What do I do once the Field Equations have been assembled

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Frogeyedpeas
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field field equations
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the process of working with the Einstein Field Equations in the context of general relativity, particularly focusing on the relationship between metrics, stress-energy tensors, and curvature tensors. Participants explore how to derive solutions from these components and the implications of their interrelations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their work with the Einstein Field Equations, specifically mentioning the definition of a Minkowski metric and a stress-energy-momentum tensor, and inquires about the next steps in assembling these into a PDE.
  • Another participant asserts that one cannot simultaneously define a metric and a stress-energy tensor, suggesting that one must either derive the stress-energy from a given metric or vice versa.
  • A participant questions how to derive curvature and metric from a specified stress-energy tensor, expressing a lack of understanding of the interrelations between the tensors involved.
  • One participant outlines two primary methods for deriving solutions to the field equations: specifying symmetries and solving for vacuum solutions, and the ADM initial value problem, which involves expressing physics on an initial spacelike surface.
  • Another participant introduces a mathematical approach where one can arbitrarily specify a stress-energy tensor across the manifold and solve for the metric, noting that this method is undesirable as it does not predict motion of matter and energy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between metrics and stress-energy tensors, with some asserting that they must be defined in a specific order while others explore the implications of arbitrary definitions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to derive solutions from the field equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of the relationships between metrics, stress-energy tensors, and curvature tensors, noting that the mathematical interrelations are not fully understood by all contributors. There are also references to specific methods and approaches that may not be universally accepted or practiced.

Frogeyedpeas
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
I was working on a problem the other day involving the Tensor versions of the Einstein Field Equations where I defined a metric (minkowski) and then defined a Stress-Energy-Momentum Tensor and solved for the corresponding Ricci curvature Tensor, now that I have all of this solved what do I do with it? How does it assemble into a PDE?

If you want me to I can post the exact "hypothetical equation" but it appears to be a lot of work so I'll restrain from posting it unless its necessary.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can't define a metric and the stress-energy at the same time. You can define a metric and figure out what the stress-energy would need to be to produce it, or you can define a particular stress-energy and figure out what its corresponding metric is.

The field equations themselves are PDE's - the Ricci curvature tensor is related to the metric by two partial derivatives.
 
So if that was the case then, how are the equations solved... Suppose I supply it a stress-energy tensor. Then how would I be able to figure out the curvature and the metric from just the stress energy? And also I am right now only having access to the tensor form of the equations (I do not know how the tensors themselves are inter-related as you hinted to)
 
There are two main ways solutions of the field equations are derived. Well, there is a third, nonphysical way elfmotat mentioned: start with an arbitrary metric, compute the Einstein tensor = stress energy tensor from it, see if it is plausible (most likely not). The more physical approaches are:

Decide on a class of symmetries you seek in esp. a vacuum solution, specify the metric form that expresses these symmetries, then solve Einstein tensor = 0 for this general form. This is how you get the classic vacuum solutions. [Edit: you can also specify boundary conditions, including overall topology].

The other physical approach is the ADM initial value problem. This is much more complex. You express physics on an initial spacelike 3-surface, meeting constraints, and numerically evolve the field equations from there. This method is discussed, for example, in:

http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2000-5/
and
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2012-2/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I should note that, mathematically, there is an additional approach. Arbitrarily specify a stress energy tensor on the whole manifold meeting chosen energy conditions. Note that GR is then not predicting anything about motion of matter and energy because you have specified all of that in your arbitrary tensor T. Then, you can solve for the metric from the G = T, (G the Einstein tensor, constants ignored). Generally, there should, in principle, be solutions because you have 10 PDEs for 10 metric components. Given the metric, you can then examine the behavior of test particles.

Obviously, the fact that you specify all behavior a priori makes this approach undesirable, and I've never read a book or paper that actually went through such an exercise. I just mention it for mathematical completeness.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 186 ·
7
Replies
186
Views
13K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K