3
$\begingroup$

I am an engineering student interested in astrophysics. I started to watch a video about Penrose diagrams, since I wanted to find out how they work. Around the seventh minute the lecturer in the video said that in order to create a Penrose Diagram "non-compact"coordinates (where at least one goes against infinity) are replaced by null coordinates (which are still non-compact). He then went ahead and defined a coordinate function $u$ as null coordinate if its $$g(\frac{\partial}{\partial u},\frac{\partial}{\partial u})=0.$$ He also noted that such coordinates are "light-like". Well, I have a hard time to understand what he means. First, I am not familiar with his notation: I assume $g$ is the divergence? But the divergence of what field? Why does light have the property of divergence equals zero? I would be grateful for some clarification.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ $g$ is not the divergence, it's the metric tensor. $\endgroup$
    – Javier
    Commented Dec 16, 2016 at 17:54

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

Expanding on my answer: $g$ is the metric tensor, i.e. the scalar product; we have $g(\vec{U},\vec{V}) = \vec{U} \cdot \vec{V} = g_{\mu\nu}U^\mu V^\nu$. So $u$ being a null coordinate means that the vector $\partial/\partial u$ is null, that is, the vector $\partial/\partial u$ is a possible tangent vector for a light ray.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Basically the diagonal terms are zero. Say $u=r-t$, $w=t+t$ yields metric tensor $dudw$ up to a sign, therefore both $u$ and $v$ are null. Does this make sense? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 25, 2020 at 14:03
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexanderCska yes, that's correct. $\endgroup$
    – Javier
    Commented Mar 25, 2020 at 14:28
2
$\begingroup$

Let's do this in 1 + 1 special relativity. In this case, the metric tensor is simple:

$$g_{ab}ds^{a}ds^{b} = - dt^{2} + dx^{2}$$

This is this metric expressed in time and space coordinates. If, instead, we did a transformation:

$$\begin{align} u &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(t + x\right)\\ v &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(t - x\right) \end{align}$$

Then, it should be pretty apparent than $du$ and $dv$ are null. Transforming the metric tensor, we get:

$$g_{ab}ds^{a}ds^{b} = -2 du\,dv$$

Which reflects the fact that $du$ and $dv$ are both null, but that their inner product is nonzero. Having the metric in a form like this simplifies a lot of things, and this procedure can be generalized to arbitrary metrics. But the simple thing is "null coordinates" just means that we're doing a generalization of this $(x,t) \rightarrow (u,v)$ transformation.

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ well if I understand correctly, the null coordinates are geodesics in Minkowski space. I guess that in flat space-time we should just have $\frac{d^2x^{\mu}}{d\tau^2}=0$ therefore the transformation $u=x+t,v=x-t$ should satisfy this condition. (All Christoffel symbols are zero.) However, how does one show that explicitly. Where is the affine parameter $\tau$ here? Do we regard $u$ and $v$ as affine parameters and differentiate with respect to them? $\endgroup$ Commented May 2, 2019 at 9:40
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexanderCska: I don't know what to tell you other than to pick some parameterization of a curve $u(\tau), v(\tau)$, and compute everything. in this very simple case, that is very easy. $\endgroup$ Commented May 2, 2019 at 14:23
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand your remark . Could you show how the calculation goes precisely. $\endgroup$ Commented May 20, 2019 at 15:10
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexanderCska: take the metric above. You are correct that $\Gamma_{ab}{}^{c} = 0$. Then, the geodesic equation becomes $0 = {\ddot x}^{a}$, and any curve of the form $(a\tau + b, c\tau + d)$ will satisfy this. $\endgroup$ Commented May 20, 2019 at 15:14
  • $\begingroup$ @JerrySchrimer that is clear. What I don't understand is how you get the $u=x+t$ and $v=x-t$. In flat spacetime the null condition reads $g_{\mu\nu}\frac{dx^{\mu}}{ds}\frac{dx^{\nu}}{ds}=\left(\frac{dt}{ds}\right)^2-\left(\frac{dx}{ds}\right)^2=0$ . This is solved by separation of variables to give $x=t=\pm C\cdot s$. I don't see how ones links the solutions of $g_{\mu\nu}\frac{dx^{\mu}}{ds}\frac{dx^{\nu}}{ds}$ and $\frac{d^2x^{\mu}}{d^2s}$ together, and arrives at $u=x+t$ and $v=x-t$. $\endgroup$ Commented May 21, 2019 at 15:18

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.