A Wald's Abstract Index Notation: Explaining T^{acde}_b

madsmh
Messages
32
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
Confusion by the abstract index notation introduced in Wald's General Relativity.
In the second paragraph on page 25 of Wald's General Relativity he rewrites T^{acde}_b as g_{bf}g^{dh} g^{ej}T^{afc}_{hj} . Can anyone explain this? I am confused by the explantion given in the book. Especially puzzling is that the inverse of g seems to be applied twice, which I can't make sese of.

Mads

IMG_0338.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The inverse metric is applied twice to raise the last two indices. The metric is used once to lower the second index.

Also note that the index horizontal placement is important.
 
This isn't particularly to do with abstract index notation - it applies in all tensor index notations. You do need to pay attention to which index is being contracted over and the order of indices is important. But all that's happening here is that the metric is being used to lower two of the indices and the inverse metric is being used to raise one. That's just what the metric does. Just as the metric in ##g_{ab}v^b## lowers the ##b## to give you the one form ##v_a##, the metric applied to any tensor lowers the repeated index - so ##g_{ad}T^{bcdefg}## lowers the ##d## to give you ##T^{bc}{}_a{}^{efg}##. Note that the repeated index ##d## was replaced with the other index on the metric because we summed over the dummy index.

In the cited section Wald is just randomly lowering a couple of indices and raising one to show you can do it to multiple indices at once.

Quote my post to see a way to do index notation with correct positioning in ##\LaTeX##.
 
  • Like
Likes madsmh and cianfa72
Ibix said:
In the cited section Wald is just randomly lowering a couple of indices and raising one to show you can do it to multiple indices at once.
Lowering one and raising two.
 
  • Like
Likes cianfa72 and Ibix
Orodruin said:
Lowering one and raising two.
🤪
 
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...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top