Why Are My Geodesic Calculations Dependent on an Unknown Function?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gleeson
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    General relativity
Click For Summary
Geodesic calculations are influenced by an unknown function f due to the non-affine parametrization of the geodesic. The equations derived show that the covariant derivative of epsilon and pressure p are proportional to this function, indicating a dependency on f. The author expresses concern about the necessity of introducing an unknown function to obtain results. Clarification on the derivation process is requested, suggesting potential confusion in the calculations. The discussion emphasizes the need for further assistance to resolve the issue with the unknown function.
Gleeson
Messages
30
Reaction score
4
Homework Statement
(a) Let ##x^a(\lambda)## describe a timelike geodesic parametrised by a non-affine parameter ##\lambda##, and let ##t^a = \frac{dx^a}{d \lambda}## be the geodesic's tangent vector. Calculate how ##\epsilon := -t_at^a## changes as a function of ##\lambda##.

(b) Let ##\xi^a## be a killing vector. Calculate how ##p := \xi_at^a## changes as a function of lambda on that same geodesic.


(c) Let ##v^a## be such that in a spacetime with metric ##g_{ab}##, ##Lie_vg_{ab} = 2cg_{ab}##, where c is a constant. (Such a vector is called homothetic.) Let ##x^a(\tau)## describe a timelike geodesic parametrised by proper time ##\tau##, and let ##u^a = \frac{d x^a}{d \tau}## be the four-velocity. Calculate how ##q = v_a u^a## changes with ##\tau##.
Relevant Equations
As above
For (a) and (b), since the geodesic is not affinely parametrised, we have that ##t^a\nabla_a t^b = f(\lambda) t^b##, for some function f.

As a results, for (a) I get that ##t^a \nabla_a \epsilon = 2 f(\lambda) \epsilon##. And for (b) I get that ##t^a \nabla_a p = f(\lambda) p##. (I can write out why I got those answers if needed.)

My suspicion is that I am doing something wrong, since I think it is strange to need to give the answer in terms of some unknown function that I introduced.

I'd appreciate some assistance please.
 
So is there some elegant way to do this or am I just supposed to follow my nose and sub the Taylor expansions for terms in the two boost matrices under the assumption ##v,w\ll 1##, then do three ugly matrix multiplications and get some horrifying kludge for ##R## and show that the product of ##R## and its transpose is the identity matrix with det(R)=1? Without loss of generality I made ##\mathbf{v}## point along the x-axis and since ##\mathbf{v}\cdot\mathbf{w} = 0## I set ##w_1 = 0## to...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K