Parallel propagator and covariant derivative of vector

In summary: The first expression is a map from a vector space V1 to another vector space V2. The second expression is the covariant derivative of a vector in V1 with a vector in V2.
  • #1
ianhoolihan
145
0
Hi all,

I'm trying to figure out the link between the connection coefficients (Christoffel symbols), the propagator, and the coordinate description of the covariant derivative with the connection coefficients.

As in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parall...ng_the_connection_from_the_parallel_transport one can write
[tex]
\nabla_X V = \lim_{h\to 0}\frac{\Gamma(\gamma)_h^0V_{\gamma(h)} - V_{\gamma(0)}}{h}= \frac{d}{dt}\left. \Gamma(\gamma)_t^0V_{\gamma(t)}\right|_{t=0}[/tex]
However, we also know that
[tex]
\nabla_b V^a = \partial_b V^a + {\Gamma^a}_{cb}V^c.[/tex]
I understand how, in some loose sense, one can think of the connection coefficients as the derivative of the parallel propagator:
[tex]
{\Gamma^a}_{cb} = \left.\frac{\partial}{\partial y^c}{[\Gamma(\gamma)^x_y]^a}_b\right|_{y \to x}.[/tex]
However, I cannot see how to link the three together, and formalise things. Carrol's notes (http://preposterousuniverse.com/grnotes/grnotes-three.pdf ) give a hint, but without using the first sort of equation I gave--- he just jumps in with the second equation as an "assumption". What I'd ultimately be looking to do would be something like using the product rule:

[tex]
\nabla_X V = \lim_{h\to 0}\frac{\Gamma(\gamma)_h^0V_{\gamma(h)} - \Gamma(\gamma)^0_0V_{\gamma(0)}}{h} [/tex]
[tex]
\nabla_X V = \lim_{h\to 0}\frac{\Gamma(\gamma)_h^0V_{\gamma(h)} - \Gamma(\gamma)_0^0V_{\gamma(h)}+\Gamma(\gamma)_0^0V_{\gamma(h)}-\Gamma(\gamma)_0^0V_{\gamma(0)}}{h} [/tex]
[tex]
\nabla_X V = \lim_{h\to 0}\frac{\Gamma(\gamma)_h^0V_{\gamma(h)} - \Gamma(\gamma)_0^0V_{\gamma(h)}}{h}+\lim_{h\to 0}\frac{\Gamma(\gamma)_0^0V_{\gamma(h)}-\Gamma(\gamma)_0^0V_{\gamma(0)}}{h} [/tex]
[tex]
\nabla_X V =V_{\gamma(h)}\frac{d}{dt}\left.\Gamma(\gamma)^t_0\right|_{t=0} +\Gamma(\gamma)^0_0\frac{d}{dt}\left.V_{\gamma(t)}\right|_{h=0}
[/tex]
So, that somehow
[tex]
\nabla_b V^a =V^c_{\gamma(0)}{\Gamma^a}_{cb} +\partial_b V^a_{\gamma(0)}
[/tex]
However, this makes no sense, as it means you are subtracting vectors from different vector spaces (the whole reason the parallel propagator was introduced in the first equation I gave in this post). I've also jumped straight to coordinate components...

Any bright ideas would be much appreciated.

Cheers,

Ianhoolihan.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I just received an email that a post had been added, though it appears not to be here ?

The post in the email read:

I fail to see the relation between propagators and curvature connections, propagators are linear, aren't they?
Could you clarify?

As far as I am concerned, the propagator [itex]\Gamma(\gamma)_h^0[/itex] is a bitensor that takes a vector from [itex]T_{\gamma(h)}(M)[/itex] to [itex]T_{\gamma(0)}(M)[/itex]. I am not an expert by any means, but I guess they are linear in the sense that
[tex]\Gamma(\gamma)_h^0 \left(V_{\gamma(h)} + W_{\gamma(h)}\right) = \Gamma(\gamma)_h^0\left(V_{\gamma(h)}\right)+ \Gamma(\gamma)_h^0\left(W_{\gamma(h)}\right)[/tex]

Does that make sense?

Ianhoolihan
 
  • #3
I don't think the propagator can be considered a bitensor because it takes a vector and maps it to a vector in another space whereas a tensor "lives" in one space and so acts only one vectors and oneforms in that one space. The parallel propagator is simply a mapping between different vector spaces.

I'm not entirely sure what you're going for.
 
  • #4
Matterwave said:
I don't think the propagator can be considered a bitensor because it takes a vector and maps it to a vector in another space whereas a tensor "lives" in one space and so acts only one vectors and oneforms in that one space. The parallel propagator is simply a mapping between different vector spaces.

To quote Eric Poisson http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2011-7&page=articlese15.html

... bitensors, tensorial functions of two points in spacetime.

I see your point, but is not a bitensor another way of describing a map from one vector space V1 to another V2? It "lives" in both spaces. For example you could write the one--form part of the bitensor as a one--form in V1*, and the vector part as a vector in V2...

I need to read the above link in more detail (having just found it), but for reference, here are the notes I have been using: http://msor.victoria.ac.nz/twiki/pub/Courses/MATH465_2012T1/WebHome/notes-464-2011.pdf

See section 3.2 on the parallel propagator. (It is called a bitensor here.)

Matterwave said:
I'm not entirely sure what you're going for.

OK, I guess I could have been clearer. I have two expressions for the covariant derivative:

[tex]\nabla_X V = \lim_{h\to 0}\frac{\Gamma(\gamma)_h^0V_{\gamma(h)} - V_{\gamma(0)}}{h}= \frac{d}{dt}\left. \Gamma(\gamma)_t^0V_{\gamma(t)}\right|_{t=0}[/tex]

and

[tex]\nabla_b V^a = \partial_b V^a + {\Gamma^a}_{cb}V^c.[/tex]

I simply want to get from the first to the second.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
ianhoolihan said:
I simply want to get from the first to the second.

Right, let's see if this works. Firstly, since we're working with bitensors, I'll expand on what I hinted at in the last post. To make things easier notationally, let the propagator be [itex]\Gamma(t \to t_0;\gamma)[/itex], which takes [itex]T_{\gamma(t)}(M)[/itex] to [itex]T_{\gamma(t_0)}(M)[/itex]. Then we can write it as

[tex]\Gamma(t \to t_0;\gamma) = \Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t} e_{a_{t_0}} \otimes \omega^{b_t}[/tex]

with the notation on the indices to indicate whether they are at [itex]\gamma(t_0)[/itex] or [itex]\gamma(t)[/itex]. That is [itex]e_{a_{t_0}}[/itex] are the basis vectors at [itex]\gamma(t_0)[/itex] and [itex]\omega^{b_t}[/itex] are the dual basis vectors at [itex]\gamma(t)[/itex].

Hence

[tex]\Gamma(t \to t_0;\gamma)V_{\gamma(t)} = \Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t} e_{a_{t_0}} \otimes \omega^{b_t}\left(V^{c_t}e_{c_t}\right) = V^{b_t}\Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t}e_{a_{t_0}}[/tex]

for some vector [itex]V_{\gamma(t)}[/itex]. Therefore

[tex]
\left.\frac{d}{dt}\Gamma(t \to t_0;\gamma)V_t \right|_{t=t_0}=\left[\frac{d}{dt}\left(V^{b_t}\right)\Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t} + V^{b_t} \frac{d}{dt} \left(\Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t}\right)\right]_{t=t_0}e_{a_{t_0}}[/tex]

Letting [itex]x=x(t)[/itex] be the local coordinates, then
[tex]\frac{d}{dt}\left(V^{b_t}\right) = \frac{dx^{c_{t_0}} }{dt} \partial_{c_{t_0}} V^{b_t}[/tex]
and
[tex]\frac{d}{dt}\left( \Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t} \right) = \frac{dx^{c_{t_0}} }{dt} \partial_{c_{t_0}} \Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t}.[/tex]

Therefore,

[tex]
\left.\frac{d}{dt}\Gamma(t \to t_0;\gamma)V_t \right|_{t=t_0}=\frac{dx^{c_{t_0}} }{dt}\left[
\partial_{c_{t_0}} V^{b_t}\Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t} +
V^{b_t} \partial_{c_{t_0}} \Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t}
\right]_{t=t_0}e_{a_{t_0}}[/tex]

Given that

[tex]
\left.\Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t}\right|_{t=t_0} = \delta ^{a_{t_0}}_{b_{t_0}}[/tex]

and defining

[tex]
{\Gamma^{a_{t_0}}}_{b_{t_0}c_{t_0}}\equiv\left. \partial_{c_{t_0}} \Gamma^{a_{t_0}}_{b_t}\right|_{t \to t_0}[/tex]

then

[tex]
\left.\frac{d}{dt}\Gamma(t \to t_0;\gamma)V_t \right|_{t=t_0}=X^{c_{t_0}} \left[
\partial_{c_{t_0}} V^{a_{t_0}} +
{\Gamma^{a_{t_0}}}_{b_{t_0}c_{t_0}}V^{b_{t_0}}
\right]e_{a_{t_0}}[/tex]

or, dropping all the [itex]t_0[/itex]


[tex]\nabla_X V = \frac{d}{dt}\left. \Gamma(t\to t_0;\gamma)V_{\gamma(t)}\right|_{t=0}
=X^c \left[
\partial_c V^a +
{\Gamma^a}_{bc}V^b
\right]e_a
=
X^c \nabla_c V^a e_a.
[/tex]

That seems alright for me, but I understand I've skipped over a few of the nuances along the way. However, I suspect if I do things in the coincidence limit of the bitensors (or something like that) this will turn out to be correct.

Thoughts?

Ianhoolihan
 
  • #6
ianhoolihan said:
I just received an email that a post had been added, though it appears not to be here ?

Yes, I deleted it, I thought you were referring to the QFT propagator. When I read your link I realized it was a different thing.
 

1. What is a parallel propagator?

A parallel propagator is a mathematical tool used in the study of differential geometry and general relativity. It is used to transport a vector or tensor field along a curve in a curved space, while keeping the magnitude and direction of the field unchanged.

2. What is the difference between a parallel propagator and a covariant derivative?

A parallel propagator is a specific type of covariant derivative, which is a mathematical operation that describes how a vector or tensor field changes as it moves along a curve in a curved space. The main difference is that a parallel propagator preserves the magnitude and direction of the field, while a covariant derivative may not.

3. How is a parallel propagator calculated?

The calculation of a parallel propagator involves solving a differential equation known as the geodesic equation, which describes the path of a free-falling object in curved space. The parallel propagator is then obtained by integrating the geodesic equation along the given curve.

4. What is the significance of the covariant derivative of a vector?

The covariant derivative of a vector is a measure of how the vector changes as it moves along a curve in a curved space. It is important in differential geometry, as it allows us to define and study important geometric concepts such as curvature and geodesics.

5. How are parallel propagators and covariant derivatives used in physics?

Parallel propagators and covariant derivatives are used extensively in the fields of general relativity and particle physics. In general relativity, they are used to study the curvature of spacetime and the motion of particles and light in curved space. In particle physics, they are used to describe the behavior of fields and particles in curved space.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
0
Views
284
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
1K
Back
Top