A convenient way to describe this scheme is by introducing a background metric, , thus the
gauge is not a coordinate condition, but rather a condition which links the physical metric with
the background one. In this approach, see [38
], the basic variable is a densitized symmetric
tensor,
, where
is the metric determinant with respect to the background
one,7
and
.
In these variables Einstein’s equations become,
where In that gauge, Einstein’s equations are “reduced” to a hyperbolic system by removing from them all
terms containing , for this quantity is assumed to vanish in this gauge. By doing this one gets a set
of coupled wave equations, one for each metric component. Thus by prescribing at an initial
(space-like) hypersurface values for
and of its normal derivatives one gets unique solutions
to the reduced system. When are such solutions solutions to Einstein’s equations? That is,
under what conditions does
vanish everywhere? It turns out that the Bianchi identity
grants that when
satisfies the reduced equations, then
satisfies a linear homogeneous
second order hyperbolic equation. Standard uniqueness results for such systems implies that if
initially
is chosen so that
and its normal derivative vanish at the initial surface, then
they vanish everywhere on the domain of dependence of that surface. Thus the question is now
posed on the initial data, that is, on whether it is possible to choose appropriate initial data
for the reduced system,
, in such a way that
vanish initially. It turns
out, using that the reduced equations are satisfied at the initial surface, that one can indeed
express
and its normal derivative at the initial surface, in terms of
and its derivatives
(both normal and tangential to the initial surface). Thus one finds there are plenty of initial
data sets for which solutions to the reduced system coincide with solutions to the full Einstein
system. Are they all possible solutions to Einstein’s equations, or are we loosing some of them by
imposing this scheme? The answer to the first part of the question is affirmative (subject so some
asymptotic and smoothness conditions), for one can prove that given “any” solution to the
Einstein equations, there exists a diffeomorphism which makes it satisfy the above harmonic gauge
condition.
It is important to realize that it is not necessary to set to zero to render the Einstein equations
hyperbolic; it just suffices to set it equal to some given vector field on the manifold, or any given vector
function of the space-time points and on the metric, but not its derivatives. So there are actually
many ways to hyperbolize Einsteins’s equations via the above scheme. We shall call all of them
harmonic gauge conditions, and reserve the name full harmonic condition to the one where
.
An important advantage of this method is that some gauge conditions, like the full harmonic gauge, are four-dimensional covariant – although a background metric is fixed – a condition which can be very useful for some considerations.
One drawback of this method, at least in the simplest version of the harmonic gauge, i.e. the full
harmonic gauge, was recognized early [14]. The drawback is the fact that this gauge condition can be
imposed only locally, and generically breaks down in a finite evolution time. A related problem has been
discussed recently in [5
] in the context of the hyperbolizations of the ADM variables with the harmonic
gauge along the temporal direction. The above disadvantage can be considered just a manifestation of
another: the lack of ductility of the method, that is the fact that one has been able do very little besides
imposing the full harmonic gauge condition, and that for each new harmonic gauge condition one
would like to use, a whole study of the properties of the reduced equations would have to be
undertaken. Although there are many other gauge conditions besides the harmonic one, the issue
of the possibility of their global validity, or the search for other properties of potential use,
do not seem to have been considered. For a detailed discussion of this topic, see [28
, 29
] and
also [38].
One can summarize the situation by noticing that in this setting one needs to prescribe a four vector as a harmonic gauge condition. Since the theory keeps its four dimensional covariance, then it is hard to choose any other vector but zero, that is the full harmonic gauge. Since recently there have been no advances in this area, I do not elaborate on it.
http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-1998-3 |
© Max Planck Society and the author(s)
Problems/comments to |