# Tag Info

21

This is definitely not a dumb question. If we work in a (linear) Hilbert space, then our inner product $\langle \cdot,\cdot \rangle$ induces the usual natural flat metric (given by $d(\psi,\phi) = || \psi - \phi ||$). However, often we take the viewpoint that our states are elements of projective Hilbert space $\mathbb CP^n$. Then it is more natural to ...

9

Actually the result is even stronger: Given a timelike geodesic $\gamma$ and a point $p \in \gamma$, there is a neighborhood $U \ni p$ equipped with coordinates, $x^0,x^1,x^2,x^3$ such that in the portion of $\gamma$ included in $U$, exactly along $\gamma$, the derivatives of the metric vanish in the said coordinates. Equivalently the Christoffel symbols $\... 3$\Lambda_{\mu\nu} = {\Lambda_\mu}^\sigma\eta_{\sigma\nu}$. It doesn't "do" anything.$\delta_{\mu\nu}$and$\delta^{\mu\nu}$are not tensors, as I explain at length in this answer of mine. The matrix elements of the identity are$\delta_\mu^\nu$, which you could have determined by thinking about the fact that the identity must send vectors$v^\mu$to other ... 3 from your profile you seem to be an amateur (gifted?, teenager?, still in school?) self-studying GR. Great! So drop the Old Man's Book (the Meaning of Relativity) and get yourself a modern intro to GR or - my suggestion - the wonderful MTW's Gravitation. I did the same when I was 16. It was published in 1973 and Kip Thorne himself told me two weeks ago that ... 2 Distance measurements in$n$dimensional flat space follows the same pattern for$n$equal 1,2,3, or higher values. I'm going to assume a straight line, change in position to simplify the math (that is we're measuring what a introductory book would call the "displacement"$s$rather than distance. But then distance is just an accumulation of many magnitudes ... 2 One meter is a unit defined in the "real world" around us – places we can actually visit. Or it is used for the lengths and dimensions of objects we can touch. It only makes sense to use the same "meter" for other worlds if we can actually get to those worlds. If two worlds are completely separated from each other, it makes no sense to apply the units of ... 2 Whatever unit you're using for distance in 1D is still good in any number of dimensions. Kilometers in manifold of dimension n is fine (assuming non-compactified dimensions). 2 The answer is simply that not every space-time has a corresponding effective potential in the sense that we have a coordinate$x$such that$\dot{x}=\sqrt{2(E-V_{eff})}$. But this is true even in Newtonian mechanics, consider a problem with a Lagrangian $$L = \frac{m}{2}(\dot{r}^2 + r^2 \dot{\varphi}^2) - V(\varphi)$$ Obviously,$p_r\equiv m \dot{r}$is ... 2 That$\Delta g_{ij} = 0$as you define it is equivalent to saying that the gradient of all metric components have vanishing divergence $$g_{ij;k}{}^k \equiv g^{k\ell}g_{ij;k\ell} = 0.$$ Here it is important to remember that the indices$i,j$denote functions. To clarify this we will let$g_k$represent the gradient of an arbitrary component function$g_{ij}...

2

This definition doesn't depend on the metric signature convention. Note that in definition of $\gamma$ the metric doesn't appear anywhere. It is defined purely in terms of "3-vectors" and "3-scalars" measured by particular observer. So it is impossible for metric to appear here explicitly.

2

As commentators have indicated Hilbert space is a vector space. A manifold is a space with an atlas-chart construction with maps on overlapping regions that define connection coefficients and ultimately curvature. It is certainly possible to think of a finite dimensional complex vector space that is a locally flat region in an otherwise curved space. This ...

2

Hilbert spaces are vectorspaces by definition. If you interpret a vector space as a manifold (which you can do) then it's a flat manifold.

2

I can answer to the first part of your question. A metric with harmonic coefficients is for example the FLRW metric for an universe with positive curvature. In this case the metric takes the form ($c=1$): $$ds^2 = dt^2 - a^2(t) \left(dr^2 + \frac{1}{\sqrt{k}} \sin(r\sqrt{k}) d\Omega^2 \right)$$

2

Comments to the post (v2): Ref. 1 is considering the $d$-dimensional real Euclidean space $(\mathbb{R}^d,|\cdot|^2)$ with the standard norm $$|x|^2~:=~\sum_{\mu=1}^d (x^{\mu})^2~=~\sum_{\mu,\nu=1}^d x^{\mu}\eta_{\mu\nu}x^{\nu}, \qquad \eta_{\mu\nu} ~=~{\rm diag}(1,\ldots, 1),\tag{A}$$ and inner product \langle x ,y\rangle~:=~\sum_{\mu,\nu=1}^d x^{\mu}\...

2

I have just now finished an article, "Geometry of the 3-sphere", in which at the end of the paper I give a simple derivation of the Riemann curvature bivector for the unit 3-sphere, using (Clifford) geometric algebra. I also discuss the Lie group $SU(2)$ and Lie algebra $SU(2)$ on the unit 3-sphere, using the powerful, but still rather unknown geometric ...

1

Certain condensed matter systems show emergent behavior that is similar to general relativity: see this for example. Also, in fluid mechanics, sound waves can become trapped behind an "event horizon" called an acoustic black hole. Finally, the Einstein field equations are essentially the only possible classical equations of motion for a massless spin-two ...

1

General relativity is a theory of gravity; as such, it makes predictions about gravity. However, general relativity does make predictions about time and physical entities such as black holes. Some of the predictions general relativity did make: Gravitational waves exist (proved by LIGO last year) Black holes exist Light bends (proved in 1919 by an ...

Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible