Proving Geodesic Length Unchanged by Small Curve Changes

In summary, the proper length of a geodesic between two points is unchanged to first order by small changes in the curve that do not change its endpoints. This can be proven by using the equation for the length of a curve and expanding it to first order, then using the symmetry of the metric to simplify the equation, and finally integrating by parts to obtain the geodesic equation. The extra term that appears in the equation can be discarded as it is second order in the variation and will vanish when the variation goes to zero.
  • #1
Mmmm
63
0

Homework Statement



Prove that the proper length of geodesic between two points is unchanged to first order by small changes in the curve that do not change its endpoints.

Homework Equations



[tex] Length of curve = \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\left|g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}\right|^\frac{1}{2}d\lambda[/tex]

where [itex]g_{\alpha\beta}[/itex] is the metric for the particular coordinate system, and
[itex]\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}= U^\alpha[/itex] is the gradient of the curve.

On a geodesic, [itex]g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}[/itex] is constant.


The Attempt at a Solution



The equation of the curve is
[tex]x^\alpha = x^\alpha(\lambda)[/tex]

For a small change in the curve, the equation becomes
[tex]x^\alpha = x^\alpha(\lambda) + \delta x^\alpha(\lambda)[/tex]
where
[tex]\delta x^\alpha(\lambda_{2})=\delta x^\alpha(\lambda_{1}) = 0[/tex]
to ensure that the ends of the curve are unchanged.

So

[tex] Length of curve = \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\left|g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{d}{d\lambda}(x^\alpha + \delta x^\alpha)\frac{d}{d\lambda}(x^\alpha + \delta x^\alpha)\right|^\frac{1}{2}d\lambda[/tex]

Multiplying out:
[tex]=\int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\left|g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\beta}{d\lambda}\right|^\frac{1}{2}d\lambda[/tex]

Expanding to first order:

[tex] \approx \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\left|g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}\right|^\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\left|g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}\right|^\frac{-1}{2} \left|g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\beta}{d\lambda}\right|d\lambda[/tex]

The first term here is the length of the original curve again so the second term is the change in length to first order given a small change in the curve. I must prove that this is 0.

[tex]\Delta l = \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\frac{1}{2}\left|g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}\right|^\frac{-1}{2} \left|g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\beta}{d\lambda}\right|d\lambda[/tex]

Now on a geodesic [itex]g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}[/itex] is constant, so i will just call this factor C.

so
[tex]\Delta l = C \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\frac{1}{2}\left|g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\beta}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\beta}{d\lambda}\right|d\lambda[/tex]

Rename some indices to get a common factor of [itex]\frac{d\delta x^\gamma}{d\lambda}[/itex]:

[tex]= C \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\frac{1}{2}\left|g_{\alpha\gamma}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\gamma}{d\lambda}+g_{\gamma\beta}\frac{d\delta x^\gamma}{d\lambda}\frac{dx^\beta}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\gamma}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\frac{d\delta x^\gamma}{d\lambda}\right|d\lambda[/tex]

Factorise and rename more indices:

[tex]= C \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\frac{1}{2}\left|\frac{d\delta x^\gamma}{d\lambda}\right|\left|g_{\alpha\gamma}\frac{d x^\alpha}{d\lambda}+g_{\gamma\alpha}\frac{dx^\alpha}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\gamma}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\right|d\lambda[/tex]

use symmetry of g to make first two terms equal:

[tex]= C \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\frac{1}{2}\left|\frac{d\delta x^\gamma}{d\lambda}\right|\left| 2 g_{\alpha\gamma}\frac{d x^\alpha}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\gamma}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\right|d\lambda[/tex]

Now integrate by parts:

[tex]= C \left[ \frac{1}{2}\left|{\delta x^\gamma}\left( 2 g_{\alpha\gamma}\frac{d x^\alpha}{d\lambda}+g_{\alpha\gamma}\frac{d\delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}\right) \right| \right] ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}} - C \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}}\frac{1}{2}\left|\delta x^\gamma}\left( 2 \frac{d}{d \lambda} \left( g_{\alpha\gamma} U^\alpha \right) + \frac{d}{d \lambda} \left( g_{\alpha\gamma} \frac{d \delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda} \right) \right)\right|d\lambda[/tex]

The first term vanishes as [itex]\delta x^\alpha(\lambda_{2})=\delta x^\alpha(\lambda_{1}) = 0[/itex]

[tex]= C \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}} \left|\delta x^\gamma}\left[ - \frac{d}{d \lambda} \left( g_{\alpha\gamma} U^\alpha \right) - \frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{d \lambda} \left( g_{\alpha\gamma} \frac{d \delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda} \right) \right]\right|d\lambda[/tex]

This is where I get a bit stuck. The expression in square brackets should come out as the geodesic equation and it is nearly there. The problem is the second term, it should be

[tex] \frac{1}{2}g_{\alpha \beta , \gamma} U^\alpha U^\beta [/tex]

(which I got from the answer in the back of the book)
to give

[tex]\Delta l = C \int ^{\lambda_{2}}_{\lambda_{1}} \left|\delta x^\gamma}\left[ - \frac{d}{d \lambda} \left( g_{\alpha\gamma} U^\alpha \right) + \frac{1}{2}g_{\alpha \beta , \gamma} U^\alpha U^\beta \right]\right|d\lambda[/tex]

Then, indeed with a bit of indices tweaking you do get the geodesic equation and everything vanishes.

I have an extra [itex]\frac{d \delta x^\alpha}{d\lambda}[/itex] and I just have no idea how to get rid of it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


It's easy to get rid of. It gets rid of itself when the variation goes to zero. It shouldn't have been there to begin with. It came from a term that's second order in the variation. You should have thrown that away at the beginning. The term you are missing comes from the variation of the g, [itex]g(x(\lambda)+\delta x(\lambda))[/itex].
 
  • #3


Aaaaahhhhhhh... of course. after a taylor expansion of g right at the beginning and a removal of that 2nd order term it all comes out beautifully.

Thanks so much Dick... Now I can sleep at night ;)
 

FAQ: Proving Geodesic Length Unchanged by Small Curve Changes

What is a geodesic and why is its length important?

A geodesic is the shortest path between two points on a curved surface. Its length is important because it represents the distance between two points in the most efficient way, taking into account the curvature of the surface.

How is the length of a geodesic affected by small changes in the curve?

The length of a geodesic is not affected by small changes in the curve. This is known as the geodesic postulate, which states that the shortest path between two points on a curved surface remains unchanged even if the surface is slightly deformed.

Is there any mathematical proof for the geodesic postulate?

Yes, there is a mathematical proof for the geodesic postulate. It involves using the concept of the first and second variations of a functional, which represents the length of a curve. The proof shows that the first variation of the functional is zero, which implies that the length of the curve remains unchanged.

Are there any real-life applications of the geodesic postulate?

Yes, the geodesic postulate has numerous applications in various fields such as engineering, physics, and mathematics. For example, it is used in designing optimal transportation routes, calculating the shortest paths for aircraft and ships, and understanding the behavior of particles in curved space-time.

Does the geodesic postulate hold true for all types of surfaces?

The geodesic postulate holds true for all types of surfaces, including flat, spherical, and hyperbolic surfaces. However, it may not hold for surfaces with extreme curvature, such as black holes, where the concept of geodesics breaks down due to the effects of gravity.

Back
Top