3
$\begingroup$

Is there a commutation relation for the inverse d'Alembertian operator in general relativity? i.e. if we define $\Box = g^{\mu\nu}\nabla_\mu\nabla_\nu$ and $\Box \Box^{-1}X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}=X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}$ then is there a way to get $[\nabla_\mu,\frac{1}{\Box}]X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}$ in terms of $[\nabla_\mu,\Box]X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}$?

It is possible to do the following:

$\Box [\nabla_\mu, \frac{1}{\Box}] X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}=\Box \nabla_\mu \frac{1}{\Box} X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}-\Box\frac{1}{\Box} \nabla_\mu X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}\\ =\Box \nabla_\mu \frac{1}{\Box} X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}- \nabla_\mu \Box\frac{1}{\Box}X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}\\ =[\Box ,\nabla_\mu ]\frac{1}{\Box} X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}$

If $\Box^{-1}\Box X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...} =X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}$ was true then we could divide by $\Box$ from the left to reach $\Box [\nabla_\mu, \frac{1}{\Box}] X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}=[\Box ,\nabla_\mu ]\frac{1}{\Box} X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}\\ \Box^{-1} \Box[\nabla_\mu, \frac{1}{\Box}] X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}=\frac{1}{\Box}[\Box ,\nabla_\mu ]\frac{1}{\Box} X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}\\ [\nabla_\mu, \frac{1}{\Box}] X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}=\frac{1}{\Box}[\Box ,\nabla_\mu ]\frac{1}{\Box} X_{\alpha_1,\alpha_2...}$

as Prahar suggests, but I don't think this is possible.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ Can you at least try to define $\Box^{-1}$ properly? $\endgroup$
    – Ryan Unger
    Commented Sep 7, 2017 at 1:35
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ To elaborate on the previous comment: please note that wave operator is not invertible. $\endgroup$
    – Blazej
    Commented Sep 8, 2017 at 14:33
  • $\begingroup$ @Blazej $\square$ is an invertible operator $\endgroup$
    – Avantgarde
    Commented Feb 17, 2019 at 18:19
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ It is not. In fact it annihilates constants. It may or may not be invertible when restricted to some particular space of functions, but nothing like that was mentioned in the question. $\endgroup$
    – Blazej
    Commented Feb 17, 2019 at 18:47
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ To the point about invertibility and the need for a proper definition, what is $\Box^{-1} 0$ for you? Surely any constant is equally good. I’m not convinced the operator is defined let alone a commutator of it, especially as a two-sided inverse. $\endgroup$
    – Brick
    Commented Jul 30, 2021 at 3:01

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

For matrices $$ [A , B^{-1} ] = - B^{-1} [ A , B ] B^{-1} $$ So extending to operators $$ [\nabla_\mu , \Box^{-1} ] = -\Box^{-1} [ \nabla_\mu , \Box ] \Box^{-1} $$

$\endgroup$
0

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.