Noether and Hilbert (metric) energy-momentum tensors are not, in general, equivalent

Abstract Multiple methods for deriving the energy-momentum tensor for a physical theory exist in the literature. The most common methods are to use Noether's first theorem with the 4-parameter Poincare translation, or to write the action in a curved spacetime and perform variation with respect to the metric tensor, then return to a Minkowski spacetime. These are referred to as the Noether and Hilbert (metric/ curved space/ variational) energy-momentum tensors, respectively. In electrodynamics and other simple models, these two methods yield the same result. Due to this fact, it is often asserted that these methods are generally equivalent for any theory considered, and that this gives physicists a freedom in using either method to derive an energy-momentum tensor depending on the problem at hand. This ambiguity in selecting one of these two different methods has gained attention in the literature, but the only attempted proofs of general equivalence of the two methods are for at most first order derivatives of first rank (vector) field theories. For spin-2, the ideal candidate to check this equivalence for a more complicated model, there exist many energy-momentum tensors in the literature, none of which are gauge invariant, so it is not clear which expression one hopes to obtain from the Noether and Hilbert approaches unlike in the case of e.g. electrodynamics. It has been shown, however, that the linearized Gauss-Bonnet gravity model (second order derivatives, second rank tensor potential) has an energy-momentum tensor that is unique, gauge invariant, symmetric, conserved, and trace-free when derived from Noether's first theorem (all the same properties of the physical energy-momentum tensor of electrodynamics). This makes it the ideal candidate to check if the Noether and Hilbert methods coincide for a more complicated model. It is proven here using this model as a counterexample, by direct calculation, that the Noether and Hilbert energy-momentum tensors are not, in general, equivalent.

[1]  R. Sarav'i On the energy-momentum tensor , 2003, math-ph/0306020.

[2]  S. Kuzmin,et al.  A connection between linearized Gauss–Bonnet gravity and classical electrodynamics , 2018, International Journal of Modern Physics D.

[3]  M. Forger,et al.  Currents and the energy-momentum tensor in classical field theory: a fresh look at an old problem , 2003, hep-th/0307199.

[4]  F. J. Belinfante On the current and the density of the electric charge, the energy, the linear momentum and the angular momentum of arbitrary fields , 1940 .

[5]  Symmetric energy-momentum tensor in Maxwell, Yang-Mills, and Proca theories obtained using only Noether's theorem , 2006, hep-th/0602190.

[6]  M. Reboud,et al.  The energy–momentum tensor(s) in classical gauge theories , 2016, 1605.01121.

[7]  Myers,et al.  Higher-derivative gravity, surface terms, and string theory. , 1987, Physical review. D, Particles and fields.

[8]  G. Magnano,et al.  Symmetry properties under arbitrary field redefinitions of the metric energy-momentum tensor in classical field theories and gravity , 2001, gr-qc/0103072.

[9]  E. Eriksen,et al.  Gauge Invariance and the Transformation Properties of the Electromagnetic Four-Potential , 1980 .

[10]  W. Pauli,et al.  On relativistic wave equations for particles of arbitrary spin in an electromagnetic field , 1939 .

[11]  S. Brendle,et al.  Calculus of Variations , 1927, Nature.

[12]  M. Leclerc,et al.  CANONICAL AND GRAVITATIONAL STRESS-ENERGY TENSORS , 2005, gr-qc/0510044.

[13]  Patrick Singleton,et al.  Theory of Space , 2016 .

[14]  Belinfante tensors induced by matter-gravity couplings , 2002, hep-th/0201043.

[15]  中村 誠,et al.  Higher-derivative Gravity , 2001 .

[16]  M. Hobson,et al.  Bootstrapping gravity: A consistent approach to energy-momentum self-coupling , 2009, 0906.0926.

[17]  S. Deser Gravity from self-interaction redux , 2009 .

[18]  E. Bessel-Hagen Über die Erhaltungssätze der Elektrodynamik , 1921 .

[19]  J. M. Pons Noether symmetries, energy–momentum tensors, and conformal invariance in classical field theory , 2009, 0902.4871.

[20]  J. Bivc'ak,et al.  Energy-momentum tensors in linearized Einstein's theory and massive gravity: The question of uniqueness , 2016, 1602.04459.

[21]  Y. Kosmann-Schwarzbach The Noether Theorems: Invariance and Conservation Laws in the Twentieth Century , 2010 .