald Problem 6.3: Reissner-Nordstrom Metric

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter WannabeNewton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Metric
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This discussion revolves around Problem 6.3 from Wald, focusing on deriving the Reissner-Nordstrom metric from source-free Maxwell's equations in a static spherically symmetric spacetime. Participants explore the implications of their calculations and the interpretation of constants in the context of electromagnetic fields and general relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines the derivation of the electromagnetic field tensor and its components in a specific coordinate system, leading to the conclusion that the solution for A is of the form A = C/r².
  • Another participant questions how to interpret the constant C, suggesting it relates to the total charge q in the context of the Einstein tensor and the stress-energy tensor (SET) for a point charge.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the rigor of their arguments, particularly regarding the limiting case argument to recover the classical Coulomb field as r approaches infinity.
  • There is a suggestion to consider logarithmic functions, although the relevance of this suggestion is not fully explored.
  • Participants discuss the implications of their findings and the need to fix the constant in front of the derived expression for A.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the form of the solution derived for A, but there is uncertainty regarding the interpretation of the constant C and its relation to physical quantities like charge. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the rigor of the arguments presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants express concerns about the non-rigorous nature of certain arguments, particularly in relation to the assumptions made about the asymptotic behavior of the solution and its physical interpretation.

WannabeNewton
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
5,850
Reaction score
553
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!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K