Why Are My Geodesic Calculations Dependent on an Unknown Function?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gleeson
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    General relativity
AI Thread Summary
Geodesic calculations are influenced by an unknown function f due to the non-affine parametrization of the geodesic. The equations derived show that the covariant derivative of epsilon and pressure p are proportional to this function, indicating a dependency on f. The author expresses concern about the necessity of introducing an unknown function to obtain results. Clarification on the derivation process is requested, suggesting potential confusion in the calculations. The discussion emphasizes the need for further assistance to resolve the issue with the unknown function.
Gleeson
Messages
30
Reaction score
4
Homework Statement
(a) Let ##x^a(\lambda)## describe a timelike geodesic parametrised by a non-affine parameter ##\lambda##, and let ##t^a = \frac{dx^a}{d \lambda}## be the geodesic's tangent vector. Calculate how ##\epsilon := -t_at^a## changes as a function of ##\lambda##.

(b) Let ##\xi^a## be a killing vector. Calculate how ##p := \xi_at^a## changes as a function of lambda on that same geodesic.


(c) Let ##v^a## be such that in a spacetime with metric ##g_{ab}##, ##Lie_vg_{ab} = 2cg_{ab}##, where c is a constant. (Such a vector is called homothetic.) Let ##x^a(\tau)## describe a timelike geodesic parametrised by proper time ##\tau##, and let ##u^a = \frac{d x^a}{d \tau}## be the four-velocity. Calculate how ##q = v_a u^a## changes with ##\tau##.
Relevant Equations
As above
For (a) and (b), since the geodesic is not affinely parametrised, we have that ##t^a\nabla_a t^b = f(\lambda) t^b##, for some function f.

As a results, for (a) I get that ##t^a \nabla_a \epsilon = 2 f(\lambda) \epsilon##. And for (b) I get that ##t^a \nabla_a p = f(\lambda) p##. (I can write out why I got those answers if needed.)

My suspicion is that I am doing something wrong, since I think it is strange to need to give the answer in terms of some unknown function that I introduced.

I'd appreciate some assistance please.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top