A Computing Null Geodesics in Schwarzschild Geometry

stevendaryl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
Messages
8,943
Reaction score
2,954
Computing timelike geodesics in the Schwarzschild geometry is pretty straightforward using conserved quantities. You can treat the problem as a variational problem with an effective Lagrangian of

##\mathcal{L} = \frac{1}{2} (Q \frac{dt}{d\tau}^2 - \frac{1}{Q} \frac{dr}{d\tau}^2 - r^2 (\frac{d\theta}{d\tau}^2 + sin^2(\theta) \frac{d\phi}{d\tau}^2))##

where ##Q = 1 - \frac{2GM}{r}##

This "lagrangian" leads to the following conserved quantities:

  1. ##K = Q \frac{dt}{d\tau}##
  2. ##L = r^2 \frac{d\phi}{dt}## (You can choose ##\theta## and ##\phi## so that ##\theta = \frac{\pi}{2}##, so all the radial motion is due to changing of ##\phi##
  3. ##\mathcal{L}## itself, which is always equal to 1/2.

In terms of these conserved quantities, the geodesics are completely determined by ##\frac{dr}{d\tau}##, which satisfies the one-D equation:

##\frac{1}{Q} (K^2 - \frac{dr}{dt}^2 ) - \frac{L^2}{r^2} = 1##

My question is: How are things changed if we are computing a null geodesic, instead of a timelike geodesic? The biggest change is that you can't use proper time as the parameter (since it's identically zero for null geodesics, by definition). If you replace ##\tau## by a different parameter, ##\lambda##, I'm assuming that it's still true that there is something like angular momentum that is conserved, but I'm not sure about the first equation, which is about the conservation of the ##t## component of momentum.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The 1 becomes a zero, I think.

Carroll does it by observing that there is a Killing field parallel to ##\partial_t## and another parallel to ##\partial_\phi##, hence writing expressions for ##dt/d\lambda## and ##d\phi/d\lambda## in terms of conserved quantities along a geodesic, restricting himself to the equatorial plane, noting that ##g_{\mu\nu}\frac{dx^\mu}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\nu}{d\lambda}## is either 0, -1, or +1, and solving for ##dr/d\lambda##. I think that's your last equation, give or take the value on the RHS.
 
Indeed, the 1 becoming a zero is the only change. The conserved ”energy” and ”angular momentum” quantities take the same form as they are the inner product between an affinely parametrized geodesic’s tangent and a Killing field.
 
Orodruin said:
Indeed, the 1 becoming a zero is the only change. The conserved ”energy” and ”angular momentum” quantities take the same form as they are the inner product between an affinely parametrized geodesic’s tangent and a Killing field.
So what is the parameter ##\lambda## for a null geodesic?
 
stevendaryl said:
So what is the parameter ##\lambda## for a null geodesic?
It does not have direct physical meaning the same way proper time does as you can reparametrize the geodesic without changing that the tangent vector us null.

If you want you could choose it such that the tangent vector is the 4-frequency of a light signal following that geodesic. However, there can be several such signals following the same geodesic.
 
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...
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...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
289
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
976
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
42
Views
5K
Back
Top