6
$\begingroup$

While on a class my teacher was taking about particle's motion in space. At some point she said the following: Consider that the particle's path is described by a curve in space defined by the parametric equations $x^i=x^i(s)$, where $x^i$ are the coordinates in space and $s$ the length along the curve. The particles velocity is then given by $$\tag{1} v^i=\frac{dx^i}{dt}=\frac{ds}{dt}\frac{dx^i}{ds}=v~e^i,$$ where $v=ds/dt$ is the particle's speed and $e^i=dx^i/ds$ is a unit vector tangent to the curve. Then she wrote that the particle's acceleration would be given by: $$\tag{2} a^i=\frac{dv^i}{dt}=\frac{ds}{dt}\frac{d(v~e^i)}{ds}=v^2 \left(\frac{de^i}{ds}\right)+e^iv\frac{dv}{ds}.$$

Then I started wandering, what is the relation between this formula for the acceleration and then one using the covariant derivative: $$\tag{3} a^i=v^j~\nabla_j~v^i=v^j\left(\partial_j v^i+\Gamma^i_{k j}v^k \right)=\dot{v}^i+\Gamma^i_{k j}~v^k v^j~,$$ where $\Gamma^i_{k j}$ are the Chritoffel symbols of second kind? I know I should have asked her right away but she left pretty quickly from class. Can anyone help me? I can't seem to prove that the formulas are equivalent.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I just have a question, how do you define the operator $\nabla _j$? $\endgroup$
    – Ana S. H.
    Commented Oct 19, 2013 at 4:52
  • $\begingroup$ @Anuar Oh sorry, I should have written it in the question. I define it as: $\nabla_i u^j=\partial_i u^j+\Gamma^j_{k i}u^k$. $\endgroup$
    – PML
    Commented Oct 19, 2013 at 8:46

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2
$\begingroup$

You're having trouble because the expressions aren't the same. On a general curved space (manifold), the definition of acceleration is the one you wrote down using the covariant derivative. Namely, for a given parameterization $x^i = x^i(t)$ of the path we define the velocity as $v^i = \dot x^i$ and the acceleration as \begin{align} a^i = \dot v^i + \Gamma^i_{jk}v^jv^k \end{align} where the overdot denotes differentiation with respect to the argument of a given function. Notice, in particular, that the acceleration is not in general equal to $\dot v$ as you indicate in your second string of equations. This is only true if \begin{align} \Gamma^i_{jk}v^iv^k = 0. \end{align} This would, for example, be the case for cartesian coordinates on $\mathbb R^3$ because then, the Christoffel symbols would all vanish.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ But why isn't Eq.$(2)$ equivalent to Eq.$(3)$? From what I was taught, Eq.$(3)$ is the most general but I don't see anything wrong with Eq.$(2)$. $\endgroup$
    – PML
    Commented Oct 19, 2013 at 21:56
  • $\begingroup$ @PML eq. ($2$) says $a^i = \dot v^i$ while equation ($3$) says $q^i = \dot v^i + \Gamma^i_{jk}v^jv^k$. They are the same only if $\Gamma^i_{jk}v^jv^k = 0$ as I remark in the answer. Think, for example, of polar coordinates on the plane. In these coordinates, one has $a_r = \ddot r - r\dot\phi^2\neq \ddot r$. $\endgroup$
    – joshphysics
    Commented Oct 19, 2013 at 22:21
  • $\begingroup$ @PML by $ q^i $ I meant $ a^i $. $\endgroup$
    – joshphysics
    Commented Oct 19, 2013 at 22:31
  • $\begingroup$ I'm feeling stupid. If I write the metric of $\mathbb{R}^2$ in polar coordinates as: $ds^2=dr^2 +r^2 d\theta ^2$ I find the same expression for $a^r$ as you, using Eq.$(3)$. But using Eq.$(2)$ isn't it the same as, for example, what I did in this answer? $\endgroup$
    – PML
    Commented Oct 19, 2013 at 22:44
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @PML No need for the disclaimer. The equation $\vec a =d^2\vec r/dt^2$ in your other answer does not imply that $a^i = d^2 r^i/dt^2$ in any coordinate system. That vector equation assumes cartesian coordinates. But why do you get the correct polar coordinates result starting from the cartesian equation in your other answer? You're performing a coordinate transformation on an equation that holds in cartesian coordinates to obtain the equation in polar coordinates. The Christoffel symbols allow you to skip the step of transforming provided you know the metric in the desired coordinates. $\endgroup$
    – joshphysics
    Commented Oct 20, 2013 at 1:02

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.