5
$\begingroup$

Let $t$ be a time function and $t^a$ the time flow vector such that $t^a\nabla_a t=1$. Let $\Sigma_t$ be a hypersurface of constant $t$ with unit normal $n^a$, $n^a n_a=-1$. Wald (1984), p. 255 defines the lapse function as $$N=-t^a n_a=\frac{1}{n^a\nabla_a t}$$ I am seriously stuck on the second equality. I really have no clue how to prove it.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Edit: A typo in the original question has been corrected.

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

4
$\begingroup$

$n^a = (-\nabla_b t \nabla^b t)^{-1/2}\nabla^a t$ since $n^a$ is hypersurface orthogonal to the foliation $\Sigma_t$ and unit timelike, therefore $-t^a n_a = -(-\nabla_b t \nabla^b t)^{-1/2}$ and $n_a n^a = -1$ which gives $-(-\nabla_b t \nabla^b t)^{-1/2} = (n_a \nabla^a t)^{-1}$ hence $-t^a n_a =(n_a \nabla^a t)^{-1}$ as desired.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ How do we know that $\nabla^a t$ is hypersurface orthogonal? By construction? (This was the equation I needed.) $\endgroup$
    – Ryan Unger
    Commented Jan 18, 2015 at 20:42
  • $\begingroup$ Do you mean $n^a$? If so then yes by construction, because it is normal to the family of spacelike hypersurfaces $\Sigma_t$ so it must be of the form $n^a \propto \nabla^a t$ where the proportionality is determined by the normalization. As to why $\nabla^a t$ is hypersurface orthogonal, it's simply because it is the gradient of a scalar field. Explicitly, $\nabla_{[a}t\nabla_{b}t \nabla_{c]} t =\nabla_{[a}t\nabla_{[b}t \nabla_{c]]} t =0$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 18, 2015 at 20:47
  • $\begingroup$ Is that last equation the Frobenius condition? If so, I completely forgot that's I tool I have. $\endgroup$
    – Ryan Unger
    Commented Jan 18, 2015 at 20:51
  • $\begingroup$ Yes indeed it is. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 18, 2015 at 21:01
4
$\begingroup$

I think the discussion above is overcomplicating this. The covectors $n_a$ and $\nabla_a t$ both have zero contraction with any vector tangent to the constant $t$ hypersurface, so they must be proportional: $n_a = -N \nabla_a t$ for some function $N$. Contracting both sides with $n^a$ yields $N=1/(n^a\nabla_a t)$. Contracting both sides with $t^a$ yields $t^a n_a=-N$. (Note the typo in the question: it should read $t^a\nabla_a t = 1$ in the first line.)

$\endgroup$

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.