0
$\begingroup$

I understand how to show in general, that under the diffeomorphism $x^\mu\to x^\mu+\epsilon^\mu (x)$, the metric tensor changes as $$g'_{\mu\nu}(x')=g_{\mu\nu}(x)-\partial_\mu\epsilon_\nu(x)-\partial_\nu\epsilon_\mu(x),\tag{1}$$ and the differential $dx^\mu$ changes as $$dx'^\mu=\frac{\partial x^\mu}{\partial x^{\gamma}}dx^\gamma=dx^\mu+\partial_\gamma\epsilon^\mu dx^\gamma,$$ such that the line element $ds^2$ is invariant.

Now I'm trying to see this in a particular example, say, the Schwarzschild metric: $$ds^2=-\left(1-\frac{r_s}{r}\right)dt^2+\frac{dr^2}{\left(1-\frac{r_s}{r}\right)}+r^2\left(d\theta^2+\text{sin}^2\theta d\phi^2\right),$$ if I take a diffeomorphism in $r$, $$r\to r+\xi(r),$$ the $g_{tt}$ component of the metric for example then becomes $$g_{tt}=1-\frac{r_s}{r}+\frac{r_s}{r^2}\xi(r)+O(\xi^2),$$ which obviously doesn't transform as in $(1)$, and if $ds^2$ is to be invariant we would need another contribution from somewhere to cancel the term proportional to $\xi$. So what am I missing here?

Also, do diffeomorphisms in the angular coordinates also look the same, i.e. $$\theta\to\theta+\xi(\theta)?$$

I know I am probably missing something very basic, so apologies for my confusion.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

The change in the metric is not what you say. The correct change is $$ \delta g_{\mu\nu} = ({\mathcal L}_\epsilon g )_{\mu\nu} \equiv \epsilon^\lambda\partial_\lambda g_{\mu\nu}+ g_{\lambda\nu} \partial_\mu \epsilon^\lambda + g_{\mu\lambda} \partial_\nu \epsilon^\lambda\\ = \nabla_\mu \epsilon_\nu+ \nabla_\nu \epsilon_\mu $$ i.e you need covariant derivatives rather than partials. A metric is unchanged by by an infinitesimal diffeomorphism only if ${\mathcal L}_\epsilon g =0$, in which case the vector field $\epsilon$ is a Killing vector.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Hi, thanks very much for your answer. So then I suppose in this case in order for this to be an isometry we need to demand that $\epsilon(r)=0$? And this needs to be imposed in order for $ds^2$ to be invariant? One more question, does this whole issue relate to active vs passive diffeomorphisms? As in, in my transformation $(1)$ I was not taking $x\to x+\epsilon$ in the metric $g_{\mu\nu}(x)$ itself, but I should have been? $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 21 at 14:49
  • $\begingroup$ There are number of isometries for Schwarzschild including time translation and rotations. For a derivation of the equation for the change in the metric and discussion see our book at goldbart.gatech.edu/PostScript/MS_PG_book/bookmaster.pdf equation 11.38 and its surrounds. $\endgroup$
    – mike stone
    Commented Feb 21 at 14:57

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.