Contraction of the Riemann Tensor with the Weak Field Metric

JMedley
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I have started with the space-time metric in a weak gravitational field (with the assumption of low velocity):
ds^2=-(1+2\phi)dt^2+(1-2\phi)(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2)
Where \phi<<1 is the gravitational potential. Using the standard form for the Christoffel symbols have found:
\Gamma^0_{00}=\phi_{,0}, \Gamma^0_{0i}=\Gamma^0_{i0}=\phi_{,i}, \Gamma^0_{ij}=\delta_{ij}\phi_{,0}
\Gamma^i_{00}=\phi^{,i}, \Gamma^i_{0j}=\Gamma^i_{j0}=-\delta^i_j\phi_{,0}, \Gamma^i_{jk}=\delta_{jk}\phi^{,i}-\delta^i_j\phi_{,k}-\delta^i_k\phi_{,j}
Then combining derivatives of these to first order (ignoring products of Christoffel symbols) using:
R^\alpha_{\beta\mu\nu}=\Gamma^\alpha_{\beta\nu,\mu} - \Gamma^\alpha_{\beta\mu,\nu}
to get:
R^0_{i0j}=\delta_{ij}\phi_{00}-\phi_{ij}, R^i_{0j0}=\phi^{,i}_{,j}+\delta^i_j\phi_{,00}
R^i_{0jk}=-\delta^i_k\phi_{,0j}+\delta^i_j\phi_{0k}, R^i_{kj0}=\delta^i_j\phi_{0k} - \delta_{jk}\phi^{,i}_{,0}
R^i_{kjl}=-\delta^i_l\phi_{,jk}+\delta_{kl}\phi^{,i}_{,j}+ {\delta^i_j}\phi_{,kl}-\delta_{jk}\phi^{,i}_{,l}
(Where greek indices run from 0 to 3 and latin indices run from 1 to 3, and commas denote coordinate partial differentiation). And here is where I run into problems.. When I try to use R_{\alpha\beta}=R^\sigma_{\alpha\sigma\beta} to contract these down to find the Ricci tensor. For example I get:
R_{00}=R^\sigma_{0\sigma 0}=\phi^{,i}_{,i}+\phi_{,00}
Which doesn't agree with the text I'm using which gives R_{00}=\nabla^2\phi +3\phi_{,00}
Can anybody spot where I'm going wrong? Many Thanks for any help.
Jack M
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Ri0j0,ijijϕ,00

When you contract this, don't forget that δii = 3.
 
Ok so that takes care of the factor 3, then how does \phi^{,i}_{,i} correspond to \nabla^2\phi? Cheers for the help
 
Last edited:
Because they are the same. I would assume that $\phi$ is a scalar (from what you showed) - then partial derivative is the same as the full derivative. And what you just wrote are exactly the same - just different way of expressing it. Hope it helps
 
JMedley said:
Ok so that takes care of the factor 3, then how does \phi^{,i}_{,i} correspond to \nabla^2\phi? Cheers for the help

You have \partial ^{i}\partial _{i}\phi = \delta ^{ij}\partial _{j}\partial _{i}\phi and this, in background flat 3 - space with a Cartesian chart is \delta ^{xx}\partial ^{2}_{x}\phi + \delta ^{yy}\partial ^{2}_{y}\phi + \delta ^{zz}\partial^{2} _{z}\phi = \partial ^{2}_{x}\phi + \partial ^{2}_{y}\phi + \partial^{2} _{z}\phi = \triangledown ^{2}\phi
 
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
Thread 'Relativity of simultaneity in actuality'
I’m attaching two figures from the book, Basic concepts in relativity and QT, by Resnick and Halliday. They are describing the relativity of simultaneity from a theoretical pov, which I understand. Basically, the lightning strikes at AA’ and BB’ can be deemed simultaneous either in frame S, in which case they will not be simultaneous in frame S’, and vice versa. Only in one of the frames are the two events simultaneous, but not in both, and this claim of simultaneity can be done by either of...
Back
Top