31

Chapter 3
Accelerated Reference Frames
At the foundation of general relativity is the equivalence principle, which states
that a gravitational eld in a limited region that is a region small enough such that tidal
forces can be ignored is equivalent to an accelerated reference frame. All objects fall
with acceleration g on the surface of the Earth, neglecting air resistance and buoyancy.
Inside a rocket accelerating at g, the oor would be exerting a force of W = mg on all
objects in contact with it (where m is the mass of the object). Any object that was released
would appear to an observer stationed within the rocket to accelerate toward the oor at
g. An inertial observer stationed outside the rocket would observe the oor of the rocket
accelerating at g towards the object. The rocket could conceivably be pumped full of air so
that when accelerating, the air pressure on the oor is equal to one atmosphere. Any object
of mass m now released by an observer within the rocket would experience a buoyancy force
and air resistance as well as a perceived gravitational force of W = mg. The point is that
any experiment carried out on Earth that is local enough to be unaected by gravitational
32
tidal forces will have the same outcome as the same experiment carried out in an identical
laboratory on board a rocket accelerating steadily at g.
Consider an experiment in which a charged object is to be dropped and the re-
sulting radiation eld measured. When the charge is released, it will accelerate towards the
ground. By Maxwells theory of Electromagnetism an accelerating charge should result in
a time dependent Electromagnetic eld the charge should radiate[51][54]. By the equiv-
alence principle, this experiment could be conducted with identical results in an identical
laboratory on a rocket accelerating at rate g. When the charge is released, it appears to
the experimenter in the laboratory to accelerate toward the oor at rate g, but an inertial
observer outside the rocket would observe the charge to be in an inertial frame and the
oor of the rocket to be accelerating toward the charge. Maxwells equations state that a
uniformly moving charge does not radiate. Hence, the experimenter on board the rocket will
not detect a radiation eld. This makes sense because Maxwells equations are not valid in
an accelerating reference frame and therefore we should not expect the same behavior that
we would get in an inertial frame. Back in the laboratory on Earth the experimenter would
get the same result he/she would observe that the falling charge does not radiate. But
how does this t with Maxwells theory? The answer lies in the fact that the gravitational
eld couples with the electromagnetic eld in eect changing Maxwells equations in a
terrestrial reference frame. It is well known that stars, galaxies and gravitationally massive
objects in general will deect rays of light that stray too close, leading to such eects as
gravitational lensing, and since light is an electromagnetic wave, what we are observing
when we see such eects is the eect of the gravitational eld on the electromagnetic.
33
A similar experiment that will give interesting results is one in which a charged
object is held stationary in a laboratory on Earth and its radiation eld measured. By the
equivalence principle, the same results will be obtained if the experiment is carried out in
an accelerating rocket; the oor and the charge will be seen, in this case, to be accelerating
by an inertial observer outside the rocket. As a result, the charge should radiate and
the experimenter on board the rocket will measure a radiation eld. Likewise, on Earth
a stationary charge should radiate as though it were accelerating at g upwards. This is
because the gravitational eld acts not only upon the material charge but also upon the
electromagnetic eld itself. It is our task in this chapter to nd a coordinate system for
an accelerated observer. Such a system is called a Rindler system. We shall examine in
particular the physical construction of such a coordinate system.
3.1 What is an Accelerated Reference Frame?
The question as to what an accelerated reference frame actually is would seem to
be easily answerable, but there are quite a few subtleties involved. In Newtonian mechanics,
transforming to an accelerated reference frame is quite a simple matter. All that needs to
be done is a simple transformation:
x

= x vt
a
2
t
2
y

= y
z

= z
34
Then a substitution into Newtons force equation F = ma gives:
m
d
2
x

dt
2
= F
x
_
x

+ vt +
a
2
t
2
, y

, z

_
ma
m
d
2
y

dt
2
= F
y
_
x

+ vt +
a
2
t
2
, y

, z

_
m
d
2
z

dt
2
= F
z
_
x

+ vt +
a
2
t
2
, y

, z

_
What are the transformation equations that will take us from an inertial reference
frame to an accelerated one in special relativity? To answer this question we will have to
consider a number of things. First What if we set up a number of stationary particles
lets call them points that have no forces between them. Each point is labelled with
a number that corresponds to its signed distance from a designated reference point. A
constant force is then synchronously with respect to the initial inertial frame applied
to all of these points giving them a constant acceleration of, say, g. Perhaps each point can
also have a clock attached so that anyone accelerating with one of the points will be able
to tell the proper time that has passed for each point. The question is, does this constitute
a satisfactory system for someone being accelerated, perhaps in a rocket, at a rate g in
the same direction as the points? The answer, we will see, is no. Initially, for reasonable
accelerations those that do not cause a signicant increase in for a reasonable duration
this coordinate system will suce. Of course this is because it is identical to the Newtonian
coordinate change just discussed as a little thought will show. But after a while, the velocity
of the rocket travelling with the accelerated system will be great enough, such that there
is an increase in , and as a result, the rocket and the laboratory it contains, will have
undergone a length contraction of l
0

1
, where l
0
is the length of the rocket measured in
an instantaneous rest frame. To the inhabitants of the rocket, if using the points they are
35
accelerating with to make measurements, they would notice the rocket and everything it
contained including themselves to be shrinking (actually, psychologically it would look
more like the coordinate system was growing)! Clearly this is not a suitable coordinate
system, although it should be noted that it is still a valid one.
Diagram 3.1 shows the motion of a set of points spaced at intervals of one light-year
and undergoing a constant acceleration of 9.807 ms
2
with respect to their instantaneous
rest frame. Notice that the distance between any two points does not change when the
measurement is made in the initial inertial frame. Also note that after a sucient length
of time - one to two years in this case - the velocity nears that of light with respect to a
stationary, non-accelerating observer - that is, an observer in the initial inertial frame.
What we need to do is set up a rigid coordinate system within the rocket. This
would be the more natural reference system because such a system is carried along in the
rocket. A measurement of height would correspond to using the markings on the laboratory
wall being accelerated with the rocket. A whole coordinate grid could be setup within the
rocket like scaolding and measurements of position made with respect to this. If, instead
of emulating Earth gravity, the rocket is to be emulating much larger gravitational elds
and therefore is accelerating with many g-forces then this scaolding can be imagined to
be suspended in a uid to reduce stress. The coordinate scaolding built into the rocket
laboratory can be viewed as being in thermodynamic equilibrium, although what is specif-
ically important is that it be in mechanical equilibrium. This is quite possible. Just as
buildings or chairs or jellies can exist in a stationary unchanging state - specically in re-
lation to their dimensions - while resting upon the surface of the Earth, so also can they
36
-10 -7.5 -5 -2.5 2.5 5 7.5 10
Light years
-10
-7.5
-5
-2.5
2.5
5
7.5
10
Years
Figure 3.1:
37
reach an equilibrium state while being accelerated at a constant rate as a result of pressure
from the oor of a rocket. Take the example of a jelly. While suspended in zero a it can
be in a state of thermodynamic equilibrium. Now place the jelly on the oor of a rocket
and initiate acceleration. Providing the acceleration is not too great (if the acceleration is
huge the deformations involved will be plastic) the jelly will undergo an elastic deformation
whereby its height becomes reduced and it bulges at the edges as a result of its own weight.
The internal stresses within the jelly will certainly cause it to undergo the deformation just
described but, after a short amount of time, it will reach an equilibrium state and become
stationary. Scaolding is unlikely to be built out of jelly, and since iron, aluminium etc. do
not deform so readily the deformation of materials can be ignored or compensated for in
the construction of a rigid coordinate system. The essential idea is that at any two times
in the journey of the rocket, the top and bottom of the scaolding and any points selected
between maintain constant distances from each other with respect to the instantaneous
reference frames in which they are at rest.
How should we measure time in the rocket reference system? We shall choose
the clock upon the rockets oor to read the time we associate with the instantaneous
inertial frame. Well see later that clocks tick at dierent rates depending upon their height
above/below the oor. We can compensate for this by calibrating each to read oor time.
Well come back to this issue when it is time to construct the transformation equations.
38
3.2 An accelerated particle
What is the equation of motion of a particle undergoing a constant acceleration
g in each of its instantaneous rest frames? Let us denote the velocity of a particle in the
following way:
U =
dx
dt
We reserve the letter V to denote velocity in a Lorentz transformation. We will denote
acceleration as follows:
a =
dU
dt
From the Lorentz coordinate transformations for a velocity boost in the positive x-direction,
we can derive the transformation equations for the components of acceleration. Doing so
yields:
a

x
=
a
x

3
V
_
1
V U
x
c
2
_
3
(3.1)
a

y
=
a
y
+ V/c
2
(U
y
a
x
U
x
a
y
)

2
V
_
1
V U
x
c
2
_
3
a

z
=
a
z
+V/c
2
(U
z
a
x
U
x
a
z
)

2
V
_
1
V U
x
c
2
_
3
We are looking for an equation of motion such that in each instantaneous rest frame the par-
ticle will have an acceleration of g. Let us try the following equations and initial conditions,
39
which are analogous to the Newtonian equations for constant acceleration:
d
dt
(
U
U
x
) = g (3.2)
d
dt
(
U
U
y
) = 0
d
dt
(
U
U
z
) = 0
U
x
(0) = 0
U
y
(0) = 0
U
z
(0) = 0
If we Lorentz transform to a frame with velocity U
x
, meaning we transform to a frame in
which the particle is at rest, we see from equations 3.1 that a

y
and a

z
are zero because U
y
,
a
y
, U
z
and a
z
are equal to zero throughout the particles motion. Solving the rst of the
equations 3.2, we nd:
a
x
=
g
_

3
U
U
2
c
2
+
_ (3.3)
Where, in equation 3.3 and in the equations that follow, U
x
has been replaced by U and is a
function of U. Substituting this into the rst of the equations 3.1, noting that every instance
of V should be replaced with U, and then simplifying, we nd that a

x
= g. Therefore we
see that equations 3.2 and equation 3.3 are the appropriate equations of motion, for they
describe an object undergoing a constant acceleration g with respect to its instantaneous
frame of rest. For the rest of this section we will set c = 1.
The next step is to nd the velocity of the particle as a function of t. Since U
y
and U
z
will equal zero throughout the motion, we will denote U
x
by U and
U
by for
simplicity. Integrating both sides of the rst of the equations 3.2 with respect to t and
40
noting that the constant of integration will be zero if the initial velocity is to be zero, we
nd:
U =
U

1 U
2
= gt (3.4)
Solving this equation for U, we get:
U =
gt
_
1 + (gt)
2
(3.5)
We can now calculate how depends on time by substituting U (t) into and simplifying.
The result is:
=
_
1 + (gt)
2
(3.6)
It will be useful to know the proper time that has elapsed for the particle, partic-
ularly if the particle is part of the oor of our rocket, because it is just this proper time
that a clock will be measuring. Let denote the proper time. Also note that proper time is
related to inertial time by d = dt/. Setting the clocks initial time to zero and integrating
to time t, we see that the proper time of the accelerated particle is given by:
=
_
t
0
dt

_
1 + (gt

)
2
=
sinh
1
(gt)
g
(3.7)
And hence:
gt = sinh(g)
Next, we would like to nd the displacement equation which we can do by inte-
grating U with respect to time t as follows:
x x
0
=
_
t
0
U
_
t

_
dt

=
1
g
_
_
1 + (gt)
2
1
_
(3.8)
41
Rearranging this equation and noting that we have dened x
f
to be x
f
= x
0

1
g
, we get:
g
2
(x x
f
)
2
g
2
t
2
= 1 (3.9)
Equation 3.9 is clearly a hyperbola. It is interesting that in Newtonian mechanics the
displacement of a particle undergoing constant acceleration is a parabola whereas, when
the equations are modied for special relativity, the displacement traces out a hyperbola -
another kind of conic section.
3.3 Transformation equations for an accelerated reference
frame
First note that, again that in this section, c = 1, and second that the oor of the
rocket will be accelerating in the x direction at a constant rate of g, therefore allowing us to
use the equations of the last section. When we compare two inertial frames, say A and B,
where B has a velocity V in the positive xdirection with respect to A, we see that the set
of all simultaneous events occurring in frame B at a time t
0
forms a 3-dimensional slice of
space-time. This slice intersects the set of all simultaneous events occurring at time t = 0
with respect to frame A. If we suppress the other two spatial dimensions (y and z) - as we
will do for the rest of this section - we see that the x-axis of system A is intersected by the
x

-axis of system B . Setting t

= const. in the Lorentz transformation equations that take

events in system B (the primed system) to events in system A (the unprimed system), we
see that the equations of lines parallel to the x

-axis of system B relative to system A are

42
given by:
t = V x + k (3.10)
where k is a constant. From equation 3.10, we can see that the greater the velocity of
system B, the greater the gradient. All events that are simultaneous relative to system B
with some time t
0
lie on lines that are described by an equation of the form 3.10.
For the accelerated reference frame, the spacial slice at a time t is the straight line
having a gradient V that intercepts the trajectory of the particle at point (x(t) , t), where
it has velocity V . What does this mean? It means that if we were being accelerated in the
rocket, any measurements we made with rulers at time t would be made as though we were
in an inertial frame travelling at velocity V . So, as time passes, the rulers on the rocket
are continually shrinking in the x-direction relative to someone in the initial inertial frame
because is getting bigger and bigger due to the rockets increasing velocity. Note that
if the acceleration and velocity of the rocket are initially in opposite directions, then the
rockets velocity will initially decrease with time and therefore will decrease instead of
increase. The point to note, however, is that is not a constant but a function of time t.
The rulers and position measurement devices used in the laboratory on board the rocket
take measurements with respect to the inertial frame in which they are instantaneously at
rest. But the changing velocity means that the slope of the x

-axis changes with time. It

would be interesting to see how the point of intersection with the initial x-axis changes with
time. To do this, rst note that because the acceleration is constant, the velocity at one
time is dierent to that at another, and therefore we can solve equation 3.5 for t. The result
43
is the following equation - note that U = V :
t =
V
g

1 V
2
=
V
g
(3.11)
Substituting for t in equation 3.8 and rearranging, we get:
gx =
1

1 V
2
+ gx
0
1 = + gx
0
1
Substituting the last two equations into equation 3.10 and solving for k, we get:
k =
V
g
V x
0
(3.12)
Substituting this into equation 3.10 gives:
t = V
_
x +
1
g
x
0
_
Which is the equation that describes the set of events simultaneous - with respect to the
reference frame when the rocket is instantaneously at rest - to the event when the rocket
oor is at velocity V . Substituting 3.12 into 3.10, setting t = 0, and solving for x, gives the
event P = (0, x
p
) of intersection with the initial inertial frames x-axis:
x
P
= x
0

1
g
Note that this is independent of V . The event P does not depend upon the velocity of
the rockets oor. It is the focal point of the hyperbola that describes the rocket oors
motion, and, as such, the oor of the rocket never gets any further away from it. This may
seem confusing so lets examine this further. First, the event P is a simultaneous event with
the rocket throughout its acceleration - it is like an event frozen in time. We should note
that this event (plane of events if we include the y and z dimensions) is an artefact of the
44
coordinate system we are using and that no light from this event will ever reach the rocket.
In fact, this point is quite distant for reasonable accelerations - for an acceleration of g the
point is almost a light-year below the oor of the rocket. Looking at diagram 3.2 we can
get a better idea of what is going on.The hyperbola on the right is the world line of the
rocket, which is at all times undergoing an acceleration of g. The lines passing through the
origin all represent allowable spatial slices of space-time. It just so happens that wherever
the hyperbola intersects the lines it does so in the direction of the temporal axis associated
with the Lorentz frame that the line denes. In other words: the tangent vector to the
hyperbola at any event E on its world line points along the time-axis of the inertial frame
with a space-axis coincident with the line joining the origin to this same event E.
To derive the transformation equations we will need a few identities, some of which
we have already derived. It will be helpful to restate the identities already derived and some
of the others that are needed in one spot. This is done here:
gt = sinh(g) (3.13)
_
1 + (gt)
2
= cosh(g) (3.14)
= cosh(g) (3.15)
V = tanh(g) (3.16)
Equation 3.14 is the result of substituting equation 3.13 into the hyperbolic identity cosh
2
(g)
sinh
2
(g) = 1 and rearranging. Since =
_
1 + (gt)
2
(equation 3.6) we get equation 3.15
from equation 3.14. We get equation 3.16 by substituting equations 3.13 and 3.14 into
equation 3.5. As mentioned earlier we are going to use the proper time of the oor of the
rocket to label time in our accelerated system. Given a point on the oor (x

= 0), and the

45
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0.5 1 1.5 2
Light years
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1
1.5
2
Years
Figure 3.2:
46
proper time = t

, we can immediately know the time t in the initial inertial frame - it is

simply given by equation 3.13. Given the proper time and some distance above the oor
of the rocket, how do we determine the time t in the initial inertial frame? First we look at
the time t given by a proper time of on the rocket oor (equation 3.13 again). Then to
that we must add the time t

as seen in diagram 3.3. The slope of line SR is V since the

x

-axis corresponds to space in the instantaneous inertial frame in which the rocket is at
rest. Therefore t

= V x. From length contraction we get x

= x/ - again refer to diagram

3.3. Therefore we have t

= V x

. If we now substitute for and V as given be equations

3.15 and 3.16, and then simplify, we see that the time t is given in terms of and x

by the
following equation:
t =
_
x

+
1
g
_
sinh(g) (3.17)
To get x in terms of both x

and we rst substitute equation 3.13 into equation

3.8 to get the x position of the oor of the rocket in terms of proper time . Doing so gives:
x
oor
= x
0

1
g
+
1
g
cosh(g) (3.18)
If we know the proper time and the position x

of an event in the accelerated (rocket)

frame, how can we nd the position x in the initial inertial frame? First work out the
x position of the oor - this is simply given by equation 3.18. Next add a term x

(see
diagram 3.3). Due to Lorentz contraction, x

is related to the distance x

above the rocket

oor by x

= x

. Substituting from equation 3.15 into this, adding the result to x

oor
and simplifying, we get the distance x in the initial inertial frame in terms of proper time
and distance above the rocket oor x

:
x = x
0

1
g
+
_
x

+
1
g
_
cosh(g) (3.19)
47
Thus, the two transformation equations we have been looking for are equations 3.17 and
3.19, which are given again below:
t =
_
x

+
1
g
_
sinh(g)
x = x
0

1
g
+
_
x

+
1
g
_
cosh(g)
3.4 Inverse Transformation
So far, the transformation equations, when supplied with the time and place of
an event relative to the rocket reference frame, will give us the time and place label of an
event relative to the initial inertial observer. If we know the time and place of an event
relative to the initial inertial frame and we what to nd the time and place of that same
event relative to the rocket frame, we will need to solve the transformation equations for
x

and in terms of x and t. For simplicity we set x

0
= 0. By inspection we see that
t/ (x + 1/g) = tanh(g), hence we can immediately solve for in terms of x and t. To get
x

in terms of x and we note that (x + 1/g) = (x

+ 1/g) cosh(g), using equation 3.17

and the hyperbolic Pythagorean identity we see that:
_
x

+
1
g
_
2
_
cosh
2
(g) sinh
2
(g)
_
=
_
x

+
1
g
_
2
=
_
x +
1
g
_
2
t
2
and we may immediately solve for x

in terms of x and t. The resulting transformation

equations are:
=
1
g
tanh
1
_
t
x +
1
g
_
(3.20)
x

=
_
(x + 1/g)
2
t
2
1/g (3.21)
48
t
*
=Vx
*
0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2
Light years
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
1.25
1.5
1.75
2
Years
x'
t
*
=Vx
*
x
*
=x'
S=(x
0
,t
0
)
R=(x,t)
Figure 3.3:
49
3.5 Coordinate Diagrams
What does a coordinate overlay of the accelerated coordinate system look like?
What we mean by this is if a family of lines of constant and a family of lines of constant
x

were drawn on the standard spacetime diagram (t being the vertical axis and x being the
horizontal), what would they look like? A standard Lorentz transformation with velocity
v = 0.5 (half the speed of light), with t

and x

the transformed coordinates, appears as in

diagram 3.4.
The coordinates used by an accelerated reference system appear as diagram 3.5
shows.Each of the horizontal lines is a line of constant time - these are the instantaneous
spatial coordinates. The Hyperbolae are lines of constant distance - they represent the
worldlines of objects that are at rest relative to the rocket system. The proper time that
parameterizes the worldline through the origin measures the elapsed time. The clocks on
the other worldlines will all be going at dierent rates, therefore, if we are to read the
rocket oor time at some elevation above the rocket oor, the clock situated there has to
be designed to tick slower to give the coordinate time.
Notice no light from events to the left of the positive-gradient 45

line through
event P the event radiating all the spatial axes can ever reach an observer situated
forever in the rocket system this line is an apparent event-horizon. We call the event
horizon apparent because it is an artefact of the coordinate system and not a property of
spacetime itself.
50
-4 -2 2 4
Distance @LD
-4
-2
2
4
Time @LD
Figure 3.4:
51
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0.5 1
Lightyears
-1
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
Years
Figure 3.5:
52
3.6 The Metric Tensor Accelerated Coordinates
It will be extremely useful to have an expression for the metric tensor in the
accelerated coordinate system because we could use it to nd the Christoel symbols and
therefore derive the equations of motion Maxwells equations etc. as they explicitly appear
in that coordinate system. The metric tensor in an inertial reference frame takes the form

=
_

_
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
_

_
(3.22)
This, of course, gives the standard Minkowski line element ds
2
= dt
2
dx
2
dy
2
dz
2
. We
will work out the components of the metric tensor in the accelerated coordinate system by
directly transforming the expression for the two-dimensional line element ds
2
= dt
2
dx
2
.
Using equations 3.17 and 3.19 we nd the dierentials dt and dx are given by:
dt = sinh(g) dx

+
_
gx

+ 1
_
cosh(g) d
dx = cosh(g) dx

+
_
gx

+ 1
_
sinh(g) d
Substituting these two equations into ds
2
= dt
2
dx
2
and collecting terms we nd:
ds
2
=
_
gx

+ 1
_
2
d
2
dx
2
53
Going back to four dimensions, we see the metric tensor takes the form:
g

=
_

_
(gx

+ 1)
2
0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
_

_
(3.23)
This metric appears to be similar to the standard Minkowski form (3.22) except for g
00
=
(gx

+ 1)
2
which is a function of x

. The metric does not depend at all on the y

, z

, and
coordinates. Note that because g

is dependent on x

, the Christoel symbols generated

by this metric will not be equal to zero.
What does a metric like that of equation 3.23 mean? First, note it does not ex-
plicitly depend on time this is important because otherwise particles that maintain the
same spatial coordinates throughout their motion will have time dependent distances from
one another. To have a time dependent distance between two constant spatial coordinates
means that if one object is at spatial position (x

0
, y

0
, z

0
) and another at position (x

1
, y

1
, z

1
)
then the distance (as in coordinate distance) between them at time t

is not necessarily the

distance between then at time t

. The fact that the metric given by equation 3.23 has the
property that distances remain constant is reminiscent of phenomena upon the Earth - if
we put an object on a shelf at a distance of 1 m above the ground and another a distance
of 2 m then the distance between them will always remain constant - namely 1 m.
It is instructive to examine g
00
, since it is the only term in equation 3.23 that
diers from the Minkowski form of the metric. When x

= 0 (oor of the rocket) we can

see that g
00
= 1. When x

> 0, g
00
> 1, and when 1/g < x

< 0 we see that 0 < g

00
< 1.
Note that because we have set c = 1, 1/g has units of meters and is a very large number in
54
these units for terrestrial accelerations for g = 9.8 ms
2
we nd 1/g =
_
3 10
8
_
2
/9.8 m =
9.18 10
15
m. So if an object is above the oor of the rocket then g
00
> 1, if it is on the
oor then g
00
= 1, and if it is below the oor then 0 < g
00
< 1. If we integrate ds to nd
the time interval between two times t
0
and t
1
we will nd that the greater the elevation of
an object the greater the elapsed time between t
0
and t
1
- that is, the higher the object the
faster time passes for it. How can more time pass for one object than for another between
the two times t
0
and t
1
? What we must remember is that t
0
and t
1
are only labels. We
could equally well use the times displayed on other clocks above or below the oor to label
the time, in which case the labels will be dierent. The labels are not important, it is the
proper time that is the physically meaningful quantity, which we measure by attaching a
clock to the object. Of course, we can just work out the time that would be measured this
way by integrating ds along the world line of the object.
We now calculate the Christoel symbols for the metric. Remember the Chrostoel
symbols are dened by:

= g

(g
,
+ g
,
g
,
)
Where g
,
=
g
x

, and g

is the inverse of g

, which is stated for convenience by the

following equation:
g

=
_

_
(gx

+ 1)
2
0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
_

_
The only g
,
=
g
x

that is not 0 is g
00,1
= 2g (1 + gx

). A calculation of the Christoel

55
symbols gives

0
01
=
0
10
=
g
1 + gx

(3.24)

1
00
= g
_
1 + gx

_
All the rest are equal to zero.
This pretty much ends our discussion.