Register to reply

Symplectic form on a 2-sphere

by rbayadi
Tags: sphere, symplectic
Share this thread:
rbayadi
#1
Nov9-10, 04:12 AM
P: 3
Hi,

The 2-sphere is given as example of symplectic manifolds, with a symplectic form [tex]\Omega = \sin{\varphi} d \varphi \wedge d \theta[/tex]. Here the parametrization is given by [tex](x,y,z) = (\cos{\theta}\sin{\varphi}, \sin{\theta}\sin{\varphi}, \cos{\varphi})[/tex] with [tex] \varphi \in [0,\pi],\ \theta \in [0, 2\pi) [/tex].

Now my question is, at the points [tex]\varphi = 0, \pi[/tex], which are the north and the south pole, is the one-form [tex]d \theta[/tex] well-defined? If yes, how? If not then how does one make [tex]\Omega[/tex] globally well defined?

Thanks in advance :)

Ram.
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
World's largest solar boat on Greek prehistoric mission
Google searches hold key to future market crashes
Mineral magic? Common mineral capable of making and breaking bonds
arkajad
#2
Nov9-10, 05:44 AM
P: 1,411
The parametrization itself is not well defined at the north pole. You will need at least two charts to cover the 2-sphere unambigously. Thus it is simpler to consider [tex]S^2[/tex] as embedded in [tex]\mathbf{R}^3[/tex] and define

[tex]\omega_u(v,w)=\langle u,v\times w\rangle[/tex]

whre [tex]u\in S^2[/tex] and [tex]v,w\in T_u S^2.[/tex]

Then you can show that this expression, in coordinates, is identical to the one you are given.
rbayadi
#3
Nov9-10, 07:25 AM
P: 3
Thanks a lot for the reply. Now I understand what makes [tex] S^2 [/tex] a symplectic manifold.

However, the parametrization not being well defined does not necessarily lead to the one-form not being well defined, does it? For example the usual parametrization [tex] \theta [/tex] on [tex] S^1 [/tex] is not well defined globally, however [tex] d \theta [/tex] is. Something else happening with [tex] S^2 [/tex]?

arkajad
#4
Nov9-10, 07:49 AM
P: 1,411
Symplectic form on a 2-sphere

Yes, you can wind R onto the circle but you can't wind torus (product of two circles) onto the sphere.
quasar987
#5
Nov9-10, 09:40 AM
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
PF Gold
quasar987's Avatar
P: 4,772
Quote Quote by rbayadi View Post
Thanks a lot for the reply. Now I understand what makes [tex] S^2 [/tex] a symplectic manifold.

However, the parametrization not being well defined does not necessarily lead to the one-form not being well defined, does it? For example the usual parametrization [tex] \theta [/tex] on [tex] S^1 [/tex] is not well defined globally, however [tex] d \theta [/tex] is. Something else happening with [tex] S^2 [/tex]?
In the case of S^1, people say that [itex]d\theta[/itex] is a 1-form. This is sloppy because [itex]\theta[/itex] is not defined at one point of S^1 (usually (-1,0)), but it is to be interpreted as such: "There is a globally defined 1-form [itex]\alpha[/itex] on S^1 such that with respect to the usual angle parametrization [itex]\theta[/itex], [itex]\alpha=d\theta[/itex] everywhere where [itex]\theta[/itex] is defined." And indeed, if you take the chart of S^1 that covers the whole of S^1 except (1,0) and associates to a point its angle [itex]\theta'[/itex], where the point (-1,0) is considered to have angle [itex]\theta'=0[/itex], you will find that [tex] d \theta = d\theta'[/tex] everywhere where both these 1-forms are defined. And in particular, there is only one way to patch the local 1-form [itex]d\theta[/itex] at (-1,0) to make it a global 1-form and that is to set it equal to [itex]d\theta'[/itex] at that point.

In the case of S^2, the area form [itex]\sin{\varphi} d \varphi \wedge d \theta[/itex] is not defined on a whole "half-slice" of S^2. Show that it can be patched in a unique way to give a globally defined 2-form on S^2, so that talking about "the area form [itex]\sin{\varphi} d \varphi \wedge d \theta[/itex] on S^2" is not ambiguous.
rbayadi
#6
Nov10-10, 05:38 AM
P: 3
Thank you.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Why does Saturn's dust form a flat ring and not a sphere around it? Astronomy & Astrophysics 2
Why does water with no gravity acting upon it form a sphere? General Physics 34
Symplectic geometry. What's this? Classical Physics 3
Symplectic geometry? Beyond the Standard Model 6
Symplectic Integrator Computing & Technology 0