Kerr Metric Confusion: Problem 1 on Page 138

Also, remember that the metric components g_{\mu\nu} are functions of r and \theta, not just constants. So it might be easier to substitute expressions for g_{\mu\nu} after you've solved for \dot{t} and \dot{\phi}.In summary, the conversation involved discussing problem 1 on page 138 of a paper on the Kerr metric. The Euler-Lagrange equations for t and \phi were derived, but when trying to solve them simultaneously, the equations seemed too complicated. However, simplifying the expressions for g_{\mu\nu} and fixing some factors of 2 revealed a simpler equation for \dot{t} and \dot{\
  • #1
latentcorpse
1,444
0
Hi.

I'm trying problem 1 on p138 of this
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/9707/9707012v1.pdf

Now when I try and get the Euler Lagrange equation for [itex]\phi[/itex] I get
(the Kerr metric in BL coordinates can be found at the bottom of p77)

[itex]\frac{\partial L}{\partial \phi} = \frac{d}{d \tau} \left( \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{\tau}} \right)[/itex]

[itex]0= \frac{d}{d \tau} \left( 2 \frac{(r^2+a^2)^2- \Delta a^2 \sin^2{\theta}}{\Sigma} \sin^2{\theta} \frac{d \phi}{d \tau} - \frac{2a \sin^2{\theta} ( r^2 + a^2 - \Delta ) }{\Sigma} \frac{dt}{d \tau} \right)[/itex]

But the question says we are in the equatorial plane and so when I impose [itex]\theta=\frac{\pi}{2}[/itex] all the sine terms cancel and I'm left with [itex]0=\frac{d}{d \tau} (0)[/itex] which is useless - what am I doing wrong here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
In what way do the sine terms cancel?
 
  • #3
sorry i meant they vanish (not cancel) and that leads to the equation 0=0 which is useless...
 
  • #4
They don't vanish either, [tex]\sin(\pi/2)=1[/tex].
 
  • #5
Ooops!
Sorry!

But anyway, I still find the EL equations for t give

[itex]\frac{2 \Delta - 2a^2}{\Sigma} \frac{dt}{d \tau} + \frac{2ar^2 + 2 a^3 -2a \Delta}{\Sigma} \frac{d \phi}{d \tau} = E[/itex]

and for [itex]\phi[/itex] they give

[itex]\frac{2(r^2+a^2)^2-\Delta a^2}{\Sigma} \frac{d \phit}{d \tau} - \frac{2a(r^2+a^2-\Delta)}{\Sigma} \frac{dt}{d \tau} = h[/itex]

Now by analogy with what we do in the Schwarzschild case (where we rearrange to get an expression for [itex]\frac{dt}{d \tau}[/itex] in terms of E and an expression for [itex]\frac{d \phi}{d \tau}[/itex] in terms of h), we want to try and find [itex]\frac{dt}{d \tau}[/itex] and [itex]\frac{d \phi}{d \tau}[/itex].
Is that correct? How would I go about this? I can't seem to solve these equations simultaneously?
 
  • #6
You have 2 equations in 2 unknowns, so it's easy to solve these equations. The algebra is quite a bit simpler if you don't substitute expressions for the metric components [tex]g_{\mu\nu}[/tex].
 
  • #7
fzero said:
You have 2 equations in 2 unknowns, so it's easy to solve these equations. The algebra is quite a bit simpler if you don't substitute expressions for the metric components [tex]g_{\mu\nu}[/tex].

I seem to be getting overcomplicated though:

[itex]\mathcal{L}=-g_{\mu \nu} \frac{dx^\mu}{d \tau} \frac{d x^\nu}{d \tau}=-g_{tt} \dot{t}^2 - g_{t \phi} \dot{t} \dot{\phi} - g_{\phi \phi} \dot{\phi}^2 - g_{rr} \dot{r}^2[/itex] where we used [itex]\dot{\theta}=0[/itex]

E-L for t gives [itex]2g_{tt} \dot{t} + g_{t \phi} \dot{\phi}=E[/itex] A

and for [itex]\phi[/itex] the E-L give [itex]g_{t \phi} \dot{t} + 2 g_{\phi \phi} \dot{\phi} = h[/itex] B

Now consider [itex]2g_{\phi \phi} A - g_{t \phi} B[/itex] this gives [itex]\dot{t}=\frac{2 g_{\phi \phi} E - g_{t \phi} h}{4 g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} - g_{t \phi}^2}[/itex]

and consider [itex]g_{t \phi} A -2 g_{tt} B[/itex] this gives [itex]\dot{\phi} = \frac{g_{t \phi} E - g_{tt} h}{g_{t \phi}^2 -4g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt}}[/itex]

Then to get the radial equation we use the fact that

[itex]g_{\mu \nu} \frac{d x^\mu}{d \tau} \frac{dx^\nu}{d \tau}=-\sigma[/itex]
[itex]\Rightarrow g_{tt} \dot{t}^2 + g_{t \phi} \dot{t} \dot{\phi} + g_{\phi \phi} \dot{\phi}^2 + g_{rr} \dot{r}^2 + \sigma=0[/itex]

Substituting gives

[itex] g_{tt} \left( \frac{2g_{\phi \phi} E - g_{t \phi} h}{4 g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} - g_{t \phi}^2} \right)^2 + g_{t \phi} \left( \frac{g_{\phi \phi} E - g_{t \phi} h}{4g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} - g_{t \phi}^2} \right) \left( \frac{ g_{t \phi} E - 2 g_{tt} h}{g_{t \phi}^2 - 4 g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt}} \right) + \left( \frac{g_{t \phi} E - 2 g_{tt} h}{g_{t \phi}^2 - 4 g_{\phi \phi}g_{tt}} \right)^2 g_{\phi \phi} + g_{rr} \dot{r}^2 + \sigma=0[/itex]

[itex]g_{tt} \left( \frac{ 4g_{\phi \phi}^2 E^2 - 4 g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi} Eh + g_{t \phi}^2 h^2}{16 g_{tt}^2 g_{\phi \phi^2} - 8 g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi}^2 + g_{t \phi}^4} \right) + g_{t \phi} \left( \frac{2 g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi} E^2 - g_{t \phi}^2 Eh - 4 g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} Eh + 2 g_{tt} g_{t \phi} h^2}{ 16 g_{tt}^2 g_{\phi \phi}^2 - 8 g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi}^2 + g_{t \phi}^4} \right) + \left( \frac{g_{t \phi}^2 E^2 - 4 g_{tt} g_{t \phi} Eh + 4 g_{tt}^2 h^2}{16 g_{tt}^2 g_{\phi \phi}^2 - 8 g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi}^2 + g_{t \phi}^4} \right) g_{\phi \phi} + g_{rr} \dot{r}^2 + \sigma=0[/itex]

Then collect the [itex] E^2 , E h[/itex] and [itex]h^2[/itex] terms to get

[itex]\left( \frac{ ( 4g_{tt}g_{\phi \phi}^2 + 3 g_{t \phi}^2 g_{\phi \phi} ) E^2 - ( 8 g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi} + 4 g_{tt} g_{ \phi \phi} + g_{t \phi}^2) Eh + ( g_{t \phi}^2 + 2 g_{tt} g_{t \phi} + 4 g_{tt}^2 ) h^2}{16 g_{tt}^2 g_{\phi \phi}^2 - 8 g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi}^2 + g_{t \phi}^4} \right) + g_{rr} \dot{r}^2 + \sigma=0[/itex]

But it still seems far to complicated to even attempt substituting for the metric components?
 
  • #8
latentcorpse said:
I seem to be getting overcomplicated though:

[itex]\mathcal{L}=-g_{\mu \nu} \frac{dx^\mu}{d \tau} \frac{d x^\nu}{d \tau}=-g_{tt} \dot{t}^2 - g_{t \phi} \dot{t} \dot{\phi} - g_{\phi \phi} \dot{\phi}^2 - g_{rr} \dot{r}^2[/itex] where we used [itex]\dot{\theta}=0[/itex]

This should be

[tex]-g_{tt} \dot{t}^2 - 2g_{t \phi} \dot{t} \dot{\phi} - g_{\phi \phi} \dot{\phi}^2 - g_{rr} \dot{r}^2[/tex]

That factor of 2 leads to some cancellations later on.

Then collect the [itex] E^2 , E h[/itex] and [itex]h^2[/itex] terms to get

[itex]\left( \frac{ ( 4g_{tt}g_{\phi \phi}^2 + 3 g_{t \phi}^2 g_{\phi \phi} ) E^2 - ( 8 g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi} + 4 g_{tt} g_{ \phi \phi} + g_{t \phi}^2) Eh + ( g_{t \phi}^2 + 2 g_{tt} g_{t \phi} + 4 g_{tt}^2 ) h^2}{16 g_{tt}^2 g_{\phi \phi}^2 - 8 g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi}^2 + g_{t \phi}^4} \right) + g_{rr} \dot{r}^2 + \sigma=0[/itex]

But it still seems far to complicated to even attempt substituting for the metric components?

If you fix the factors of 2, you'll find something like

[itex]\left( \frac{ g_{\phi \phi} E^2 + 2 g_{t \phi} Eh + g_{tt} h^2}{ g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} - g_{t \phi}^2 } \right) + g_{rr} \dot{r}^2 + \sigma=0.[/itex]
 
  • #9
fzero said:
This should be

[tex]-g_{tt} \dot{t}^2 - 2g_{t \phi} \dot{t} \dot{\phi} - g_{\phi \phi} \dot{\phi}^2 - g_{rr} \dot{r}^2[/tex]

That factor of 2 leads to some cancellations later on.



If you fix the factors of 2, you'll find something like

[itex]\left( \frac{ g_{\phi \phi} E^2 + 2 g_{t \phi} Eh + g_{tt} h^2}{ g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} - g_{t \phi}^2 } \right) + g_{rr} \dot{r}^2 + \sigma=0.[/itex]

Where's the factor of 2 from?
 
  • #10
latentcorpse said:
Where's the factor of 2 from?

When you sum over indices, both [tex]g_{t\phi}[/tex] and [tex]g_{\phi t}[/tex] terms contribute as usual.
 
  • #11
fzero said:
When you sum over indices, both [tex]g_{t\phi}[/tex] and [tex]g_{\phi t}[/tex] terms contribute as usual.

Here's what I've got so far:

E-L for t gives [itex]g_{tt} \dot{t} + g_{t \phi} \dot{\phi} =E[/itex]
and for [itex] \phi[/itex] we get [itex]g_{t \phi} \dot{t} + g_{\phi \phi} \dot{\phi} =h[/itex]

These can be solved to get

[itex]\dot{t} = \frac{g_{\phi \phi} E - g_{t \phi} h}{g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2} , \quad \dot{\phi} = \frac{g_{t \phi} E - g_{tt} h}{g_{t \phi}^2 - g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi}}[/itex]

Radial equation also needs a missing factor of 2 from [itex]g_{\mu \nu} \frac{dx^\mu}{d \tau} \frac{dx^\nu}{d \tau}=-\sigma[/itex]

and so we get

[itex]g_{tt} \dot{t}^2 + 2 g_{t \phi} \dot{t} \dot{\phi} + g_{\phi \phi} \dot{\phi}^2 + g_{rr} \dot{r}^2 + \sigma=0[/itex]

Subbing in and expanding out the squares we get

[itex]g_{tt} \left( \frac{g_{\phi \phi}^2 E^2 + g_{t \phi}^2 h^2 - 2 g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi} Eh}{g_{\phi \phi}^2 g_{tt}^2 + g_{t \phi}^4 - 2 g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} g_{t \phi}^2} \right) + 2g_{t \phi} \left( \frac{ g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi} E^2 + g_{t \phi} g_{tt} h^2 - ( g_{t \phi}^2 + g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi}) Eh}{g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} g_{t \phi}^2 - g_{t \phi}^4 -g_{tt}^2 g_{\phi \phi}^2 -g_{t \phi}^2 g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi}} \right) + g_{\phi \phi} \left( \frac{ g_{t \phi}^2 E^2 + g_{tt}^2 h^2 -2g_{t \phi} g_{tt} Eh}{g_{t \phi}^4 + g_{tt}^2 g_{\phi \phi}^2 - 2g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi}^2} \right) + g_{rr} \dot{r}^2 + \sigma=0[/itex]

Now if you look at the denominator of the 2nd term in that last line, it will reduce to the denominator that you have in your answer but the denominators of the other two terms remain a problem as they don't cancel?
 
  • #12
You have a sign error in the last term of that denominator. The denominators of all 3 terms are equal to the square of the same determinant up to a sign. When you collect terms in the numerator, you cancel one factor of the determinant.
 
  • #13
fzero said:
You have a sign error in the last term of that denominator. The denominators of all 3 terms are equal to the square of the same determinant up to a sign. When you collect terms in the numerator, you cancel one factor of the determinant.

Ok. So I got to that result.

Now for the substitutions, I find

[itex]g_{\phi \phi} = \frac{(r^2+a^2)^2-\Delta a^2}{r^2} =\frac{r^4+r^2a^2+2Mra^2-e^2a^2}{r^2}[/itex]

[itex]g_{tt}=-( \frac{\Delta - a^2}{r^2} ) = \frac{2Mr-r^2-e^2}{r^2}[/itex]

[itex]g_{t \phi} = -2a ( \frac{r^2+a^2-r^2+2Mr-a^2-e^2}{r^2})=\frac{2ae^2-4Mra}{r^2}[/itex]

[itex]g_{rr}=\frac{r^2}{\Delta}=\frac{r^2}{r^2}=1[/itex]

Do these look correct? Are there any simplifications I have missed?

I then rearranged our equation to give

[itex](g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2)(g_{rr} \dot{r}^2+\sigma}) = - g_{\phi \phi} E^2 -g_{tt} h^2 + 2 g_{t \phi} Eh[/itex]

Does this look ok to go ahead with substitution now?

Thanks.

Do these look correct? (I'm supposed to be getting an [itex]E^2[/itex] term on its own on the other side from [itex]\dot{r}^2[/itex] and I don't see how that's going to happen - it looks to me like it will always be attached to some factor?)
 
Last edited:
  • #14
latentcorpse said:
Ok. So I got to that result.

Now for the substitutions, I find

[itex]g_{\phi \phi} = \frac{(r^2+a^2)^2-\Delta a^2}{r^2} =\frac{r^4+r^2a^2+2Mra^2-e^2a^2}{r^2}[/itex]

[itex]g_{tt}=-( \frac{\Delta - a^2}{r^2} ) = \frac{2Mr-r^2-e^2}{r^2}[/itex]

[itex]g_{t \phi} = -2a ( \frac{r^2+a^2-r^2+2Mr-a^2-e^2}{r^2})=\frac{2ae^2-4Mra}{r^2}[/itex]

[itex]g_{rr}=\frac{r^2}{\Delta}=\frac{r^2}{r^2}=1[/itex]

Do these look correct? Are there any simplifications I have missed?

I really haven't taken the calculation this far, but I can see you've got a factor of 2 wrong in one place, since

[itex]
g_{t \phi} = -a ( \frac{r^2+a^2-r^2+2Mr-a^2-e^2}{r^2})=\frac{ae^2-2Mra}{r^2}
[/itex]

The other terms are probably ok.

I then rearranged our equation to give

[itex](g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2)(g_{rr} \dot{r}^2+\sigma}) = - g_{\phi \phi} E^2 -g_{tt} h^2 + 2 g_{t \phi} Eh[/itex]

Does this look ok to go ahead with substitution now?

You probably want to solve for [tex]\dot{r}^2[/tex] before making substitutions.

Thanks.

Do these look correct? (I'm supposed to be getting an [itex]E^2[/itex] term on its own on the other side from [itex]\dot{r}^2[/itex] and I don't see how that's going to happen - it looks to me like it will always be attached to some factor?)

It's probably just massaging of the coefficient. It's likely that you can obtain that term by adding and subtracting 1 in the right place.
 
  • #15
fzero said:
I really haven't taken the calculation this far, but I can see you've got a factor of 2 wrong in one place, since

[itex]
g_{t \phi} = -a ( \frac{r^2+a^2-r^2+2Mr-a^2-e^2}{r^2})=\frac{ae^2-2Mra}{r^2}
[/itex]

The other terms are probably ok.



You probably want to solve for [tex]\dot{r}^2[/tex] before making substitutions.



It's probably just massaging of the coefficient. It's likely that you can obtain that term by adding and subtracting 1 in the right place.

Well we have [itex]\dot{r}^2=\frac{g_{\phi \phi} E^2 + 2 g_{t \phi} Eh + g_{tt} h^2}{g_{t \phi}^2-g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi}} - \sigma[/itex]

Now from the form of the final answer it looks like we want to evaluate the E^2, Eh and h^2 terms seperately.

But let's consider first that tricky denominator:

[itex]g_{t \phi}^2 = ( \frac{ae^2-2Mra}{r^2})^2 = \frac{a^2e^4 + 4 M62 r^2 a^2 - 4Mra^2e^2}{r^4}[/itex]
[itex]g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} = ( \frac{r^4+r^2a^2 + 2Mra^2 -e^2a^2}{r^2})(\frac{2Mr-r^2-e^2}{r^2})=\frac{2Mr^5+2Mr^3a^2+4M^2r^2a^2-2Mre^2a^2-r^6-r^4a^2-2Mr^3a^2+r^2e^2a^2-r^4e^2-r^2a^2e^2-2Mra^2e^2+e^4a^2}{r^4}=\frac{2Mr^5+2Mr^3a^2+4M^2r^2a^2-4Mre^2a^2-r^6-r^4a^2-2Mr^3a^2+-r^4e^2+e^4a^2}{r^4}[/itex]
[itex]g_{t \phi}^2-g_{\phi \phi}g_{tt}=\frac{r^6+r^4a^2+r^4e^2-4Mr^3a^2-2Mr^5}{r^4}[/itex] after much cancellation

But then suppose we try and work out the first term of the answer (the h^2 term), it should have coefficient [itex](1-\frac{2M}{r}+\frac{e^2}{r^2}[/itex] but if we put [itex]g_{tt}[/itex] over the above denominator, it doesn't simplify down?
 
  • #16
I find

[tex]g_{\phi \phi}g_{tt}-g_{t \phi}^2= \Delta,[/tex]

which ends up canceling against the factor of [tex]\Delta[/tex] in [tex]g_{rr}[/tex]. You should leave [tex]\Delta[/tex] unsubstituted to make this calculation easier.
 
  • #17
fzero said:
I find

[tex]g_{\phi \phi}g_{tt}-g_{t \phi}^2= \Delta,[/tex]

which ends up canceling against the factor of [tex]\Delta[/tex] in [tex]g_{rr}[/tex]. You should leave [tex]\Delta[/tex] unsubstituted to make this calculation easier.

Ok. I find that [itex]g_{\phi \phi}g_{tt}-g_{t \phi}^2=-\Delta[/itex] actually.
This is because [itex]g_{\phi \phi}g_{tt}=\frac{(r^2+a^2)^2}{r^2}\frac{a^2-\Delta}{r^2}[/itex] and if you take the [itex]r^2^2[/itex] from the first term and the [itex]-\Delta[/itex] from the second you get [itex]-r^4 \Delta[/itex] which reduces to [itex]-\Delta[/itex] when you divide by the [itex]r^4[/itex] on the bottom.But our rearranged formula for [itex]\dot{r}[/itex] is

[itex]\dot{r}^2=\frac{1}{g_{rr}} \left( \frac{2g_{t \phi} Eh - g_{\phi \phi} E^2 - g_{tt} h^2}{g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2} \right) - \frac{1}{g_{rr}} \sigma[/itex]

Now the [itex]\frac{1}{g_{rr}}=\frac{1}{\frac{\Sigma}{\Delta}}=\frac{\Delta}{\Sigma}=\frac{\Delta}{r^2}[/itex] and so as you said the [itex]\Delta[/itex]'s will cancel.

Consider the [itex]h^2[/itex] term now. We have

[itex]\frac{1}{g_rr} \frac{-g_{tt}}{-\Delta}h^2=\frac{g_{tt}}{\Delta}\frac{\Delta}{r^2}h^2=\frac{g_{tt}}{r^2}h^2 = \frac{a^2-\Delta}{r^2} \frac{h^2}{r^2} =\frac{a^2-r^2+2Mr-a^2-e^2}{r^2} \frac{h^2}{r^2} = ( \frac{2M}{r} - 1 - \frac{e^2}{r^2} ) \frac{h^2}{r^2}[/itex]
which if you look at the answer is out by a factor of -1 which means you must have been correct with the sign of the denominator that we worked out. But I don't see how? I clearly get a [itex]-\Delta[/itex] when I do that calculation?
 
Last edited:
  • #18
latentcorpse said:
Ok. I find that [itex]g_{\phi \phi}g_{tt}-g_{t \phi}^2=-\Delta[/itex] actually.

That's right, I found my sign mistake.

Consider the [itex]h^2[/itex] term now. We have

[itex]\frac{1}{g_rr} \frac{-g_{tt}}{-\Delta}h^2=\frac{g_{tt}}{\Delta}\frac{\Delta}{r^2}h^2=\frac{g_{tt}}{r^2}h^2 = \frac{a^2-\Delta}{r^2} \frac{h^2}{r^2} =\frac{a^2-r^2+2Mr-a^2-e^2}{r^2} \frac{h^2}{r^2} = ( \frac{2M}{r} - 1 - \frac{e^2}{r^2} ) \frac{h^2}{r^2}[/itex]
which if you look at the answer is out by a factor of -1 which means you must have been correct with the sign of the denominator that we worked out. But I don't see how? I clearly get a [itex]-\Delta[/itex] when I do that calculation?

There's a - sign put in when [tex]V_\text{eff}[/tex] is defined.
 
  • #19
fzero said:
That's right, I found my sign mistake.



There's a - sign put in when [tex]V_\text{eff}[/tex] is defined.

Oh yeah. So I now get the answer except for the [itex]Eh[/itex] term where I'm out by a minus sign since

[itex]\dot{r}^2[/itex] has a [itex]\frac{\Delta}{r^2} \frac{2 g_{t \phi}Eh}{-\Delta}=-\frac{2g_{t \phi}Eh}{r^2}[/itex] term

Now if we sub for the metric component using [itex]g_{t \phi}=-\frac{a(r^2+a^2-\Delta)}{r^2}=\frac{a(\Delta-r^2-a^2)}{r^2}=\frac{a(e^2-2mr)}{r^2}[/itex]

we get

[itex]-\frac{2g_{t \phi}Eh}{r^2}=-\frac{2a(e^2-2Mr)}{r^2} \frac{Eh}{r^2} = - \frac{2aEh}{r^3} ( \frac{e^2}{r}-2M)[/itex]

but then when we take the minus at the front out when we define [itex]V_{\text{eff}}[/itex] we find that the term that contributes to the effective potential is [itex]\frac{2aEh}{r^3} ( \frac{e^2}{r}-2M)[/itex] whereas it's meant to be [itex]\frac{2aEh}{r^3} ( 2M-\frac{e^2}{r})[/itex]
 
  • #20
You're missing a minus sign in front of that term. You should have [itex]
\dot{r}^2=\frac{1}{g_{rr}} \left( \frac{-2g_{t \phi} Eh - g_{\phi \phi} E^2 - g_{tt} h^2}{g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2} \right) - \frac{1}{g_{rr}} \sigma
[/itex]
 
  • #21
fzero said:
You're missing a minus sign in front of that term. You should have [itex]
\dot{r}^2=\frac{1}{g_{rr}} \left( \frac{-2g_{t \phi} Eh - g_{\phi \phi} E^2 - g_{tt} h^2}{g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2} \right) - \frac{1}{g_{rr}} \sigma
[/itex]

I don't see how

if you follow the contributions from the radial eqn, we had a

[itex]g_{tt} \dot{t}^2 = g_{tt} ( \frac{g_{\phi \phi} E - g_{t \phi} h}{g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2})^2[/itex]
the cross term here will be [itex]\frac{-2 g_{tt}g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi} Eh}{(g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2)^2}[/itex]

we also had a [itex]g_{\phi \phi} \dot{\phi}^2=g_{\phi \phi} ( \frac{g_{ t \phi} E - g_{tt} h}{g_{t \phi}^2 - g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi}} )^2[/itex]
the cross term will be [itex]\frac{-2g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi} g_{t \phi} Eh}{(g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2)^2}[/itex]

and we also had a [itex]2g_{t \phi} \dot{t} \dot{\phi} = 2 g_{t \phi} ( \frac{g_{\phi \phi} E - g_{t \phi} h}{g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2} ) ( \frac{g_{t \phi} E - g_{tt} h}{ g_{t \phi}^2 - g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi}})[/itex]
the Eh contribution will be [itex] \frac{-2g_{t \phi} ( g_{t \phi}^2 + g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt})Eh}{(g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}^2)^2}[/itex]Putting all these contributions together we get

[itex]\frac{-2 g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} g_{t \phi} + 2g_{t \phi}^2 + 2 g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} g_{t \phi} - 2 g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} g_{t \phi}}{(g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi})^2} Eh[/itex]

[itex]=\frac{2 g_{t \phi} ( g_{t \phi} - g_{tt} g_{\phi \phi})}{( g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi})^2}Eh[/itex]

[itex]=\frac{-2g_{t \phi} Eh}{g_{\phi \phi} g_{tt} - g_{t \phi}}[/itex]

and then when we take that over to the other side so that we have [itex]\dot{r}^2 = \dots[/itex], it will become positive, no?
 
  • #22
I found another mistake and agree with your sign now. I haven't been able to match the sign of the quoted answer.
 

Related to Kerr Metric Confusion: Problem 1 on Page 138

1. What is the Kerr metric?

The Kerr metric is a mathematical representation of the spacetime around a rotating black hole. It describes the curved spacetime in the vicinity of a rotating black hole, taking into account both its mass and its spin.

2. What is the significance of "Problem 1" on page 138 in relation to the Kerr metric?

Problem 1 on page 138 is a specific mathematical problem that involves using the Kerr metric to calculate the properties of a rotating black hole. It is an important problem in the study of general relativity and black holes.

3. What is the confusion surrounding Problem 1 on page 138?

The confusion surrounding Problem 1 on page 138 is due to a discrepancy in the given equations and the solution provided for the problem. This has led to confusion and debate among scientists about the correct solution and the validity of the problem itself.

4. How does the Kerr metric differ from other metrics used in general relativity?

The Kerr metric differs from other metrics used in general relativity in that it takes into account the rotation of a black hole, which is a key factor in understanding the properties of black holes. Other metrics, such as the Schwarzschild metric, only consider the mass of a black hole.

5. Why is understanding the Kerr metric important in the study of black holes?

Understanding the Kerr metric is important in the study of black holes because it allows scientists to make predictions and calculations about the behavior of rotating black holes. This metric is essential in understanding the complex nature of black holes and their role in the universe.

Similar threads

Back
Top