Why, when going from special to general relativity, do we just replace partial derivatives with covariant derivatives? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowDifference between $partial$ and $nabla$ in general relativityMetric tensor in special and general relativityGeneral relativity from helicity 2 massless field theory by using Deser's argumentsProblem in General Relativity (metric tensor covariant derivative / indexes)Motivation for covariant derivative axioms in the context of General RelativityWhat is the motivation from Physics for the Levi-Civita connection on GR?Regarding $T^munu;_mu=0$ in general relativityOn covariant derivativeChristoffel symbol derivation in book by WaldWhen can we raise lower indices on “nontensors” as described in Dirac's book *General Theory of Relativity*?

TikZ: How to fill area with a special pattern?

How did Beeri the Hittite come up with naming his daughter Yehudit?

How do I fit a non linear curve?

Help/tips for a first time writer?

In the "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" video game, what potion is used to sabotage Umbridge's speakers?

Reshaping json / reparing json inside shell script (remove trailing comma)

Which one is the true statement?

Raspberry pi 3 B with Ubuntu 18.04 server arm64: what chip

What is the process for purifying your home if you believe it may have been previously used for pagan worship?

Defamation due to breach of confidentiality

If Nick Fury and Coulson already knew about aliens (Kree and Skrull) why did they wait until Thor's appearance to start making weapons?

Would a grinding machine be a simple and workable propulsion system for an interplanetary spacecraft?

Inductor and Capacitor in Parallel

Why is information "lost" when it got into a black hole?

What flight has the highest ratio of timezone difference to flight time?

(How) Could a medieval fantasy world survive a magic-induced "nuclear winter"?

What does "shotgun unity" refer to here in this sentence?

Audio Conversion With ADS1243

Airplane gently rocking its wings during whole flight

Is French Guiana a (hard) EU border?

What CSS properties can the br tag have?

What day is it again?

How do you define an element with an ID attribute using LWC?

Can Sneak Attack be used when hitting with an improvised weapon?



Why, when going from special to general relativity, do we just replace partial derivatives with covariant derivatives?



The Next CEO of Stack OverflowDifference between $partial$ and $nabla$ in general relativityMetric tensor in special and general relativityGeneral relativity from helicity 2 massless field theory by using Deser's argumentsProblem in General Relativity (metric tensor covariant derivative / indexes)Motivation for covariant derivative axioms in the context of General RelativityWhat is the motivation from Physics for the Levi-Civita connection on GR?Regarding $T^munu;_mu=0$ in general relativityOn covariant derivativeChristoffel symbol derivation in book by WaldWhen can we raise lower indices on “nontensors” as described in Dirac's book *General Theory of Relativity*?










14












$begingroup$


I've come across several references to the idea that to upgrade a law of physics to general relativity all you have to do is replace any partial derivatives with covariant derivatives.



I understand that covariant derivatives become partial derivatives in Minkowski space however is the reverse unique? Is there no other tensor operation which becomes a partial derivative / if so why do we not mention them?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    14












    $begingroup$


    I've come across several references to the idea that to upgrade a law of physics to general relativity all you have to do is replace any partial derivatives with covariant derivatives.



    I understand that covariant derivatives become partial derivatives in Minkowski space however is the reverse unique? Is there no other tensor operation which becomes a partial derivative / if so why do we not mention them?










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      14












      14








      14


      2



      $begingroup$


      I've come across several references to the idea that to upgrade a law of physics to general relativity all you have to do is replace any partial derivatives with covariant derivatives.



      I understand that covariant derivatives become partial derivatives in Minkowski space however is the reverse unique? Is there no other tensor operation which becomes a partial derivative / if so why do we not mention them?










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      I've come across several references to the idea that to upgrade a law of physics to general relativity all you have to do is replace any partial derivatives with covariant derivatives.



      I understand that covariant derivatives become partial derivatives in Minkowski space however is the reverse unique? Is there no other tensor operation which becomes a partial derivative / if so why do we not mention them?







      general-relativity special-relativity differential-geometry tensor-calculus differentiation






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited yesterday









      Ben Crowell

      53.5k6165313




      53.5k6165313










      asked yesterday









      Toby PeterkenToby Peterken

      452216




      452216




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          14












          $begingroup$

          Transforming partial derivatives to covariant derivatives when going from Minkowski to a general spacetime is just a rule of thumb, and should not be applied carelessly.



          For example, when studying electromagnetism in the Lorenz gauge $(nabla_mu A^mu =0)$, working from first principles, one can show that the inhomogeneous wave equation reads:



          $$nabla_nu nabla^nu A^mu - R^mu_,,nu A^nu = -j^mu$$



          whereas in Minkowski the same equation reads:



          $$partial_nu partial^nu A^mu = -j^mu$$



          If we used $partialrightarrownabla$, we would not find the contribution of the curvature term. Although in general the $partialrightarrownabla$ might work, to be safe you should try to derive physical rules using a covariant approach (e.g. from an action principle).






          share|cite|improve this answer










          New contributor




          Filipe Miguel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          $endgroup$




















            6












            $begingroup$

            You are right that it is not unique. The rule you mention is called minimal coupling. It is similar to electromagnetism when we replace $p_mu$ by $p_mu - eA_mu$ in our first-order equations. This is the simplest approach one could take, in which you just add a term describing, e.g. electromagnetism, to the action, and then it just couples to gravity through the metric in the volume element.



            There are other ways of doing so by contracting the Ricci tensor with the field strength tensor, for instance, but these are non-minimal. We make choices like these all the time, even in choosing the form of the connection in the covariant derivative. So the answer in the end is that this minimal approach agrees with experiment to their current accuracies, so why complicate things?






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$




















              1












              $begingroup$


              I've come across several references to the idea that to upgrade a law of physics to general relativity all you have to do is replace any partial derivatives with covariant derivatives.




              Maybe but IMHO it's a wrong idea. Covariant derivatives are needed in SR too, if you wish to use arbitrary coordinates. Which is completely allowed even though generally inconvenient. But there are exceptions - see e.g. Rindler's coordinates.



              Of course in a curved spacetime you're obliged to use coordinates where metric takes a complicated form, simply because a coordinate system which diagonalizes the metric tensor to constant components in a finite region doesn't exist. Then covariant derivative is an imperative tool.



              But there's no warranty that it's a sufficient method to obtain the right physical laws in GR. @DanielC already gave a classical example.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$













                Your Answer





                StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
                return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
                StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
                StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
                );
                );
                , "mathjax-editing");

                StackExchange.ready(function()
                var channelOptions =
                tags: "".split(" "),
                id: "151"
                ;
                initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

                StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
                // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
                if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
                StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
                createEditor();
                );

                else
                createEditor();

                );

                function createEditor()
                StackExchange.prepareEditor(
                heartbeatType: 'answer',
                autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
                convertImagesToLinks: false,
                noModals: true,
                showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
                reputationToPostImages: null,
                bindNavPrevention: true,
                postfix: "",
                imageUploader:
                brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
                contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
                allowUrls: true
                ,
                noCode: true, onDemand: true,
                discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
                ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
                );



                );













                draft saved

                draft discarded


















                StackExchange.ready(
                function ()
                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f469527%2fwhy-when-going-from-special-to-general-relativity-do-we-just-replace-partial-d%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                );

                Post as a guest















                Required, but never shown

























                3 Answers
                3






                active

                oldest

                votes








                3 Answers
                3






                active

                oldest

                votes









                active

                oldest

                votes






                active

                oldest

                votes









                14












                $begingroup$

                Transforming partial derivatives to covariant derivatives when going from Minkowski to a general spacetime is just a rule of thumb, and should not be applied carelessly.



                For example, when studying electromagnetism in the Lorenz gauge $(nabla_mu A^mu =0)$, working from first principles, one can show that the inhomogeneous wave equation reads:



                $$nabla_nu nabla^nu A^mu - R^mu_,,nu A^nu = -j^mu$$



                whereas in Minkowski the same equation reads:



                $$partial_nu partial^nu A^mu = -j^mu$$



                If we used $partialrightarrownabla$, we would not find the contribution of the curvature term. Although in general the $partialrightarrownabla$ might work, to be safe you should try to derive physical rules using a covariant approach (e.g. from an action principle).






                share|cite|improve this answer










                New contributor




                Filipe Miguel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.






                $endgroup$

















                  14












                  $begingroup$

                  Transforming partial derivatives to covariant derivatives when going from Minkowski to a general spacetime is just a rule of thumb, and should not be applied carelessly.



                  For example, when studying electromagnetism in the Lorenz gauge $(nabla_mu A^mu =0)$, working from first principles, one can show that the inhomogeneous wave equation reads:



                  $$nabla_nu nabla^nu A^mu - R^mu_,,nu A^nu = -j^mu$$



                  whereas in Minkowski the same equation reads:



                  $$partial_nu partial^nu A^mu = -j^mu$$



                  If we used $partialrightarrownabla$, we would not find the contribution of the curvature term. Although in general the $partialrightarrownabla$ might work, to be safe you should try to derive physical rules using a covariant approach (e.g. from an action principle).






                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  New contributor




                  Filipe Miguel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                  Check out our Code of Conduct.






                  $endgroup$















                    14












                    14








                    14





                    $begingroup$

                    Transforming partial derivatives to covariant derivatives when going from Minkowski to a general spacetime is just a rule of thumb, and should not be applied carelessly.



                    For example, when studying electromagnetism in the Lorenz gauge $(nabla_mu A^mu =0)$, working from first principles, one can show that the inhomogeneous wave equation reads:



                    $$nabla_nu nabla^nu A^mu - R^mu_,,nu A^nu = -j^mu$$



                    whereas in Minkowski the same equation reads:



                    $$partial_nu partial^nu A^mu = -j^mu$$



                    If we used $partialrightarrownabla$, we would not find the contribution of the curvature term. Although in general the $partialrightarrownabla$ might work, to be safe you should try to derive physical rules using a covariant approach (e.g. from an action principle).






                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    New contributor




                    Filipe Miguel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.






                    $endgroup$



                    Transforming partial derivatives to covariant derivatives when going from Minkowski to a general spacetime is just a rule of thumb, and should not be applied carelessly.



                    For example, when studying electromagnetism in the Lorenz gauge $(nabla_mu A^mu =0)$, working from first principles, one can show that the inhomogeneous wave equation reads:



                    $$nabla_nu nabla^nu A^mu - R^mu_,,nu A^nu = -j^mu$$



                    whereas in Minkowski the same equation reads:



                    $$partial_nu partial^nu A^mu = -j^mu$$



                    If we used $partialrightarrownabla$, we would not find the contribution of the curvature term. Although in general the $partialrightarrownabla$ might work, to be safe you should try to derive physical rules using a covariant approach (e.g. from an action principle).







                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    New contributor




                    Filipe Miguel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.









                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer








                    edited yesterday









                    DanielC

                    1,7181919




                    1,7181919






                    New contributor




                    Filipe Miguel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.









                    answered yesterday









                    Filipe MiguelFilipe Miguel

                    442112




                    442112




                    New contributor




                    Filipe Miguel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.





                    New contributor





                    Filipe Miguel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.






                    Filipe Miguel is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                        6












                        $begingroup$

                        You are right that it is not unique. The rule you mention is called minimal coupling. It is similar to electromagnetism when we replace $p_mu$ by $p_mu - eA_mu$ in our first-order equations. This is the simplest approach one could take, in which you just add a term describing, e.g. electromagnetism, to the action, and then it just couples to gravity through the metric in the volume element.



                        There are other ways of doing so by contracting the Ricci tensor with the field strength tensor, for instance, but these are non-minimal. We make choices like these all the time, even in choosing the form of the connection in the covariant derivative. So the answer in the end is that this minimal approach agrees with experiment to their current accuracies, so why complicate things?






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$

















                          6












                          $begingroup$

                          You are right that it is not unique. The rule you mention is called minimal coupling. It is similar to electromagnetism when we replace $p_mu$ by $p_mu - eA_mu$ in our first-order equations. This is the simplest approach one could take, in which you just add a term describing, e.g. electromagnetism, to the action, and then it just couples to gravity through the metric in the volume element.



                          There are other ways of doing so by contracting the Ricci tensor with the field strength tensor, for instance, but these are non-minimal. We make choices like these all the time, even in choosing the form of the connection in the covariant derivative. So the answer in the end is that this minimal approach agrees with experiment to their current accuracies, so why complicate things?






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$















                            6












                            6








                            6





                            $begingroup$

                            You are right that it is not unique. The rule you mention is called minimal coupling. It is similar to electromagnetism when we replace $p_mu$ by $p_mu - eA_mu$ in our first-order equations. This is the simplest approach one could take, in which you just add a term describing, e.g. electromagnetism, to the action, and then it just couples to gravity through the metric in the volume element.



                            There are other ways of doing so by contracting the Ricci tensor with the field strength tensor, for instance, but these are non-minimal. We make choices like these all the time, even in choosing the form of the connection in the covariant derivative. So the answer in the end is that this minimal approach agrees with experiment to their current accuracies, so why complicate things?






                            share|cite|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$



                            You are right that it is not unique. The rule you mention is called minimal coupling. It is similar to electromagnetism when we replace $p_mu$ by $p_mu - eA_mu$ in our first-order equations. This is the simplest approach one could take, in which you just add a term describing, e.g. electromagnetism, to the action, and then it just couples to gravity through the metric in the volume element.



                            There are other ways of doing so by contracting the Ricci tensor with the field strength tensor, for instance, but these are non-minimal. We make choices like these all the time, even in choosing the form of the connection in the covariant derivative. So the answer in the end is that this minimal approach agrees with experiment to their current accuracies, so why complicate things?







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered yesterday









                            gmaroccogmarocco

                            1415




                            1415





















                                1












                                $begingroup$


                                I've come across several references to the idea that to upgrade a law of physics to general relativity all you have to do is replace any partial derivatives with covariant derivatives.




                                Maybe but IMHO it's a wrong idea. Covariant derivatives are needed in SR too, if you wish to use arbitrary coordinates. Which is completely allowed even though generally inconvenient. But there are exceptions - see e.g. Rindler's coordinates.



                                Of course in a curved spacetime you're obliged to use coordinates where metric takes a complicated form, simply because a coordinate system which diagonalizes the metric tensor to constant components in a finite region doesn't exist. Then covariant derivative is an imperative tool.



                                But there's no warranty that it's a sufficient method to obtain the right physical laws in GR. @DanielC already gave a classical example.






                                share|cite|improve this answer









                                $endgroup$

















                                  1












                                  $begingroup$


                                  I've come across several references to the idea that to upgrade a law of physics to general relativity all you have to do is replace any partial derivatives with covariant derivatives.




                                  Maybe but IMHO it's a wrong idea. Covariant derivatives are needed in SR too, if you wish to use arbitrary coordinates. Which is completely allowed even though generally inconvenient. But there are exceptions - see e.g. Rindler's coordinates.



                                  Of course in a curved spacetime you're obliged to use coordinates where metric takes a complicated form, simply because a coordinate system which diagonalizes the metric tensor to constant components in a finite region doesn't exist. Then covariant derivative is an imperative tool.



                                  But there's no warranty that it's a sufficient method to obtain the right physical laws in GR. @DanielC already gave a classical example.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer









                                  $endgroup$















                                    1












                                    1








                                    1





                                    $begingroup$


                                    I've come across several references to the idea that to upgrade a law of physics to general relativity all you have to do is replace any partial derivatives with covariant derivatives.




                                    Maybe but IMHO it's a wrong idea. Covariant derivatives are needed in SR too, if you wish to use arbitrary coordinates. Which is completely allowed even though generally inconvenient. But there are exceptions - see e.g. Rindler's coordinates.



                                    Of course in a curved spacetime you're obliged to use coordinates where metric takes a complicated form, simply because a coordinate system which diagonalizes the metric tensor to constant components in a finite region doesn't exist. Then covariant derivative is an imperative tool.



                                    But there's no warranty that it's a sufficient method to obtain the right physical laws in GR. @DanielC already gave a classical example.






                                    share|cite|improve this answer









                                    $endgroup$




                                    I've come across several references to the idea that to upgrade a law of physics to general relativity all you have to do is replace any partial derivatives with covariant derivatives.




                                    Maybe but IMHO it's a wrong idea. Covariant derivatives are needed in SR too, if you wish to use arbitrary coordinates. Which is completely allowed even though generally inconvenient. But there are exceptions - see e.g. Rindler's coordinates.



                                    Of course in a curved spacetime you're obliged to use coordinates where metric takes a complicated form, simply because a coordinate system which diagonalizes the metric tensor to constant components in a finite region doesn't exist. Then covariant derivative is an imperative tool.



                                    But there's no warranty that it's a sufficient method to obtain the right physical laws in GR. @DanielC already gave a classical example.







                                    share|cite|improve this answer












                                    share|cite|improve this answer



                                    share|cite|improve this answer










                                    answered yesterday









                                    Elio FabriElio Fabri

                                    3,3401214




                                    3,3401214



























                                        draft saved

                                        draft discarded
















































                                        Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                                        • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                        But avoid


                                        • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                        • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                        Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                        To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                        draft saved


                                        draft discarded














                                        StackExchange.ready(
                                        function ()
                                        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f469527%2fwhy-when-going-from-special-to-general-relativity-do-we-just-replace-partial-d%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                        );

                                        Post as a guest















                                        Required, but never shown





















































                                        Required, but never shown














                                        Required, but never shown












                                        Required, but never shown







                                        Required, but never shown

































                                        Required, but never shown














                                        Required, but never shown












                                        Required, but never shown







                                        Required, but never shown







                                        Popular posts from this blog

                                        How to write a 12-bar blues melodyI-IV-V blues progressionHow to play the bridges in a standard blues progressionHow does Gdim7 fit in C# minor?question on a certain chord progressionMusicology of Melody12 bar blues, spread rhythm: alternative to 6th chord to avoid finger stretchChord progressions/ Root key/ MelodiesHow to put chords (POP-EDM) under a given lead vocal melody (starting from a good knowledge in music theory)Are there “rules” for improvising with the minor pentatonic scale over 12-bar shuffle?Confusion about blues scale and chords

                                        What if the end-user didn't have the required library?What is setup.py?What is a clean, pythonic way to have multiple constructors in Python?What does Ruby have that Python doesn't, and vice versa?What is the reason for having '//' in Python?How do I create a namespace package in Python?How to package shared objects that python modules depend on?setuptools vs. distutils: why is distutils still a thing?Navigation in Windows 10 vs code not going to virtualenv library when the same library is installed at user levelPython create package for local usePackaging a project that uses multiple python versionsWhy is permission denied on pip install except for when “--user” is included at end of command?

                                        Esgonzo ibérico Índice Descrición Distribución Hábitat Ameazas Notas Véxase tamén "Acerca dos nomes dos anfibios e réptiles galegos""Chalcides bedriagai"Chalcides bedriagai en Carrascal, L. M. Salvador, A. (Eds). Enciclopedia virtual de los vertebrados españoles. Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid. España.Fotos