Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
formalism
Luciano Rezzolla
i.e. even the GWs from the most intense sources will
statistically reach us as very weak
Not just an academic exercise
The calculation of the waveforms is not just an academic
achievement. Several millions !s and thousands man-hours are
dedicated to one of the most challenging physical experiments.
Knowledge of the
waveforms can
compensate for the
very small S/N
(matched-filtering).
enhance detection
and allow for source-
characterization
possible.
Numerical Relativity: why so hard?
" No obviously better formulation of the Einstein equations
ADM, conformal traceless decomposition, first-order hyperbolic, harmonic, ???
" Coordinates (spatial and time) do not have a specific meaning
this gauge freedom needs to be handled with care!
Which part of the spacetime to cover?
Consider the simplest black-hole spacetime in Cartesian
coordinates
future timelike infinity infinitely away
t timelike (finite) slice
singularity
horizon
+
I future null infinity
n
izo
r
ho
0
0 i spacelike infinity
I past null infinity
i past timelike infinity
Which part of the spacetime to cover?
Consider the simplest black-hole spacetime: its conformal
representation is given by a Carter-Penrose diagram
+
singularity i
timelike (infinite) slice
+
I
0
0 i
I
spacelike (infinite) slice
i
Spacelike finite slices
Most common discretization of the spacetime. Reminescent of
fluid dynamics; introduces complications from outer boundary
+
singularity i timelike outer
boundary
+
I
0
0 i
very natural choice
to define initial data
and interpret results; I
outer boundary is
placed as far out as
possible i
Spacelike infinite (conformal) slices
Not common discretization of the spacetime: spacelike infinity
is included in the grid; requires suitable coord transformations
+
singularity i
outer boundary
always at
+ spacelike infinity
I
0
0 i
care needed for
treatment of
outgoing radiation;
I
removes need for
outer boundary
conditions i
Null (ingoing-outgoing) slices
Not common discretization of the spacetime. Works well in
1D but not employed in higher dimensions
+
singularity i
+
I future null infinity
0
0 i
very natural to
study radiation
(exact answer);
I past null infinity
specification of
initial data highly
non trivial i
spacelike-characteristic slices (CCE)
Combines advantages of spacelike slices with accurate
description of outgoing radiation; tested in 3D linear regimes
+ Cauchy-characteristic
singularity i
extraction (CCE)
+
I
0
0 i
very natural to study
radiation (exact
answer); specification I
of initial data simple;
matching can be important progress
cumbersome i done at AEI
Numerical Relativity: why so hard?
" No obviously better formulation of the Einstein equations
ADM, conformal decomposition, first-order hyperbolic form, harmonic, ???
" Coordinates (spatial and time) do not have a special meaning
this gauge freedom need to be handled with care!
gauge conditions must avoid singularities
gauge conditions must counteract grid stretching
Choosing the right temporal gauge
Suppose you want to follow the
gravitational collapse to a bh and assume a
simplistic gauge choice (geodesic slicing):
such that
where
while the timelike part is obtained after contracting with the timelike
projection operator
where
and
More explicitely, the 3-dim Riemann tensor can be written in
terms of the 3-dim connection coefficients as
Also, the 3-dim contractions of the 3-dim Riemann tensor, i.e. the
3-dim Ricci tensor the 3-dim Ricci scalar are respectively given by
It is important not to confuse the 3-dim Riemann tensor
with the corresponding 4-dim one
Doing the same for the right-hand-side, using the Gauss eqs
contracted twice with the spatial metric and the definition of the
energy density we finally reach the form of the Hamiltonian
constraint equation
(*)
Once again, this a clear expression that the extrinsic curvature can
be seen as the rate of change of the spatial metric, i.e.
Finally, note that the Ricci equations (*) are definitions and not
pieces of the Einstein eqs, although this is sometimes confused
the evolution part of the Einstein equations
We are now ready to express the missing piece of the 3+1
decomposition and derive the evolution part of the Einstein eqs.
As for the constraints, we need suitable projections of the two sides
of the Einstein equations and in particular the two spatial ones, ie
where
Fifth step: select a coordinate basis
So far we have dealt with tensor eqs and not specified a coordinate
basis with unit vectors . Doing so can be useful to simplify
equations and to highlight the spatial nature of and
Hence:
the lapse measures proper time
between two adjacent hypersurfaces
coordinate line
normal line Hence:
the lapse measures proper time
between two adjacent hypersurfaces
[6]
[6]
These are 12 hyperbolic, first-order in time, second-order
in space, nonlinear partial differential equations: evolution
equations
The (ADM) Einstein eqs in 3+1
Similarly
Hamiltonian
Constraint (HC) [1]
Momentum
Constraints (MC) [3]
[6]
[6]
[1]
[3]
These 6+6 (+3+1) eqs are also known as the ADM equations. In
practice only the evolution eqs are solved and the constraints are
instead monitored (more later)
ADM vs Maxwell
The ADM eqs may appear as rather cryptic and simply complicated.
However, it is easy to see analogies with the Maxwell eqs. and make
the equations less cryptic.
The relevant quantities in this case are the electric and magnetic
fields , the charge density and the charge current density
Then also the Maxwell equations split into evolution equations
to be compared
with the ADM
evolution eqs
It is then possible to make the associations
: conformal factor
ij: conformal 3-metric
K : trace of extrinsic curvature
Aij : trace-free conformal
extrinsic curvature
:Gammas
i
1
Dt = K ,
6
! "
TF
Dt Aij = e
4
[i j + (Rij Sij )] + K Aij 2Ail Alj ,
# $
1 2 1
Dt K = i j + Aij A + K + ( + S) ,
ij ij
3 2
! 2 ij "
Dt = 2A j + 2 jk A j K ij Sj + 6Aij j
i ij i kj
3
! 2 "
j l l ij 2 m(j m i) + ij l l .
3
These equations are also known as the BSSNOK equations
or more simply the conformal traceless formulation of the
Einstein equations.
Although not self evident, the BSSNOK equations are
strongly hyperbolic with a structure which is resembling the
1st-order in time, 2nd-order in space formulation
Conformal traceless
formulation
NOTE: these eqs are not solved but only monitored to verify
can be rewritten as
While there are infinite possible choices, not all of them are
equally useful to carry out numerical simulations. Indeed,
there is a whole branch of numerical relativity that is
dedicated to finding suitable gauge conditions.
Several possible routes are possible
L
L x j1 j j+1 x
Initial data
This is a concept you are surely familiar with as you have
encountered, for instance, in Newtonian dynamics/kinematics.
For any time evolution of the Einstein equations we need
therefore to specify initial data and immediately two distinct
problems arise:
In practice one does not solve them in this form but rather
use a conformally related metric which is, in particular flat
All revolve around the solution of the constraint eqs and the
hydrostatic equilibrium equations for the matter sources. More
information in the Living Review by Cook (2004).
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2004-5/
Extraction of gravitational waves
Wave-extraction techniques
Computing the waveforms is the ultimate goal of most
numerical relativity and there are several ways of extracting
GWs from numerical relativity codes:
- asymptotic measurements
null slicing
conformal compactification
- non-asymptotic measurements (finite-size extraction worldtube)
Weyl scalars
perturbative matching to a Schwarzschild background
All have different degrees of success and this depends on
the efficiency of the process which is very different for
different sources
Wave-extraction techniques
In both approaches, observers are placed on nested 2-spheres
and calculate there either the Weyl scalars or decompose the
metric into tensor spherical-harmonics to calculate the gauge-
invariant perturbations of a Schwarschild black hole
where
Calculations vs Simulations
The relativistic hydrodynamics eqs in 3+1
Nonlinear nature of the equations
The issue of the formulation
Numerical approaches
HRSC methods
Numerical Relativity: how?
Lets recall the equations we are dealing with:
where
Calculations vs Simulations
Before entering in the details or relativistic hydrodynamics it
is useful and important to underline a fundamental
distinction
The description of vacuum spacetimes is mathematically and
physically complete. The full set of eqs is known and there is
no approximation whatsoever. This reflects the fact that black
holes are the simplest macroscopic objects in the universe:
fully determined in terms of their mass, spin, (possibly)
charge.
The only error is the numerical one and one could speak of
numerical relativity calculations (e.g. calculation of )
Calculations vs Simulations
fluid worldlines
normal line
conservation of momentum
conservation of energy
where the RHS is assumed zero in the inviscid limit. Despite the
remarkable similarity, the solution to this eq. is remarkably different
time
space
Some representative examples: Burgers equation
This behaviour is referred to as shock steepening and is the
consequence that the propagation speeds are not constant
as for the advection equation but are a function of space and
time (nonlinear nature of the equation).
Consider
with
or as (green line)
as
characteristic curves
and hence
where
where and
special relativistic
general relativistic
special relativistic
Newtonian
non self-
gravitating fluid
Discretizing the relativistic
hydrodynamics equations
Discretizing the equations in general
Lets restrict to a simpler but instructive problem: a homogeneous,
flux- conservative differential equation for the scalar function
in one dimension
where and
some approximation to
the average flux at j+1/2
! Godunov Methods
good compromise between accuracy (2nd order with
smooth data, 1st-order at discontinuities) but monotonic.
Most importantly: discontinuities are exploited
Finite-Volume methods
Godunov methods are tightly related with finite-volume
methods. For simplicity, assume a 1-dim. uniform grid.
Finite-Volume Methods are based on subdividing the spatial
domain into intervals (finite volumes or grid cells) and
on keeping track of an approximation to the integral
where and are the two constant left and right states
A typical example of a Riemann
problem is a shock-tube where
there is a right-moving shock and a
left-moving rarefaction wave.
Not the development of a constant
state between the two waves and the
presence of a contact discontinuity
where the density is discontinuous
but pressure and velocity are not
High-Resolution Shock-Capturing (Godunov) Methods
where
In other words, the solution at any point (x,t) is the sum of the
left states of all the waves which are to the right of (x,t) and of
the right states of all the waves which are to the left of (x,t)
Once changes sign, the corresponding conserved
variable changes from to while all the other with
remain constant.
Finally, because , the jump
in the fluxes for the i-th wave are
rarefaction wave shock front