2004
DOI: 10.1023/b:math.0000045554.71211.99
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Classification of Surface Charges for a Spin 2 Field on a Curved Background Solution

Abstract: We give an explicit proof of the result that non trivial conserved n − 2 forms for a spin 2 field on a background corresponding to a solution to Einstein's equation (with or without cosmological constant) are characterized uniquely by the Killing vector fields of the background.

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
(31 reference statements)
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…• for n ≥ 3, that all n − 2 forms that are closed for all solutions h of the linearized theory are given, on solutions h, by k ξ for some Killing vector ξ, up to d exact n − 2 forms which do not contribute to the integrals [15,17,18],…”
Section: Surface Chargesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• for n ≥ 3, that all n − 2 forms that are closed for all solutions h of the linearized theory are given, on solutions h, by k ξ for some Killing vector ξ, up to d exact n − 2 forms which do not contribute to the integrals [15,17,18],…”
Section: Surface Chargesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When α 2 l 2 = 1, the limit µ → 0 can be taken smoothly in the coordinatesr = γr,t = t/γ in which the solution becomes The charge differences between a given solution (g µν , A µ ) and an infinitesimally close one (g µν + δg µν , A µ + δA µ ) are controlled by the linearized theory around (g µν , A µ ). The equivalence classes of conserved n− 2-forms (here 1-forms) of the linearized theory can be shown [26,27] to be in one-to-one correspondence with gauge parameters (ξ µ , ǫ) satisfying…”
Section: B the Solutionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, decomposing δA = n ∧ ω (1) + φ * δA, one sees that the term involving n do not contribute because of the antisymmetry of H. Therefore, the second term in (34) will vanish if H is regular and if the pull-back φ * δA on the future horizon is regular.…”
Section: First Lawmentioning
confidence: 99%