paweld said:
I'm also looking for simple prove that conformal mapping doesn't change Weyl tensor
(I would love to find geometrical argument, but probably it's imposibble).
Thanks for help
There is no other alternative to the proof of this theorem. Actually it is all clear that a conformal transformation of metric tensor, i.e. [tex]\bar{g}_{ab}=e^{2\lambda}{g}_{ab},[/tex] with [tex]\lambda[/tex] being a scalar function of coordinates [tex]x^{a}[/tex] using
a direct calculation, including the expansion of Christoffel symbols and Riemann tensor in the new coordinates, leaves the Weyl tensor unchanged and this all doesn't exceed two ordinary textbook pages.
See e.g. Riemannian Geometry, E. P. Eisenhart, Princeton Press 1949, pp 89-90.
I found the formula for the number of independent components of
Weyl tensor in n-dimensional manifold:
There's already a formula to calculate the number of the independent components of the WT and it is
[tex]\frac{1}{12}n(n+1)(n+2)(n-3)[/tex]
which gives 0 for n=3 and obviously works fine for n's greater than 2. I don't know how you manage to derive your formula but if it works for any given n, you should first consult an expert and then think of a suitable journal to publish it in (though I for one am sure it has nothing new to tell but as a tacit work can be good.)
This expression implies that in 3 dimension Weyl tensor has 0 independent
components, so it's 0. Does it implies that any three-dimensional manifold
is conformally flat (maybe the formula I've written above is incorrect for n<4)?
Nupe. Any three dimensional pseudo-Riemannian* manifold is conformally flat iff the third order http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotton_tensor" vanishes.
*
(this must be pseudo-Riemannian Weyl tensor is a measure of the pseudo-Riemannian manifolds)
AB