Why do these two terms cancel in the Riemann-Christoffel tensor?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Legion81
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Tensor
Legion81
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to work through getting the Riemann-Christoffel tensor using covariant differentiation and I don't see where two terms cancel. I have the correct result, plus these two terms:

d/dx^(sigma) *{alpha nu, tau}*A^(alpha)
and
d/dx^(nu) *{alpha sigma, tau}*A^(alpha)

Sorry, I couldn't figure out how to do this with LaTeX. The A^(alpha) is just an arbitrary contravariant vector, and the {a n, t} and {a sigma, t} are Christoffel symbols.

Somehow these two are supposed to be equal (in order to cancel). I know the Christoffel symbols are symmetric in the lower indices, but that doesn't help me much. Can anyone shed some light on why the two are the same?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Or more simply put:

{alpha nu, tau}*d/dx^sigma - {alpha sigma, tau}*d/dx^nu = 0

How can I show this is true? Is there some way of writing this with the nu and sigma switched in one of the terms?

Thanks.
 
I'm afraid you have to be a little more specific. I don't see why an expression like

<br /> \Gamma^{\tau}_{\alpha\nu} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\sigma}} - <br /> \Gamma^{\tau}_{\alpha\sigma} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^{\nu}}<br />

would disappear. On what does it act? Maybe you can rewrite the partial derivatives in terms of covariant ones?

And for future questions: learn how to use latex. You can look at the code I've written down. It's a matter of hours to get the basics, and eventually you will need it anyway if you study physics or math ;)
 
Thanks for the reply (and the latex sample!). It is acting on a vector A:

<br /> \Gamma^{\tau}_{\alpha\nu} \frac{\partial A^{\alpha}}{\partial x^{\sigma}} - <br /> \Gamma^{\tau}_{\alpha\sigma} \frac{\partial A^{\alpha}}{\partial x^{\nu}}<br />

I've tried rewriting the partials as

<br /> A^{\alpha}_{\sigma} - \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\sigma} A^{\mu}<br />

and

<br /> A^{\alpha}_{\nu} - \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} A^{\mu}<br />

which would give me

<br /> \Gamma^{\tau}_{\alpha\nu} A^{\alpha}_{\sigma} - \Gamma^{\tau}_{\alpha\nu} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\sigma} A^{\mu} - \Gamma^{\tau}_{\alpha\sigma} A^{\alpha}_{\nu} + \Gamma^{\tau}_{\alpha\sigma} \Gamma^{\alpha}_{\mu\nu} A^{\mu}<br />

but it didn't get me anywhere. Any ideas?
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top