2
$\begingroup$

This might be a little bit of a technical question, so bear with me. Ok, so from string theory we know that the action for a relativistic string is found from the worldsheet when we embed the string in spacetime and so we get $$ S_{Nambu-Goto}=T \int d^2 \sigma \sqrt{h_{\alpha \beta}}$$ where $h_{\alpha \beta} = \eta_{\mu \nu} \partial_{\alpha} X^{\mu} \partial_{\beta} X^{\nu},$ the derivatives taken with respect to the the worldsheet coordinates $\sigma^{\alpha}=(\tau, \sigma)$.

That is all nice and well, and then we want to get rid of this ugly square root so we introduce the auxiliary variable $\gamma_{\alpha \beta}$ and write $$S_{Polyakov}= \frac{T}{2} \int d^2 \sigma \sqrt {\gamma} \gamma^{\alpha \beta} h_{\alpha \beta}$$ Upon varying the action with respect to $\gamma_{\mu \nu}$ to find the EOM, you get $\gamma_{\alpha \beta}=h_{\alpha \beta},$ so this auxiliary variable is just the induced metric, and everything simplifies nicely into the Nambu-Goto action when substituted.

My question is, during the derivation of the EOM, you had to vary the action ofcourse, which gave you (which is just the chain rule) $$\delta S_P =\bigg[ \frac{\partial \sqrt{\gamma}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} (\gamma^{\alpha \beta} h_{\alpha \beta} ) + \sqrt {\gamma} \Big( \frac{\partial \gamma^{\alpha \beta}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} h_{\alpha \beta} \Big) \bigg] \delta \gamma_{\mu \nu} $$ When computing $\frac{\partial \sqrt {\gamma}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}}$, I got this: $$ \frac{\partial \sqrt {\gamma}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} = \frac{1}{2 \sqrt{\gamma}} \frac{\partial (det \gamma)}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}}$$ Then I use Jacobi's formula which says that $$\frac{\partial (det \gamma)}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} = \gamma \cdot tr \Big( \gamma^{\alpha \beta} \frac{\partial \gamma_{\alpha \beta}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} \Big) = \gamma \cdot tr (\gamma^{\alpha \beta} \delta_{\alpha}^\mu \delta_{\beta}^\nu) = \gamma \cdot tr(\gamma^{\mu \nu})$$ This is the part that stumped me. The book says that the answer to this should be $$\delta \gamma = \gamma \gamma^{\nu \mu} \delta \gamma_{\mu \nu}$$ However, I am getting this result above, i.e. $$\delta \gamma = \gamma tr (\gamma^{\mu \nu}) \delta \gamma_{\mu \nu}$$ How is $tr(\gamma^{\mu \nu}) = \gamma^{\nu \mu}$ or am I just missing a stupid mistake.

Btw, I am using the fact that $\delta f(x) = \frac{df(x)}{dx}\delta x$ as you saw to find the variation. Sorry if this might be a dumb question, I was just learning GR when I came across an appendix with this and got interested!

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

As you say, $\gamma_{\mu \nu}$ is a metric. Then, $\gamma_{\mu \nu}=\gamma_{ \nu \mu}$ and it makes no difference which one you write down. This already deals with one half of your discrepancy.

Now for the trace: In the einstein summation notation, a the trace of $\gamma_{\mu \nu}$ is $\gamma_{\mu}^{\; \mu}$. The looking at your $$\frac{\partial (det \gamma)}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} = \gamma \cdot tr \Big( \gamma^{\alpha \beta} \frac{\partial \gamma_{\alpha \beta}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} \Big)$$ The $tr \Big( \gamma^{\alpha \beta} \frac{\partial \gamma_{\alpha \beta}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} \Big)$ is really $\Big( \gamma^{\alpha \beta} \frac{\partial \gamma_{\alpha \beta}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu}^{\; \mu}} \Big)$. Now in $$\frac{\partial (det \gamma)}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} = \gamma \cdot \Big( \gamma^{\alpha \beta} \frac{\partial \gamma_{\alpha \beta}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu}^{\; \mu}} \Big)$$ there is clearly something wrong as the indices don't match on either side. The correct expression is $$\frac{\partial (det \gamma)}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} = \gamma \cdot \Big( \gamma^{\alpha \beta} \frac{\partial \gamma_{\alpha \beta}}{\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}} \Big)$$ Think about what you should be taking the trace of in your formula. It is only the $\gamma^{\alpha \beta}\partial \gamma_{\alpha \beta}$ part; but as this is scalar, taking the trace would be meaningless.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Ok cool I understand the symmetry of the metric part, thanks. However, I'm still confused as to why we only take the trace of $\gamma^{\alpha \beta} \partial \gamma_{\alpha \beta}$ since I thought the whole expression with the partial derivative is in the trace. $\endgroup$ – Josh Pilipovsky Jul 4 '16 at 1:44
  • $\begingroup$ remember that $\partial (det\gamma )/\partial \gamma_{\mu \nu}$ is not one equation but $d^2$ equations for $d$ spacetime dimensions. Consider writing out the individual equations $\partial (det\gamma )/\partial \gamma_{0 0}$, $\partial (det\gamma )/\partial \gamma_{0 1}$,.. and working some of those out individually. That should make it clear. If not, you might want to revisit Einstein summation convention. $\endgroup$ – Gerben Jul 4 '16 at 1:48
  • $\begingroup$ Oooooh I got it now, that whole thing is just a scalar! Thanks a lot man! $\endgroup$ – Josh Pilipovsky Jul 4 '16 at 1:54

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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