Why Gravitational Waves are Decomposed in Spin Weighted Spherical Harmonics

Skhaaan
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi All,

Can someone tell me why gravitational waves are always decomposed in spin weighted spherical harmonics with spin weight -2 ?

I'm assuming you can hand wave the answer with something to do with the 'graviton' being a spin 2 particle but this isn't very satisfying to me.

Are there any other decompositions? Why not just regular spherical harmonics?

On a more basic level, why is it advantageous to decompose anything into spherical harmonics?
Is it just another analysis you can perform to get more insight into the physics such as what 'poles' there are.
i.e. mono, di, quad, etc...
Or is it also supposed to simplify the algebra too?

Many thanks in advance!

Sebastian
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It would help if you gave a reference to what you are referring to. At least in classical treatments of gravitational waves, most sources I've read simply do not do what you describe at all. For example:

http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2011-1/

makes no mention of the decomposition you refer to.

I'm suspecting there is a particular reference you are reading that raised questions. In such case, you should always provide such a reference so people can look at what you are talking about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi, thanks for the reply and advice.

Sorry I didn't supply a reference, I didn't realize
that this decomposition was not more common.
It is very common in Gravitational Wave analysis.

This link gives a definition of the spin weighted spherical harmonics
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0511111

I worked with this decomposition a lot but never understood the reason
for performing this decomposition. So then I wanted to ask
what is the reason for performing spherical harmonic decomposition
in general.

Maybe I will post again and ask the more general question on spherical harmonic decomposition

Thanks
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top