2
$\begingroup$

I am reading this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.02577. On page 13, it is written that the $d$-dimensional Einstein equations are

$$G_{\mu\nu}+\frac{(d-1)(d-2)}{6}\Lambda g_{\mu\nu}=8\pi T_{\mu\nu}.\tag{2.6}$$

Of course, for $d=4$ we take what we expect. But I don't see how the the factor $(d-1)(d-2)/6$ shows up if the action is

$$S=\int (\frac{1}{2\kappa}(R-2\Lambda)+L_{M})\sqrt{-g} d^{d}x.$$

If I variate with respect to the metric, I just take $G_{\mu\nu}+\Lambda g_{\mu\nu}=8\pi T_{\mu\nu}$ for any value of $d$. What's my mistake?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This is a Gauss-Bonnet theory, the action is not the Einstein-Hilbert action. The action in the Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet theory does lead to an equation like this as I remember. $\endgroup$ – Y2H May 29 at 9:45
  • $\begingroup$ I am sorry, I should explain more. I am interested in Einstein gravity in higher dimensions now. $L_{M}$ is not the Gauss-Bonnet term here, it just describes any matter fields. So actually the problem is the term that inculdes the cosmological constant. $\endgroup$ – john May 29 at 10:01
1
$\begingroup$

You didn't make a math mistake. The only mistake is assuming that equation (2.6) was derived starting from the action shown in the question. To get the factor $(d-1)(d-2)/6$, it must be inserted by hand into the action prior to starting the derivation.

The motive for including that factor is not stated in the cited paper as far as I noticed, but whatever the motive might be, introducing a $d$-dependent factor into that term in the action is a legal thing to do, since the coefficient $\Lambda$ is arbitrary anyway.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

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.