Wave equation in curved spacetime

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the wave equation in curved spacetime, specifically focusing on the mathematical formulation and expressions involved in the derivation. Participants explore different forms of the wave equation and related concepts in the context of general relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant requests a derivation of the wave equation in curved spacetime, presenting a specific form of the equation.
  • Another participant suggests that writing the d'Alembertian in covariant form may suffice, although they express uncertainty about transforming it into the requested form.
  • A question is posed regarding expressions for the covariant divergence of a vector, hinting at a relationship with the coordinate four-divergence.
  • One participant speculates that the covariant divergence of a vector might equal the vector itself, but this is challenged by another participant who points out the inconsistency of equating a scalar quantity with a vector.
  • A later reply provides a more formal expression relating the covariant divergence of a vector to the partial derivative, emphasizing the importance of the Levi-Civita connection in this context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion contains multiple competing views and remains unresolved, particularly regarding the derivation of the wave equation and the expressions for covariant divergence.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the transformations between different forms of the wave equation and the covariant divergence, indicating a reliance on specific mathematical properties and definitions that may not be fully established in the discussion.

Pacopag
Messages
193
Reaction score
4
Does anyone know how to derive the wave equation in curved spacetime?
[tex](-g)^{-1\over 2}\partial_\mu((-g)^{1\over 2}g^{\mu \nu}\partial_\nu \phi) = 0[/tex]

A reference, or an outline of the derivation would be very helpful. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It seems that just writing the d'Alembertian in covariant form
[tex]\Delta \phi = g^{\mu \nu}\phi_{;\mu \nu}=0[/tex] does the trick.
This form is giving me the results I want, but I still don't know how to put it in the form written in my original post.
 
Given a vector [itex]V^\mu[/itex], can you think of any cute expressions for [itex]\nabla_\mu V^\mu[/itex]? (Hint: you can write the covariant four-divergence of a vector in terms of the coordinate four-divergence much like the expression in the first post.)
 
shoehorn said:
Given a vector [itex]V^\mu[/itex], can you think of any cute expressions for [itex]\nabla_\mu V^\mu[/itex]?

Just a guess, but : [itex]\nabla_\mu V^\mu=V^\mu[/itex]?

[addendeum: or is it [itex]\nabla_\mu V^\mu=\frac{\delta V^\mu}{\delta t}[/itex]?]

Regards,

Bill
 
Last edited:
Antenna Guy said:
Just a guess, but : [itex]\nabla_\mu V^\mu=V^\mu[/itex]?

Nope. That can't work because the left-hand side is a scalar quantity, while the right-hand side is a vector.

Antenna Guy said:
[addendeum: or is it [itex]\nabla_\mu V^\mu=\frac{\delta V^\mu}{\delta t}[/itex]?]

Regards,

Bill

Not this either. Perhaps it will be simpler if I just state the result and leave the proof as an exercise. Given an orientable Riemannian manifold [itex](M,g)[/itex], one has a preferred idea of a connection in the form of the Levi-Civita connection. This allows one to define, for example, a straightforward notion of covariant differentiation on tensor fields over [itex]M[/itex]. The relationship between the covariant divergence of a vector and the partial derivative of the vector is given by

[tex]\nabla_\mu V^\mu = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\textrm{det}g_{\rho\sigma}}}\partial_\mu(\sqrt{\textrm{det}g_{\rho\sigma}}V^\mu)[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
7K