Christoffel symbols and tensor analysis

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties and transformations of Christoffel symbols in tensor analysis, including their symmetry, the use of covariant and contravariant differentials, and the implications of these properties in various contexts. Participants explore mathematical expressions and raise questions regarding definitions and conventions in tensor calculus.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion over the appearance of a missing minus sign when comparing two expressions involving covariant derivatives and suspects antisymmetry in the Christoffel symbols might be the cause.
  • Another participant cautions that Christoffel symbols are not tensors and do not transform as tensors, suggesting careful handling of their transformation properties.
  • Questions are raised about the validity of using covariant differentials and whether differentiation of covariant vectors with respect to covariant variables is defined.
  • There is a discussion about the symmetry of the Kronecker delta in non-orthogonal coordinates, with one participant asserting it is always symmetric regardless of the coordinate system.
  • Participants discuss different definitions of covariant vectors and their equivalence, noting that both representations can describe the same vector in different bases.
  • One participant questions the symmetry of the Christoffel symbols of the first kind and seeks clarification on the definitions being used.
  • Another participant attempts to clarify the relationships between various forms of the Christoffel symbols and points out a contradiction in their equalities, seeking help to understand the correct relationships.
  • There is acknowledgment of the need for a deeper understanding of the definitions of Christoffel symbols and their properties.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the properties of Christoffel symbols, particularly regarding their symmetry and transformation rules. Some participants agree on certain definitions, while others raise questions or express confusion, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved on several points.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in understanding may arise from varying definitions of Christoffel symbols and the context in which they are applied. Participants also highlight the need for clarity in the transformation of these symbols and their relationships to other tensorial quantities.

Marin
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
Hi all!

I read about tensor analysis and came about following expressions, where also a questions arose which I cannot explain to me. Perhaps you could help me:

I: Consider the following expressions:

d\vec v=dc^k e^{(k)}
d\vec v=dc^k e_{(k)}

where:
dc^k=dv^k+v^t\Gamma_{wt}^k dx^w

dc_k=dv_k-v_t\Gamma_{wk}^t dx^w

Now, consider the covariant derivatives:

\frac{\partial c^k}{\partial x^q}=\frac{\partial v^k}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{wt}^k \frac{\partial x^w}{\partial x^q}=\frac{\partial v^k}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{wt}^k \delta^w_q=\frac{\partial v^k}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{qt}^k

analagous:

(1)\frac{\partial c_k}{\partial x^q}=\frac{\partial v_k}{\partial x^q}-v_t\Gamma_{qk}^t

So far so good, here I start transforming:

\frac{\partial c_k}{\partial x^q}=\frac{g_{kl}\partial c^l}{\partial x^q}=g_{kl}\frac{\partial c^l}{\partial x^q}=\frac{g_{kl}\partial v^l}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{qt}^l g_{kl}=\frac{\partial v_l}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{qtk}

As the second term looks different from the one above we continue transforming it:

v^t\Gamma_{qtk}=v^t\Gamma_{qk}^s g_{ts}=(t\rightarrow s, g_{ts}=g_{st})=v^s\Gamma_{qk}^t g_{ts}=v_t\Gamma_{qk}^t

so, we finally get:

(2)\frac{\partial c_k}{\partial x^q}=\frac{\partial v_k}{\partial x^q}+v_t\Gamma_{qk}^t

By comparing (1) and (2) I miss a minus sign!

I suspect that the Christoffel symbol of first kind is antisymmetric and indices permute just like they do in the epsilon tensor and thereby generate a minus but I am not sure...

II: In both of the above daces of derivatives one uses dx^q as differential which is contravariant. Does it make sense to also use a covariant dx_q? Is in general differentiation of covariant vectors with respect to a covariant variable defined? (I suppose it must be, since you also differentiate a contravariantvector w.r.t. a contravariant variable)

III: And another question: Is the Kronecker delta symmetric in non-orthogonal coordinates

\delta^i_j=\delta^j_i ?

If not, then which one of the two definitions is correct: (I´ve seen both in the net)

e^{i}e_j=\delta^j_i

or

e^je_i=\delta^j_i

I have also seen two types in which you define covariant vectors:

\vec v=v_ke^k and \vec v=v_ke_k

Which one is correct, or do they just represent the same covariant vector once in the covariant and in the contravariant basis?

IV: And the last one: I haven´t seen a classification of the Christoffel symbol of this kind:

\Gamma^{kl}_m Is it also symmetric in the upper indices?Thanks a lot, I really appreciate your help!

marin
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Marin said:
Hi all!

I read about tensor analysis and came about following expressions, where also a questions arose which I cannot explain to me. Perhaps you could help me:

I: Consider the following expressions:

d\vec v=dc^k e^{(k)}
d\vec v=dc^k e_{(k)}

where:
dc^k=dv^k+v^t\Gamma_{wt}^k dx^w

dc_k=dv_k-v_t\Gamma_{wk}^t dx^w

Now, consider the covariant derivatives:

\frac{\partial c^k}{\partial x^q}=\frac{\partial v^k}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{wt}^k \frac{\partial x^w}{\partial x^q}=\frac{\partial v^k}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{wt}^k \delta^w_q=\frac{\partial v^k}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{qt}^k

analagous:

(1)\frac{\partial c_k}{\partial x^q}=\frac{\partial v_k}{\partial x^q}-v_t\Gamma_{qk}^t

So far so good, here I start transforming:

\frac{\partial c_k}{\partial x^q}=\frac{g_{kl}\partial c^l}{\partial x^q}=g_{kl}\frac{\partial c^l}{\partial x^q}=\frac{g_{kl}\partial v^l}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{qt}^l g_{kl}=\frac{\partial v_l}{\partial x^q}+v^t\Gamma_{qtk}

As the second term looks different from the one above we continue transforming it:

v^t\Gamma_{qtk}=v^t\Gamma_{qk}^s g_{ts}=(t\rightarrow s, g_{ts}=g_{st})=v^s\Gamma_{qk}^t g_{ts}=v_t\Gamma_{qk}^t

so, we finally get:

(2)\frac{\partial c_k}{\partial x^q}=\frac{\partial v_l}{\partial x^q}+v_t\Gamma_{qk}^t

By comparing (1) and (2) I miss a minus sign!

I suspect that the Christoffel symbol of first kind is antisymmetric and indices permute just like they do in the epsilon tensor and thereby generate a minus but I am not sure...
Be careful how you "transform" the Christoffel symbols. They are not tensors and do not transform as tensors.

It is true that \Gamma^{qk}_t= -\Gamma{tk}_q and that \Gamma^{qk}_t= \Gamma^{kq}_t.

[qote]II: In both of the above daces of derivatives one uses dx^q as differential which is contravariant. Does it make sense to also use a covariant dx_q? Is in general differentiation of covariant vectors with respect to a covariant variable defined? (I suppose it must be, since you also differentiate a contravariantvector w.r.t. a contravariant variable)[/quote]
Yes, you can use covariant dx_q if you also lower the indices on the Christoffel symbols. \Gamma_{ij, t}= g_{ki} g_{jq}\Gamma^{kq}_t.

III: And another question: Is the Kronecker delta symmetric in non-orthogonal coordinates

\delta^i_j=\delta^j_i ?
The Kronecker delta is definded by \delta_{ij}= 1 if i= j, 0 if i\ne j, independent of the coordinate system, so, yes, it is always symmetric. (The metric tensor is, although dependent, of course, on the coordinate system, is also symmetric in all coordinate systems.)

If not, then which one of the two definitions is correct: (I´ve seen both in the net)

e^{i}e_j=\delta^j_i

or

e^je_i=\delta^j_i

I have also seen two types in which you define covariant vectors:

\vec v=v_ke^k and \vec v=v_ke_k

Which one is correct, or do they just represent the same covariant vector once in the covariant and in the contravariant basis?
They are really the same thing although the second would not make sense in the standard "Einstein summation convention" that we sum when the same index appears both as a superscript and a subscipt.

IV: And the last one: I haven´t seen a classification of the Christoffel symbol of this kind:

\Gamma^{kl}_m Is it also symmetric in the upper indices?
Yes, it is. That should be clear from the definition of the Christoffel symbols (of the first kind) in terms of derivatives of the metric tensor. What definition are you using?


Thanks a lot, I really appreciate your help!

marin
You are welcome.
 
ok, now let me try and see:

\Gamma^l_{qt}=\Gamma^l_{tq}=-\Gamma^q_{lt}=-\Gamma^q_{tl}=\Gamma^t_{lq}

and also:

\Gamma^l_{qt}=-\Gamma^t_{ql}=-\Gamma^t_{lq}

seems to me like a contradiction..

Can you please point out the wrong equalities, so that I get a better understanding?

thanks
 
Marin said:
ok, now let me try and see:

\Gamma^l_{qt}=\Gamma^l_{tq}=-\Gamma^q_{lt}=-\Gamma^q_{tl}=\Gamma^t_{lq}

and also:

\Gamma^l_{qt}=-\Gamma^t_{ql}=-\Gamma^t_{lq}

seems to me like a contradiction..

Can you please point out the wrong equalities, so that I get a better understanding?

thanks
You are right. I wrote too fast \Gamma^l_{qt}= \Gamma^l_{tq} but \Gamma^t_{lq}\ne -\Gamma^q_{lt}. What is true is that \Gamma^l_{qt}+ \Gamma^q_{tl}+ \Gamma^t_{lq}= 0. Notice that the three indices are "rotated"- the three even permutations of tlq.

I asked before what definition of the Krisstofel symbols you are using. The ones I am familiar with are
\Gamma_{ij,k}= \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{\partial g_ik}{\partial x^j}+ \frac{\partial g_{jk}}{\partial x^i}- \frac{\partial g_{ij}}{\partial x^k}\right)

\Gamma^{i}_{jk}= g^{im}\Gamma_{jk,m}
The symmetry rules follow from that.
 
I also "use" the definition you stated, but haven´t studied it thoroughly yet, perhaps I had to, before I try to take on expressions.

Anyway, I´ll go on trying to understand this stuff and some new and will pose some questions again.

Thanks once again for the help!
 
ok, I tried the following transformation:

\Gamma^w_{bt}=\Gamma^w_{bt}\delta^b_b=\Gamma^w_{bt}\delta^b_w\delta^w_b=\Gamma^w_{bt}\delta^b_w\delta^b_w=(\Gamma^w_{bt}\delta^b_w)\delta^b_w=\Gamma^w_{wt}\delta^b_w=\Gamma^b_{wt}=\Gamma^b_{tw}

But this implies that nothing changes with the Christoffel symbol if I permute the indices evenly.

But then, HallsofIvy, the equation you posted does not hold any more..

I suppose I´ve done something wrong again, so could someone please help me :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K