0

I use the following MA code to calculate Einstein’s tensor. I’m asking about the zero component of the Einstein’s tensor, is it correct?

Because I think $G_{00}$ should contains the terms in the zero component of the metric , which is here $ g_{00} \sim \Phi[t,r,\theta,\phi]$

Also, as I will show although we make a linearization for the parameters in the metric: ( $\Phi, \Psi,S,\chi$ ) with respect to a factor n , fourth derivatives terms appear like $\chi^{(0, 0, 0, 4)} [t,r,\theta,\phi]$, so are these terms correct?

Here is the code:

x = {t, r, θ, ϕ}; 
met = a[t, y]^2*{{-(1 + 2*n*Φ[t, r, θ, ϕ]), 
     n*D[S[t, r, θ, ϕ], r], 
     n*D[S[t, r, θ, ϕ], θ], 
     n*D[S[t, r, θ, ϕ], ϕ]}, 
         {n*D[S[t, r, θ, ϕ], r], 
     1 - 2*n*Ψ[t, r, θ, ϕ] + 
      n*D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], {r, 2}] - (1/3)*n*
       D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], {θ, 2}] - 
             (1/3)*n*D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], {ϕ, 2}], 
     n*D[D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], r], θ], 
     n*D[D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], r], ϕ]}, 
         {n*D[S[t, r, θ, ϕ], θ], 
     n*D[D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], r], θ], 
     1 - 2*n*Ψ[t, r, θ, ϕ] + 
      n*D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], {θ, 2}] -
  n*D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], {r, 2}] - (1/3)*n*
   D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], {ϕ, 2}], 
 n*D[D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], θ], ϕ]}, 
     {n*D[S[t, r, θ, ϕ], ϕ], 
 n*D[D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], r], ϕ], 
 n*D[D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], θ], ϕ], 

 1 - 2*n*Ψ[t, r, θ, ϕ] + 
  n*D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], {ϕ, 2}] - (1/3)*n*
   D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], {θ, 2}] - 
         (1/3)*n*D[Xi[t, r, θ, ϕ], {r, 2}]}}; 

metI := Inverse[met]

Chrest = ParallelTable[ Normal[Series[(1/2)* Sum[metI[[i, p]]*(D[met[[p, j]], x[[k]]] + D[met[[k, p]], x[[j]]] - D[met[[j, k]], x[[p]]]), {p, 1, 4}], {n, 0, 1}]], {i, 1, 4}, {j, 1, 4}, {k, 1, 4}];

Reim = ParallelTable[ Normal[Series[ D[Chrest[[i, l, j]], x[[k]]] - D[Chrest[[i, k, j]], x[[l]]] + Sum[Chrest[[i, k, m]]Chrest[[m, l, j]], {m, 1, 4}] - Sum[Chrest[[i, l, m]]Chrest[[m, k, j]], {m, 1, 4}], {n, 0, 1}]], {i, 1, 4}, {j, 1, 4}, {k, 1, 4}, {l, 1, 4}];

Ricci = ParallelTable[ Normal[Series[Sum[Reim[[m, i, m, j]], {m, 1, 4}], {n, 0, 1}]], {i, 1, 4}, {j, 1, 4}];

RScal = Normal[ Series[Sum[ Sum[metI[[i, j]]*Ricci[[i, j]], {i, 1, 4}], {j, 1, 4}], {n, 0, 1}]];

Eins = ParallelTable[ Normal[Series[ Ricci[[i, j]] - (1/2)met[[i, j]]RScal, {n, 0, 1}]], {i, 1, 4}, {j, 1, 4}]

Here is $G_{00}$ output

FullSimplify[Eins[[1, 1]]]

(1/3)((9Derivative[1, 0][a][t, y]^2)/a[t, y]^2 + n(6Derivative[0, 0, 0, 2][Ψ][t, r, θ, ϕ] + Derivative[0, 0, 0, 4][Xi][t, r, θ, ϕ] + 6Derivative[0, 0, 2, 0][Ψ][t, r, θ, ϕ] + Derivative[0, 0, 2, 2][Xi][t, r, θ, ϕ] + Derivative[0, 0, 4, 0][Xi][t, r, θ, ϕ] + 6Derivative[0, 2, 0, 0][Ψ][t, r, θ, ϕ] + 2Derivative[0, 2, 0, 2][Xi][t, r, θ, ϕ] + Derivative[0, 2, 2, 0][Xi][t, r, θ, ϕ] + 2Derivative[0, 4, 0, 0][Xi][t, r, θ, ϕ]) + (1/a[t, y])(n Derivative[1, 0][a][t,y](-6Derivative[0, 0, 0, 2][S][t, r, θ, ϕ] - 6Derivative[0, 0, 2, 0][S][t, r, θ, ϕ] - 6Derivative[0, 2, 0, 0][S][t, r, θ, ϕ] - 18*Derivative[1, 0, 0, 0][Ψ][t, r, θ, ϕ] + Derivative[1, 0, 0, 2][Xi][t, r, θ, ϕ] + Derivative[1, 0, 2, 0][Xi][t, r, θ, ϕ] - Derivative[1, 2, 0, 0][Xi][t, r, θ, ϕ])))

$G_{00}$ In Tex format:

enter image description here

I expects to be there $\Phi$ in the first term of $\dot{a}^2/a^2$. The metric in Tex form:

enter image description here

MarcoB
  • 67,153
  • 18
  • 91
  • 189
Dr. phy
  • 287
  • 1
  • 9
  • 1
    Code for the Einstein tensor can be found here. If you cannot apply that code it is not clear what is the problem here. – Artes Nov 20 '23 at 15:14
  • Hi @Artes. Thanks for the suggested post. – Dr. phy Nov 20 '23 at 15:52
  • 1
    Your metric contains terms which compute second derivatives of some of your arbitrary functions, such as xi. Since the Riemann/Ricci/Einstein tensors involve second derivatives of your metric, you'll pick up 4th derivatives. If this is a continuation of the series of posts regarding the Kaluza-Klein metric, be aware that the code posted in the comment links is for the 4D case. You've been working with the projected 5D->4D system from a paper, so if you want to use the posted code, you'll likely need to modify it and specify the full 5D metric, then repeat the steps in the paper to get to 4D. –  Nov 20 '23 at 18:59

1 Answers1

0

It's correct. Given that you start with a gauge that has a second derivative of h, a fourth derivative is expected as the field equations are differentially of second order. Linearization has be carried out to the powers of h not the derivatives.

Dr. phy
  • 287
  • 1
  • 9
  • Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please [edit] to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center. – Community Nov 21 '23 at 06:08