Can't remember where I read this (when using the proper-time parametrization)

In summary: Looks like I should have listened to my instinct that was telling me to accompany that "no" with some excess stuff! Sorry if it didn't seem friendly.
  • #1
ShayanJ
Insights Author
Gold Member
2,810
604
A while ago, I read a proof in a book on GR that when using the proper-time parametrization, the two conditions ## \delta \int_{\lambda_1}^{\lambda_2} \sqrt{-g_{\mu\nu} \dot{x}^\mu \dot{x}^\nu} d\lambda=0## and ## \delta \int_{\lambda_1}^{\lambda_2} (-g_{\mu\nu} \dot{x}^\mu \dot{x}^\nu) d\lambda=0## are equilvalent. But then I forgot which book was it. I was able to reconstruct the proof but now I'm really curious what book was that! Does anyone know? I've checked several books so I know that not many books on GR contain such a proof.
Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #4
Page 45 https://www.maths.tcd.ie/~fionnf/dg/dg.pdf mentions this, and you can prove it yourself thinking about it, but it feels weird and dirty...
 
  • #5
bolbteppa said:
Page 45 https://www.maths.tcd.ie/~fionnf/dg/dg.pdf mentions this, and you can prove it yourself thinking about it, but it feels weird and dirty...
As I said in the OP, I have no problem with the proof. I just don't remember which GR book I read the proof in! So if anyone knows a GR book that contains the proof, I'll appreciate it if they let me know.
 
  • #7
jedishrfu said:
One more try, Wheelers Gravitation?
No!
 
  • #8
The proof can be found in most string-theory books, but I guess they don't count as GR books.
 
  • #9
Shyan said:
A while ago, I read a proof in a book on GR that when using the proper-time parametrization, the two conditions ## \delta \int_{\lambda_1}^{\lambda_2} \sqrt{-g_{\mu\nu} \dot{x}^\mu \dot{x}^\nu} d\lambda=0## and ## \delta \int_{\lambda_1}^{\lambda_2} (-g_{\mu\nu} \dot{x}^\mu \dot{x}^\nu) d\lambda=0## are equilvalent. But then I forgot which book was it. I was able to reconstruct the proof but now I'm really curious what book was that! Does anyone know? I've checked several books so I know that not many books on GR contain such a proof.
Thanks
I found it! :woot:

R. Adler, M. Bazin, M. Schiffer, Introduction to General Relativity (1975)
Sec. 4.2, Eqs. (4.101)-(4.102)
 
  • Like
Likes jedishrfu
  • #10
jedishrfu said:
One more try, Wheelers Gravitation?
Shyan said:
No!
Misner Thorne Wheeler - Gravitation also has it:
Page 322-323, Box 13.3, Eqs. (1)-(2).
 
  • Like
Likes jedishrfu
  • #11
Demystifier said:
I found it! :woot:

R. Adler, M. Bazin, M. Schiffer, Introduction to General Relativity (1975)
Sec. 4.2, Eqs. (4.101)-(4.102)
Thanks, seems a nice book!
But I didn't know it at the time I read that proof. Also the book I read, precisely proves the statement by introducing ## F=\sqrt{-g_{\mu \nu} \dot{x}^\mu \dot{x}^\nu} ## and then showing that if ## \int_{\tau_1}^{\tau_2} F d\tau ## is extermized, ## \int_{\tau_1}^{\tau_2} \frac{F^2}{2} d\tau ## is extermized too.(About the notation, I'm only sure about the F!)

Demystifier said:
Misner Thorne Wheeler - Gravitation also has it:
Page 322-323, Box 13.3, Eqs. (1)-(2).
Well, that's a pretty big book and hard to search. But I remembered it wasn't the book I read anyway.

I have two reasons for posting this thread, first is that I like books that do such calculations and I want to read it more carefully and second is that I hate it when from time to time it comes to my mind "God, what was that book?"!
 
  • #12
Shyan said:
Thanks, seems a nice book!
But I didn't know it at the time I read that proof. Also the book I read, precisely proves the statement by introducing ## F=\sqrt{-g_{\mu \nu} \dot{x}^\mu \dot{x}^\nu} ## and then showing that if ## \int_{\tau_1}^{\tau_2} F d\tau ## is extermized, ## \int_{\tau_1}^{\tau_2} \frac{F^2}{2} d\tau ## is extermized too.(About the notation, I'm only sure about the F!)Well, that's a pretty big book and hard to search. But I remembered it wasn't the book I read anyway.

I have two reasons for posting this thread, first is that I like books that do such calculations and I want to read it more carefully and second is that I hate it when from time to time it comes to my mind "God, what was that book?"!

It was such an emphatic "No!" that I decided not to post further. My third choice was Adler Bazin and Schiffer as these are the three books in my library but then figured the Adler book was too old for Shyan to consider. Also, I think Zee may have it as well but since its too big to search...

In any event, I'm glad the mystery is solved. Thanks Demystifier!
 
  • #13
jedishrfu said:
It was such an emphatic "No!" that I decided not to post further. My third choice was Adler Bazin and Schiffer as these are the three books in my library but then figured the Adler book was too old for Shyan to consider. Also, I think Zee may have it as well but since its too big to search...

In any event, I'm glad the mystery is solved. Thanks Demystifier!
Looks like I should have listened to my instinct that was telling me to accompany that "no" with some excess stuff! Sorry if it didn't seem friendly.
Thanks for the help to all.
 

Related to Can't remember where I read this (when using the proper-time parametrization)

What is the proper-time parametrization?

The proper-time parametrization is a method used in physics to describe the motion of objects in space and time. It uses the object's proper time, which is the time as measured by a clock attached to the object, as the parameter for describing its path.

Why is the proper-time parametrization useful?

The proper-time parametrization is useful because it allows us to describe the motion of objects in a way that is independent of the observer's frame of reference. This means that the same path can be described using different coordinates, making it easier to compare and analyze different systems.

How does the proper-time parametrization differ from other parametrization methods?

The proper-time parametrization differs from other methods, such as coordinate-time parametrization, in that it takes into account the effects of special relativity. This means that it can accurately describe the motion of objects traveling at high speeds and in strong gravitational fields.

What are some examples of when the proper-time parametrization is used?

The proper-time parametrization is commonly used in the fields of particle physics and general relativity. It is used to describe the motion of particles in particle accelerators and the paths of objects in curved spacetime, such as in the vicinity of black holes.

What are the limitations of the proper-time parametrization?

The proper-time parametrization has limitations when dealing with systems that are not in uniform motion or when dealing with systems with multiple interacting objects. In these cases, other parametrization methods may be more appropriate.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
122
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
3
Views
459
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
18
Views
2K
Back
Top