What is the Factor of F in the Differential Forms Problem on Smooth Manifolds?

In summary, the right-hand side of (c) near the top of page 304 of "Introduction to smooth manifolds" by John Lee has a factor \omega_I\circ F, which can be proven using the facts (a) the pullback commutes with the exterior derivative, and (b) the pullback of a 0-form f is f o F. The original equation written by the user is incorrect because in the evaluation of F^*\omega, the point p in M must be taken into account.
  • #1
Fredrik
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
10,877
422
Introduction to smooth manifolds, by John Lee, page 304. The right-hand side of (c) near the top of the page has a factor [itex]\omega_I\circ F[/itex]. I've been doing the calculation over and over for hours now and I keep getting just [itex]\omega_I[/itex]. Is that F supposed to be there?

Edit: I should add that [tex]\omega_I=\omega(\partial_{i_1},\dots,\partial_{i_k})[/tex], so the left-hand side is just [itex]F^*\omega[/itex].
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Well, mmh... (3) can be proven from (1) and (2) and the facts that
(a) the pullback commutes with the exterior derivative
(b) the pullback of a 0-form f is f o F.

Granted this,
[tex]F^*\left(\sum'_I\omega_Idy^I\right)=\sum'F^*\omega_{i_1,...,i_k}F^*dy^{i_1}\wedge ...\wedge F^*dy^{i_k}=\sum'(\omega_{i_1,...,i_k}\circ F) d(y^{i_1}\circ F)\wedge ...\wedge d(y^{i_k}\circ F)[/tex]
 
  • #3
Thank you. That solved the problem for me. After a few minutes of verifying the relavant identities, I understand your solution perfectly. But I still don't see what's wrong with my failed attempt. Experience tells me that I'll see it just before I'm done typing this, but if you're reading this I guess it didn't work out that way.

[tex]F^*\omega(X_1,\dots,X_k)=\omega(F_*X_1,\dots,F_*X_k)=\sum_I{}^{'} \omega_I\ dy^{i_1}\wedge\dots\wedge dy^{i_k}(F_*X_1,\dots,F_*X_k)[/tex]

[tex]=\sum_I{}^{'} \omega_I\ \sum_J(F_*X_1)(y^{j_1})\cdots (F_*X_1)(y^{j_k})\ dy^{i_1}\wedge\dots\wedge dy^{i_k}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial y^{j_1}},\dots,\frac{\partial}{\partial y^{j_k}}\right)[/tex]

Note that

[tex](F_*X_1)(y^{j_1})=X_1(y^{j_1}\circ F)[/tex]

and that this is a component of [itex]X_1[/itex] in the coordinate system [itex]y\circ F[/itex]. We also have

[tex]dy^{i_1}\wedge\dots\wedge dy^{i_k}\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial y^{j_1}},\dots,\frac{\partial}{\partial y^{j_k}}\right)=\delta^I_J[/tex]

where the delta is =0 unless there's exactly one permutation P that takes I to J, and =sgn P if there is. Since [itex]y\circ F[/itex] is a coordinate system too, we can also write

[tex]d(y^{i_1}\circ F)\wedge\dots\wedge d(y^{i_k}\circ F)\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial (y\circ F)^{j_1}},\dots,\frac{\partial}{\partial (y\circ F)^{j_k}}\right)=\delta^I_J[/tex]

So the original expression can be written as

[tex]\sum_I{}^{'} \omega_I\ \sum_J X_1(y^{j_1}\circ F)\cdots X_1(y^{j_k}\circ F)\ d(y^{i_1}\circ F)\wedge\dots\wedge d(y^{i_k}\circ F)\left(\frac{\partial}{\partial (y\circ F)^{j_1}},\dots,\frac{\partial}{\partial (y\circ F)^{j_k}}\right)[/tex]

[tex]=\sum_I{}^{'} \omega_I\ \sum_J d(y^{i_1}\circ F)\wedge\dots\wedge d(y^{i_k}\circ F)(X_1,\dots,X_k)[/tex]

which is everything we want, except that [itex]\omega_I[/itex] hasn't changed. I still don't see what I've done wrong, so I'll post this so you can point and laugh.
 
  • #4
Fredrik said:
[tex]F^*\omega(X_1,\dots,X_k)=\omega(F_*X_1,\dots,F_*X_k)=[...][/tex]

You can't really write this because if F:M-->N, then F*w is a k-form on M, while w is a k-form on N. So the LHS is a map M-->R and the RHS is a map N-->R. So it is important to keep track of the point p in M at which the map of the LHS is evaluated. If you follow the definition of F*w given by Lee on page 303, you will agree that when evaluated at p in M, the equation you meant to write is actually

[tex](F^*\omega)_p(X_1|_p,\dots,X_k|_p)=\omega_{F(p)}(F_*(X_1|_p),\dots,F_*(X_k|_p))[/tex]

and then when you expand the RHS, you will have

[tex]\sum_I \omega_I(F(p))\ dy^{i_1}|_{F(p))}\wedge\dots\wedge dy^{i_k}|_{F(p))}(F_*(X_1|_p),\dots,F_*(X_k|_p))
[/tex]

etc.
 
  • #5
Thank you again. I understand now.
 

What is a differential form?

A differential form is a mathematical object that represents an infinitesimal change or flow of a quantity. It is used in multivariable calculus and differential geometry to describe the behavior of vector fields, surfaces, and higher-dimensional spaces.

What is the differential forms problem?

The differential forms problem is a fundamental problem in differential geometry, which aims to find a systematic way to define and manipulate differential forms on manifolds. This problem was first studied by Élie Cartan in the early 20th century and has since been an active area of research.

Why are differential forms important?

Differential forms are important because they provide a powerful tool for expressing and understanding geometric concepts in a coordinate-independent manner. They also have many applications in physics, engineering, and other fields.

How are differential forms different from vector fields?

While both differential forms and vector fields can be used to describe quantities that vary over space, they are fundamentally different mathematical objects. Differential forms are dual to vector fields, meaning they describe the behavior of vector fields in a coordinate-free way.

How are differential forms used in calculus?

Differential forms are used in calculus to generalize concepts such as derivatives, integrals, and gradients to higher dimensions. They provide a way to express these operations in a coordinate-independent manner, making them useful for solving problems in multivariable calculus and differential geometry.

Similar threads

  • Differential Geometry
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Back
Top