Lect Notes-2
Lect Notes-2
relativity
(Courses in canonical gravity)
Yaser Tavakoli
1 Space-time foliation
The Hamiltonian formulation of ordinary mechanics is given in terms of a set
of canonical variables q and p at a given instant of time t. In field theory,
however, one is dealing with fields rather than a mechanical system then
the canonical variables ϕ(x) are functions of position, and their canonical
momenta are πϕ (x), both given at an instant of time. General relativity
treats space and time on the same footing, that is not what is done in
Hamiltonian formulations. Therefore, in order to discuss general relativity in
a Hamiltonian fashion, one needs to break that equal footing. This requires a
space-time splitting, since only time derivatives are transformed to momenta
but not space derivatives.
We assume a foliation of space-time in terms of space-like three dimen-
sional surfaces S of space-time manifold M . Thus, we consider the case
of a Lorentzian manifold M diffeomorphic to R × S, where the manifold S
represents ‘space’, and t ∈ R represents ‘time’. It should be noted that, the
particular slicing of space-time into ‘instants of time’ is an arbitrary choice,
rather than something intrinsic to the world. In other words, there are lots
of way to pick a diffeomorphism
ϕ : M −→ R × S.
1
Canonical General Relativity 2
2 Geometry of hypersurfaces
Let us consider a surface Σ ≈ Σt0 : t0 = const in a foliated space-time
manifold R×Σ. This can be considered as a constraint surface characterized
by Ct0 = t − t0 = 0. Notice that, the geometry of the constraint surface Σt0
in a space-time is governed by a Riemannian geometry with the metric gab
(with the inverse g ab ) rather than a Poisson or symplectic one on a phase
space.
In analogy to the Poisson geometry, let us associate to the constraint
Ct0 a (Hamiltonian-like) vector field as g ♯ dCt0 on the Riemannian geometry
(which is given by a metric tensor g ab rather than a Poisson tensor P ij ):
This shows that, in the herein Riemannian geometry, the vector field X a =
g ab ∂b t is normal1 to the constraint surface Σt0 ; this is opposite to the case
happens in the Poisson geometry where the Hamiltonian vector field of a
single, necessarily first class constraint must be tangent to the constraint
surface. This is, indeed, because of the antisymmetric feature of the Poisson
tensor that makes the Hamiltonian vector field of a single constraint C
tangent to the constraint surface: XC C = P ij ∂i C∂j C = 0.
Using the definition of the normal vector X a we can determine the nor-
malized (time-like) normal vector to the surface as
Xa
na = √ , (2.2)
−gbc X b X c
such that gab na nb = −1. Furthermore, for any vector field sa tangent to Σt0
we have gab sa nb = 0.
The tangent space in T M at each point of Σt can be decomposed to
a ‘spatial tangent space’ spanned by vectors tangent to Σt , and a ‘normal
space’ spanned by the unique unit future-pointing vector field na normal to
Σt . For example, given a vector field Z a ∈ Tp M at any point p ∈ Σt , we
can decompose it into a component tangent to Σt and a normal component
proportional to nb :
Each spatial slice Σt is equipped with its own Riemannian structure. The
induced metric hab on Σt can be uniquely determined by using the two
conditions that
for any vector sa tangent to Σt . So that, the induced metric hab reads
hab = gab + na nb (2.5)
Interestingly, in comparison to the Poisson geometry, the induced metric
hab is analogous to the Dirac bracket, which subtracts from off the Poisson
structure any contribution from the flow of the constraints transversal to
the constraint surface. The inverse of the induced metric hab can be defined
as hab = g ab + na nb .
In order to study the dynamics of the canonical formulation, we con-
sider an interpretation of the induced metric hab as a time-dependent 3-
dimensional tensor field on the family of manifolds Σt . Thus, the time-
dependent fields hab will play a crucial role as the configuration variables
of canonical gravity. In this way, it makes sense to define time derivatives
of the induced metric or any other fields. Let us introduce a time-evolution
vector field t = ta ∇a to define the direction of time derivatives, such that
ta is normalized: ta ∇a t = 1. By introducing the shift vector N a := hab tb ,
and the laps function N := −nb tb , the time-evolution vector field ta can be
decomposed to the spatial and normal parts as
ta = N na + N a . (2.6)
Using this relation, we can write the inverse space-time metric as
1 a
g ab = hab − na nb = hab − (t − N a )(tb − N b ). (2.7)
N2
By inverting this matrix and writing it in coordinate basis we obtain the
line element
gab dxa dxb = −N 2 dt2 + hab (dxa + N a dt) (dxb + N b dt) (2.8)
Dc T a1 ···akb1 ···bl := (ha1d1 · · · hakdk hb1e1 · · · hbl el )hc f ∇f T c1 ···cn d1 ···dm . (2.10)
Thus, Kab measures how much the surface Σ is curved in the way it sits in
M , because it says how much a vector tangent to Σ will fail to be tangent
if we parallel translate it a bit using the Levi-Civita connection ∇ on M .
.
(iii) From the symmetric property of Kab we have that Kab = 12 (Kab +Kba );
using this together with (2.13) we can write
Thus, the extrinsic curvature is half of the Lie derivative of the intrinsic
metric along the unit normal:
1
Kab = Ln hab (2.16)
2
1 ( )
Kab = ḣab − Da Nb − Db Na (2.18)
2N
Using the symmetry of the spatial projection of ∇a nb , the last term in this
equation vanishes. The result is the Codazzi equation:
This equation can be derived in terms of Ln , the Lie derivative along the
unit normal na , of the extrinsic curvature Kab , and the normal acceleration
aa := nc ∇c na (satisfying aa na = 0):
Rab na nb = Racdc na nb
From the Gauss-Codazzi equations together with the Ricci equation, the
Ricci scalar R reads
Then, using the symmetry of the Riemann tensor, we find the Ricci scalar
in terms of the extrinsic curvature
R = (3)
R + Kab K ab − (K aa )2 − 2∇a v a (2.27)
up to boundary terms which do not affect local field equations. The deter-
minant det g = −N 2 det h.
3.1 Constraints
Eq. (3.2) shows that the ten independent components of the space-time
metric gab are replaced by the six components of the induced Riemannian
metric hab on the slice Σ, plus the three components of the shift vector Na
and the lapse function N . The action of general relativity depends on ḣab via
Canonical General Relativity 9
extrinsic curvature Kab , thus, one can obtain the momentum pab conjugate
to hab :
δLgrav 1 δLgrav
pab (x) = =
δ ḣab (x) 2N δKab
√ ( )
det h
= K ab − Kcc hab . (3.3)
16πG
However, the action does not depend on time derivatives of the remaining
space-time metric component N and N a ; therefore, momenta conjugate to
N and N a , are given, respectively, by
δLgrav δLgrav
pN (x) = =0 and pa (x) = =0, (3.4)
δ Ṅ (x) δ Ṅ a (x)
presenting two constraints on the gravitational phase space. Since the rela-
tion (3.3) can be inverted for
16πGN
ḣab = √ (2pab − pcc hab ) + 2D(a Nb) , (3.5)
det h
thus, relations in (3.4) present two primary constraints. Then one can work
out the total Hamiltonian by the formula
∫ ( )
Hgrav = d3 x ḣab pab + λpN + µa pa − Lgrav , (3.6)
By working out the Poisson bracket in these relations we obtain the so-called
Hamiltonian constraint:
( ) √
16πG 1 a 2 det h (3)
Cgrav = √ pab p − (pa ) −
ab
R ≈ 0 (3.10)
det h 2 16πG
∫ √ √
We have integrated by parts, using 2 d3 x det hDa (pab Nb / det h) as a
boundary term for any vector field N a , in derivation of Cgrav .
The lapse function N and the shift vector N a now play the role of La-
grange multipliers of the secondary constraints. Then, with these notations,
the total Hamiltonian, as a linear combination of the constraints, can be
written as where we identify the Hamiltonian density as follows
∫
Hgrav = d3 x (N Cgrav + N a Cagrav + λpN + µa pN a ) + H∂Σ (3.12)
The first relation just reproduces the equation (3.5) in terms of the momen-
tum. Finally the last relation is a non-trivial evolution equation which can
be computed in several steps. We write only the final equation here (for
details of calculation see [2]):
δHgrav
ṗab = {pab , Hgrav } = −
δhab
√ ( ) ( )
N det h (3) ab 1 (3) ab 8πGN ab cd 1 c 2
= − R − Rh + √ h p pcd − (pc )
16πG 2 det h 2
( ) √ ( )
32πGN 1 det h
− √ pac pcb − pab pcc + Da Db N − hab Dc Dc N
det h 2 16πG
√ ( √ )
+ det hDc pab N c / det h − 2pc(a Dc N b) . (3.14)
The point is that, even on the physical phase space where Hgrav = 0, the
time evolution given by Hamilton’s equations is nontrivial.
If matter sources are present, they, too, contribute to the action and thus
to the canonical constraints. In particular, the matter Hamiltonian Cmatt
will be added to the Hamiltonian constraint Cgrav , and energy flows of matter
will be added to the diffeomorphism constraint Cagrav . Then, the combined
Hamiltonian constraint is C = Cgrav + Cmatt and the total diffeomorphism
constraint reads Ca = Cagrav +Camatt . It is convenient to exhibit the structure
of the system for constraints in smeared form, integrated with respect to
the multipliers N and N a : the smeared Hamiltonian and diffeomorphism
constraints are given, respectively, by
∫ ∫
3
H[N ] := d xN (x)C(x) = d3 xN (Cgrav + Cmatt ) , (3.15)
∫ ∫
( )
D[N a ] := d3 xN a (x)Ca (x) = d3 xN a Cagrav + Camatt . (3.16)
Recall that the lapse and shift measure how much time evolution pushes
the slice Σ in the normal direction and the tangent direction, respectively.
In particular, if we set the shift equal to zero, the Hamiltonian for general
Canonical General Relativity 12
The relations above are know as Dirac algebra. In the first two lines, we sim-
ply have the expected action of infinitesimal spatial diffeomorphisms, with
multipliers on the right-hand side given by Lie derivatives LN b M a = [N, M ]a
and LN a N = N a ∂a N . The last line, includes the phase space function hab ,
Canonical General Relativity 13
which is the so-called structure function, rather than just phase-space inde-
pendent structure constants.
References
[1] John C. Baez, Javier P. Muniain, Gauge Fields, Knots and Gravity,
(Series on Knots and Everything, Vol 4, 1994).