I An alternative derivation of the equation of motion in General Relativity

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Bishal Banjara
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derivation
Bishal Banjara
Messages
93
Reaction score
3
TL;DR Summary
I need a standard reference/s for an alternative form of the equation of motion in general relativity that I saw elsewhere.
I am extremely engaged in studying the different ways of derivation of the equation of motion in General Relativity. On the way, I found a very general form of the equation of motion that no standard books have done (to my knowledge).

Although the process is implemented in deriving the equation of motion for charged particles in standard books, it is done by none for the case of mass. Although it is not an authentic reference we can see the interaction term ##L_I## involved (added) to generalize the Lagrangian than that for the free particle somewhere in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_Lagrangian_mechanics under the heading "Lagrangian formulation in general relativity."

This finally leads an extra term to the equation of motion ##f_{\alpha}## representing the additional source of force beside the gravitational force of the mass in reference by varying the lagrangians with the position of the particle. This is done without quoting any reference. I want to know its authenticity. Will anybody provide me with any authentic standard reference to this type of derivation? Or, is this the wrong way to do the job?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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...
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...
Back
Top