Finding Christoffel Symbols using via variational method.












4














I'm trying to find the Christoffel Symbols for the Lorentz metric $${rm d}s^2 = cos(2pi x)({rm d}x^2-{rm d}y^2) - 2sin(2pi x),{rm d}x,{rm d}y$$by looking at the Euler-Lagrange equations for $$L(x,dot{x},y,dot{y}) = cos(2pi x)(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2) - 2sin(2pi x),dot{x},dot{y}.$$I have already done my fair share of computations like this, but I must be making some algebraic mistake that I cannot find for the life of me. If we write $$begin{align}frac{partial L}{partial x} - frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t}&left(frac{partial L}{partial dot{x}}right) = -2pisin(2pi x)(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2)-4picos(2pi x)dot{x}dot{y} \ &qquad - frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t}left(2dot{x}cos(2pi x) - 2dot{y}sin(2pi x)right),end{align} $$and we will have a term with $ddot{y}$. This is a problem, since as far as I understand the geodesic equation corresponding to the $x$-coordinate should have the form $$ddot{x} + Gamma(dot{x},dot{y})=0,$$maybe after dividing by something. What is going on?










share|cite|improve this question






















  • I see it unavoidlable due to the existence of the cross term. The Euler-Lagrange equations aren't the geodesic ones. You need to rearrange the terms of the former to get the latter.. A practical example
    – Rafa Budría
    Nov 29 at 18:57












  • I understand and I don't, at the same time. I understand that the coefficient of $ddot{x}$ need not be $1$, which requires rearranging. And while I agree that it seems unavoidable because of the $dot{x}dot{y}$ will always generate a $ddot{y}$, I think that it should not appear there and I still don't see what is wrong. Or are you saying that that in $$g_{ell k}ddot{x}^k + g_{ell k}Gamma_{ij}^k dot{x}^idot{x}^j = 0$$ we could still have $ddot{x}_m$ terms for $m neq ell$ since the metric coefficient matrix is not diagonal?
    – Ivo Terek
    Nov 29 at 19:23








  • 1




    I don't see any reason E-L should decouple for you. Maybe you should "complete the square" and change coordinates in the metric first. It looks like it won't be pretty — but, having done it, it's not that bad, assuming you're working where $cos(2pi x)>0$.
    – Ted Shifrin
    Nov 29 at 19:55


















4














I'm trying to find the Christoffel Symbols for the Lorentz metric $${rm d}s^2 = cos(2pi x)({rm d}x^2-{rm d}y^2) - 2sin(2pi x),{rm d}x,{rm d}y$$by looking at the Euler-Lagrange equations for $$L(x,dot{x},y,dot{y}) = cos(2pi x)(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2) - 2sin(2pi x),dot{x},dot{y}.$$I have already done my fair share of computations like this, but I must be making some algebraic mistake that I cannot find for the life of me. If we write $$begin{align}frac{partial L}{partial x} - frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t}&left(frac{partial L}{partial dot{x}}right) = -2pisin(2pi x)(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2)-4picos(2pi x)dot{x}dot{y} \ &qquad - frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t}left(2dot{x}cos(2pi x) - 2dot{y}sin(2pi x)right),end{align} $$and we will have a term with $ddot{y}$. This is a problem, since as far as I understand the geodesic equation corresponding to the $x$-coordinate should have the form $$ddot{x} + Gamma(dot{x},dot{y})=0,$$maybe after dividing by something. What is going on?










share|cite|improve this question






















  • I see it unavoidlable due to the existence of the cross term. The Euler-Lagrange equations aren't the geodesic ones. You need to rearrange the terms of the former to get the latter.. A practical example
    – Rafa Budría
    Nov 29 at 18:57












  • I understand and I don't, at the same time. I understand that the coefficient of $ddot{x}$ need not be $1$, which requires rearranging. And while I agree that it seems unavoidable because of the $dot{x}dot{y}$ will always generate a $ddot{y}$, I think that it should not appear there and I still don't see what is wrong. Or are you saying that that in $$g_{ell k}ddot{x}^k + g_{ell k}Gamma_{ij}^k dot{x}^idot{x}^j = 0$$ we could still have $ddot{x}_m$ terms for $m neq ell$ since the metric coefficient matrix is not diagonal?
    – Ivo Terek
    Nov 29 at 19:23








  • 1




    I don't see any reason E-L should decouple for you. Maybe you should "complete the square" and change coordinates in the metric first. It looks like it won't be pretty — but, having done it, it's not that bad, assuming you're working where $cos(2pi x)>0$.
    – Ted Shifrin
    Nov 29 at 19:55
















4












4








4







I'm trying to find the Christoffel Symbols for the Lorentz metric $${rm d}s^2 = cos(2pi x)({rm d}x^2-{rm d}y^2) - 2sin(2pi x),{rm d}x,{rm d}y$$by looking at the Euler-Lagrange equations for $$L(x,dot{x},y,dot{y}) = cos(2pi x)(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2) - 2sin(2pi x),dot{x},dot{y}.$$I have already done my fair share of computations like this, but I must be making some algebraic mistake that I cannot find for the life of me. If we write $$begin{align}frac{partial L}{partial x} - frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t}&left(frac{partial L}{partial dot{x}}right) = -2pisin(2pi x)(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2)-4picos(2pi x)dot{x}dot{y} \ &qquad - frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t}left(2dot{x}cos(2pi x) - 2dot{y}sin(2pi x)right),end{align} $$and we will have a term with $ddot{y}$. This is a problem, since as far as I understand the geodesic equation corresponding to the $x$-coordinate should have the form $$ddot{x} + Gamma(dot{x},dot{y})=0,$$maybe after dividing by something. What is going on?










share|cite|improve this question













I'm trying to find the Christoffel Symbols for the Lorentz metric $${rm d}s^2 = cos(2pi x)({rm d}x^2-{rm d}y^2) - 2sin(2pi x),{rm d}x,{rm d}y$$by looking at the Euler-Lagrange equations for $$L(x,dot{x},y,dot{y}) = cos(2pi x)(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2) - 2sin(2pi x),dot{x},dot{y}.$$I have already done my fair share of computations like this, but I must be making some algebraic mistake that I cannot find for the life of me. If we write $$begin{align}frac{partial L}{partial x} - frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t}&left(frac{partial L}{partial dot{x}}right) = -2pisin(2pi x)(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2)-4picos(2pi x)dot{x}dot{y} \ &qquad - frac{{rm d}}{{rm d}t}left(2dot{x}cos(2pi x) - 2dot{y}sin(2pi x)right),end{align} $$and we will have a term with $ddot{y}$. This is a problem, since as far as I understand the geodesic equation corresponding to the $x$-coordinate should have the form $$ddot{x} + Gamma(dot{x},dot{y})=0,$$maybe after dividing by something. What is going on?







multivariable-calculus differential-geometry riemannian-geometry calculus-of-variations






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 29 at 18:30









Ivo Terek

45.2k951139




45.2k951139












  • I see it unavoidlable due to the existence of the cross term. The Euler-Lagrange equations aren't the geodesic ones. You need to rearrange the terms of the former to get the latter.. A practical example
    – Rafa Budría
    Nov 29 at 18:57












  • I understand and I don't, at the same time. I understand that the coefficient of $ddot{x}$ need not be $1$, which requires rearranging. And while I agree that it seems unavoidable because of the $dot{x}dot{y}$ will always generate a $ddot{y}$, I think that it should not appear there and I still don't see what is wrong. Or are you saying that that in $$g_{ell k}ddot{x}^k + g_{ell k}Gamma_{ij}^k dot{x}^idot{x}^j = 0$$ we could still have $ddot{x}_m$ terms for $m neq ell$ since the metric coefficient matrix is not diagonal?
    – Ivo Terek
    Nov 29 at 19:23








  • 1




    I don't see any reason E-L should decouple for you. Maybe you should "complete the square" and change coordinates in the metric first. It looks like it won't be pretty — but, having done it, it's not that bad, assuming you're working where $cos(2pi x)>0$.
    – Ted Shifrin
    Nov 29 at 19:55




















  • I see it unavoidlable due to the existence of the cross term. The Euler-Lagrange equations aren't the geodesic ones. You need to rearrange the terms of the former to get the latter.. A practical example
    – Rafa Budría
    Nov 29 at 18:57












  • I understand and I don't, at the same time. I understand that the coefficient of $ddot{x}$ need not be $1$, which requires rearranging. And while I agree that it seems unavoidable because of the $dot{x}dot{y}$ will always generate a $ddot{y}$, I think that it should not appear there and I still don't see what is wrong. Or are you saying that that in $$g_{ell k}ddot{x}^k + g_{ell k}Gamma_{ij}^k dot{x}^idot{x}^j = 0$$ we could still have $ddot{x}_m$ terms for $m neq ell$ since the metric coefficient matrix is not diagonal?
    – Ivo Terek
    Nov 29 at 19:23








  • 1




    I don't see any reason E-L should decouple for you. Maybe you should "complete the square" and change coordinates in the metric first. It looks like it won't be pretty — but, having done it, it's not that bad, assuming you're working where $cos(2pi x)>0$.
    – Ted Shifrin
    Nov 29 at 19:55


















I see it unavoidlable due to the existence of the cross term. The Euler-Lagrange equations aren't the geodesic ones. You need to rearrange the terms of the former to get the latter.. A practical example
– Rafa Budría
Nov 29 at 18:57






I see it unavoidlable due to the existence of the cross term. The Euler-Lagrange equations aren't the geodesic ones. You need to rearrange the terms of the former to get the latter.. A practical example
– Rafa Budría
Nov 29 at 18:57














I understand and I don't, at the same time. I understand that the coefficient of $ddot{x}$ need not be $1$, which requires rearranging. And while I agree that it seems unavoidable because of the $dot{x}dot{y}$ will always generate a $ddot{y}$, I think that it should not appear there and I still don't see what is wrong. Or are you saying that that in $$g_{ell k}ddot{x}^k + g_{ell k}Gamma_{ij}^k dot{x}^idot{x}^j = 0$$ we could still have $ddot{x}_m$ terms for $m neq ell$ since the metric coefficient matrix is not diagonal?
– Ivo Terek
Nov 29 at 19:23






I understand and I don't, at the same time. I understand that the coefficient of $ddot{x}$ need not be $1$, which requires rearranging. And while I agree that it seems unavoidable because of the $dot{x}dot{y}$ will always generate a $ddot{y}$, I think that it should not appear there and I still don't see what is wrong. Or are you saying that that in $$g_{ell k}ddot{x}^k + g_{ell k}Gamma_{ij}^k dot{x}^idot{x}^j = 0$$ we could still have $ddot{x}_m$ terms for $m neq ell$ since the metric coefficient matrix is not diagonal?
– Ivo Terek
Nov 29 at 19:23






1




1




I don't see any reason E-L should decouple for you. Maybe you should "complete the square" and change coordinates in the metric first. It looks like it won't be pretty — but, having done it, it's not that bad, assuming you're working where $cos(2pi x)>0$.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 29 at 19:55






I don't see any reason E-L should decouple for you. Maybe you should "complete the square" and change coordinates in the metric first. It looks like it won't be pretty — but, having done it, it's not that bad, assuming you're working where $cos(2pi x)>0$.
– Ted Shifrin
Nov 29 at 19:55












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















2
















  1. The infinitesimal variation of the Lagrangian
    $$ L(x,dot{x})~=~ g_{ij}(x)~ dot{x}^idot{x}^j tag{1} $$
    is
    $$ frac{1}{2}delta L~=~ -left{ color{blue}{ g_{kell}ddot{x}^{ell}} +color{red}{Gamma_{k,ij} dot{x}^idot{x}^j}right}delta x^k
    +frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{ g_{kell}dot{x}^{ell} delta x^k}right},tag{2} $$

    where we have introduced the lowered Levi-Civita Christoffel symbols
    $$Gamma_{k,ij}~:=~g_{kell}Gamma^{ell}_{ij}. tag{3} $$
    Note that eq. (2) contains three different types of terms (displayed in different colors), which are uniquely characterized by how the $t$-derivatives are distributed.



    In particular we see that the geodesic equations are multiplied with the metric, cf. OP's last question.




  2. Example. OP's Lagrangian reads
    $$L~=~c(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2) - 2sdot{x}dot{y}, qquad c~:=~cos(2pi x), qquad s~:=~sin(2pi x) ,tag{4}$$
    corresponding to the metric
    $$ begin{pmatrix} g_{xx} & g_{xy} cr g_{yx} & g_{yy} end{pmatrix} ~=~begin{pmatrix} c & -s cr -s & -c end{pmatrix}. tag{5}$$
    We calculate the infinitesimal variation:
    $$begin{align}frac{1}{2} delta L
    ~=~&left{ color{blue}{sddot{y}-cddot{x}}
    + color{red}{pi s (dot{x}^2+dot{y}^2)} right} delta x
    + left{ color{blue}{sddot{x}+cddot{y}}
    + color{red}{2pi (cdot{x}^2-sdot{x}dot{y})} right} delta y cr
    & + frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{(cdot{x}-sdot{y})delta x -(sdot{x}+cdot{y})delta y}right},
    end{align}tag{6}$$

    which should be compared with the general formula (2).



    From the red terms in eq. (6) we can read off the non-zero lowered Christoffel symbols
    $$ Gamma_{x,xx}~=~-pi s ~=~Gamma_{x,yy}~=~-Gamma_{y,xy}, qquad Gamma_{y,xx}~=~-2pi c,tag{7} $$
    cf. OP's title.








share|cite|improve this answer























    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: "69"
    };
    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: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    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%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019003%2ffinding-christoffel-symbols-using-via-variational-method%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2
















    1. The infinitesimal variation of the Lagrangian
      $$ L(x,dot{x})~=~ g_{ij}(x)~ dot{x}^idot{x}^j tag{1} $$
      is
      $$ frac{1}{2}delta L~=~ -left{ color{blue}{ g_{kell}ddot{x}^{ell}} +color{red}{Gamma_{k,ij} dot{x}^idot{x}^j}right}delta x^k
      +frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{ g_{kell}dot{x}^{ell} delta x^k}right},tag{2} $$

      where we have introduced the lowered Levi-Civita Christoffel symbols
      $$Gamma_{k,ij}~:=~g_{kell}Gamma^{ell}_{ij}. tag{3} $$
      Note that eq. (2) contains three different types of terms (displayed in different colors), which are uniquely characterized by how the $t$-derivatives are distributed.



      In particular we see that the geodesic equations are multiplied with the metric, cf. OP's last question.




    2. Example. OP's Lagrangian reads
      $$L~=~c(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2) - 2sdot{x}dot{y}, qquad c~:=~cos(2pi x), qquad s~:=~sin(2pi x) ,tag{4}$$
      corresponding to the metric
      $$ begin{pmatrix} g_{xx} & g_{xy} cr g_{yx} & g_{yy} end{pmatrix} ~=~begin{pmatrix} c & -s cr -s & -c end{pmatrix}. tag{5}$$
      We calculate the infinitesimal variation:
      $$begin{align}frac{1}{2} delta L
      ~=~&left{ color{blue}{sddot{y}-cddot{x}}
      + color{red}{pi s (dot{x}^2+dot{y}^2)} right} delta x
      + left{ color{blue}{sddot{x}+cddot{y}}
      + color{red}{2pi (cdot{x}^2-sdot{x}dot{y})} right} delta y cr
      & + frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{(cdot{x}-sdot{y})delta x -(sdot{x}+cdot{y})delta y}right},
      end{align}tag{6}$$

      which should be compared with the general formula (2).



      From the red terms in eq. (6) we can read off the non-zero lowered Christoffel symbols
      $$ Gamma_{x,xx}~=~-pi s ~=~Gamma_{x,yy}~=~-Gamma_{y,xy}, qquad Gamma_{y,xx}~=~-2pi c,tag{7} $$
      cf. OP's title.








    share|cite|improve this answer




























      2
















      1. The infinitesimal variation of the Lagrangian
        $$ L(x,dot{x})~=~ g_{ij}(x)~ dot{x}^idot{x}^j tag{1} $$
        is
        $$ frac{1}{2}delta L~=~ -left{ color{blue}{ g_{kell}ddot{x}^{ell}} +color{red}{Gamma_{k,ij} dot{x}^idot{x}^j}right}delta x^k
        +frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{ g_{kell}dot{x}^{ell} delta x^k}right},tag{2} $$

        where we have introduced the lowered Levi-Civita Christoffel symbols
        $$Gamma_{k,ij}~:=~g_{kell}Gamma^{ell}_{ij}. tag{3} $$
        Note that eq. (2) contains three different types of terms (displayed in different colors), which are uniquely characterized by how the $t$-derivatives are distributed.



        In particular we see that the geodesic equations are multiplied with the metric, cf. OP's last question.




      2. Example. OP's Lagrangian reads
        $$L~=~c(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2) - 2sdot{x}dot{y}, qquad c~:=~cos(2pi x), qquad s~:=~sin(2pi x) ,tag{4}$$
        corresponding to the metric
        $$ begin{pmatrix} g_{xx} & g_{xy} cr g_{yx} & g_{yy} end{pmatrix} ~=~begin{pmatrix} c & -s cr -s & -c end{pmatrix}. tag{5}$$
        We calculate the infinitesimal variation:
        $$begin{align}frac{1}{2} delta L
        ~=~&left{ color{blue}{sddot{y}-cddot{x}}
        + color{red}{pi s (dot{x}^2+dot{y}^2)} right} delta x
        + left{ color{blue}{sddot{x}+cddot{y}}
        + color{red}{2pi (cdot{x}^2-sdot{x}dot{y})} right} delta y cr
        & + frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{(cdot{x}-sdot{y})delta x -(sdot{x}+cdot{y})delta y}right},
        end{align}tag{6}$$

        which should be compared with the general formula (2).



        From the red terms in eq. (6) we can read off the non-zero lowered Christoffel symbols
        $$ Gamma_{x,xx}~=~-pi s ~=~Gamma_{x,yy}~=~-Gamma_{y,xy}, qquad Gamma_{y,xx}~=~-2pi c,tag{7} $$
        cf. OP's title.








      share|cite|improve this answer


























        2












        2








        2








        1. The infinitesimal variation of the Lagrangian
          $$ L(x,dot{x})~=~ g_{ij}(x)~ dot{x}^idot{x}^j tag{1} $$
          is
          $$ frac{1}{2}delta L~=~ -left{ color{blue}{ g_{kell}ddot{x}^{ell}} +color{red}{Gamma_{k,ij} dot{x}^idot{x}^j}right}delta x^k
          +frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{ g_{kell}dot{x}^{ell} delta x^k}right},tag{2} $$

          where we have introduced the lowered Levi-Civita Christoffel symbols
          $$Gamma_{k,ij}~:=~g_{kell}Gamma^{ell}_{ij}. tag{3} $$
          Note that eq. (2) contains three different types of terms (displayed in different colors), which are uniquely characterized by how the $t$-derivatives are distributed.



          In particular we see that the geodesic equations are multiplied with the metric, cf. OP's last question.




        2. Example. OP's Lagrangian reads
          $$L~=~c(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2) - 2sdot{x}dot{y}, qquad c~:=~cos(2pi x), qquad s~:=~sin(2pi x) ,tag{4}$$
          corresponding to the metric
          $$ begin{pmatrix} g_{xx} & g_{xy} cr g_{yx} & g_{yy} end{pmatrix} ~=~begin{pmatrix} c & -s cr -s & -c end{pmatrix}. tag{5}$$
          We calculate the infinitesimal variation:
          $$begin{align}frac{1}{2} delta L
          ~=~&left{ color{blue}{sddot{y}-cddot{x}}
          + color{red}{pi s (dot{x}^2+dot{y}^2)} right} delta x
          + left{ color{blue}{sddot{x}+cddot{y}}
          + color{red}{2pi (cdot{x}^2-sdot{x}dot{y})} right} delta y cr
          & + frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{(cdot{x}-sdot{y})delta x -(sdot{x}+cdot{y})delta y}right},
          end{align}tag{6}$$

          which should be compared with the general formula (2).



          From the red terms in eq. (6) we can read off the non-zero lowered Christoffel symbols
          $$ Gamma_{x,xx}~=~-pi s ~=~Gamma_{x,yy}~=~-Gamma_{y,xy}, qquad Gamma_{y,xx}~=~-2pi c,tag{7} $$
          cf. OP's title.








        share|cite|improve this answer
















        1. The infinitesimal variation of the Lagrangian
          $$ L(x,dot{x})~=~ g_{ij}(x)~ dot{x}^idot{x}^j tag{1} $$
          is
          $$ frac{1}{2}delta L~=~ -left{ color{blue}{ g_{kell}ddot{x}^{ell}} +color{red}{Gamma_{k,ij} dot{x}^idot{x}^j}right}delta x^k
          +frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{ g_{kell}dot{x}^{ell} delta x^k}right},tag{2} $$

          where we have introduced the lowered Levi-Civita Christoffel symbols
          $$Gamma_{k,ij}~:=~g_{kell}Gamma^{ell}_{ij}. tag{3} $$
          Note that eq. (2) contains three different types of terms (displayed in different colors), which are uniquely characterized by how the $t$-derivatives are distributed.



          In particular we see that the geodesic equations are multiplied with the metric, cf. OP's last question.




        2. Example. OP's Lagrangian reads
          $$L~=~c(dot{x}^2-dot{y}^2) - 2sdot{x}dot{y}, qquad c~:=~cos(2pi x), qquad s~:=~sin(2pi x) ,tag{4}$$
          corresponding to the metric
          $$ begin{pmatrix} g_{xx} & g_{xy} cr g_{yx} & g_{yy} end{pmatrix} ~=~begin{pmatrix} c & -s cr -s & -c end{pmatrix}. tag{5}$$
          We calculate the infinitesimal variation:
          $$begin{align}frac{1}{2} delta L
          ~=~&left{ color{blue}{sddot{y}-cddot{x}}
          + color{red}{pi s (dot{x}^2+dot{y}^2)} right} delta x
          + left{ color{blue}{sddot{x}+cddot{y}}
          + color{red}{2pi (cdot{x}^2-sdot{x}dot{y})} right} delta y cr
          & + frac{mathrm{d}}{mathrm{d}t}left{ color{green}{(cdot{x}-sdot{y})delta x -(sdot{x}+cdot{y})delta y}right},
          end{align}tag{6}$$

          which should be compared with the general formula (2).



          From the red terms in eq. (6) we can read off the non-zero lowered Christoffel symbols
          $$ Gamma_{x,xx}~=~-pi s ~=~Gamma_{x,yy}~=~-Gamma_{y,xy}, qquad Gamma_{y,xx}~=~-2pi c,tag{7} $$
          cf. OP's title.









        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Dec 2 at 11:23

























        answered Nov 30 at 21:35









        Qmechanic

        4,79311853




        4,79311853






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics 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.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • 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.


            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%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019003%2ffinding-christoffel-symbols-using-via-variational-method%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

            Berounka

            Sphinx de Gizeh

            Different font size/position of beamer's navigation symbols template's content depending on regular/plain...