Bochner-Weitzenbock formula (-> Laplacian)

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Sajet
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Laplacian
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the proof of the Bochner-Weitzenbock formula in the context of Riemannian geometry. Participants explore the mathematical steps involved in deriving the formula, particularly focusing on the Laplacian of the squared norm of the gradient of a smooth function.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the initial step of the proof, specifically the equation involving the Laplacian and the gradient of a function.
  • Another participant suggests that sharing a solution or sketch of the solution would be beneficial for others who may encounter similar difficulties.
  • A later reply provides a detailed derivation of the equation, breaking down the steps and utilizing concepts such as the Hessian and the trace operator.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no explicit disagreement noted, but the initial confusion indicates a lack of clarity on the proof's first step. The later response provides a solution, suggesting that the discussion may have resolved the initial query for that participant.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes complex mathematical expressions and relies on specific definitions and properties of Riemannian manifolds, which may not be fully detailed in the posts.

Sajet
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Hi! I'm trying to understand a proof for the Bochner-Weitzenbock formula. I'm sorry I have to bother you with such a basic question but I've worked at this for more than an hour now, but I just don't get the very first step, i.e.:

-\frac{1}{2} \Delta |\nabla f|^2 = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i}X_iX_i \langle \nabla f, \nabla f \rangle

Where we are in a complete Riemannian manifold, f \in C^\infty(M) at a point p \in M, with a local orthonormal frame X_1, ..., X_n such that \langle X_i, X_j \rangle = \delta_{ij}, D_{X_i}X_j(p) = 0, and of course

\langle \nabla f, X \rangle = X(f) = df(X)
\textrm{Hess }f(X, Y) = \langle D_X(\nabla f), Y \rangle
\Delta f = - \textrm{tr(Hess )}f

I've tried to use the Levi-Civita identities, but I'm getting entangled in these formulas and don't get anywhere.

Any help is appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I got it now :)
 
You may try to post a solution/sketch of solution for the one interested. That would be nice of you.
 
Sorry, i didn't notice the post. In case anyone ever finds this through google or the search function, here it is:

-\frac{1}{2} \Delta\|\nabla f\|^2 = \frac{1}{2}\text{tr}(\text{Hess}(\langle \nabla f, \nabla f \rangle ))
= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^n \langle \nabla_{X_i} \text{grad}\langle \nabla f, \nabla f \rangle, X_i\rangle (<- these are the diagonal entries of the representation matrix)
= \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^n X_i \langle \text{grad}\langle \nabla f, \nabla f\rangle, X_i\rangle - \langle \text{grad}\langle \nabla f, \nabla f\rangle, \nabla_{X_i} X_i\rangle (where the second summand is zero)
= \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^n X_i X_i \langle \nabla f, \nabla f\rangle
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
13K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K