[ 2 posts ] 
 Exercise [20.14] 
Author Message

Joined: 27 Apr 2009, 19:54
Posts: 26
Location: Munich, Germany
Post Exercise [20.14]
As usual, I extended this exercise a bit. See attachment, part (d) is the actual exercise as given in the book.

RR_20_14.pdf [80.12 KiB]
Downloaded 215 times
23 Oct 2009, 08:24

Joined: 12 Jul 2010, 07:44
Posts: 154
Post Re: Exercise [20.14]
In part (c) it would have been simpler to show that S_{ij} was non-degenerate simply by inspection, by constructing the inverse (eq. (20)) rather than by calculating the determinant. That was an unnecessary complication, and knowing the value of the determinant doesn't help us in any way here.

Also it's probably worth pointing out explicitly that S^{ij} is not a raised version of S_{ij}, as the notation used throughout much of the book up to this point would suggest. (In fact we can't define raising or lowering of indicies on this manifold, because there's no metric defined (yet)). It's a source of confusion that the same symbol, S, has been used for both, when they aren't the same tensor. Perhaps Penrose would have been better off using S_{ij} vs \bar{S}^{ij}, or S_{ij} vs \left[S^{-1}\right]^{ij}, or something similar?

18 May 2012, 07:19
   [ 2 posts ]