Solving Covariant Derivative Notation Confusion

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion addresses the confusion surrounding the notation of covariant derivatives, specifically in the context of vector fields and the use of indices. The main focus is on the expression $$\frac{d \mathbf{e}^{\alpha}}{d \tau}$$ and the implications of shifting the index ##\alpha##. It is clarified that the notation is incorrect as it should remain in the lower position, and the derivation of $$\nabla_{\frac{d}{d\tau}} \mathbf{e}_\alpha(x(\tau))$$ is explained through the relationship between the covariant derivative and the Christoffel symbols, leading to the conclusion that $$\nabla_{\mathbf X} \mathbf e_c = \Gamma^a_{bc} X^b \mathbf e_a$$ is the correct formulation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector fields and their notation
  • Familiarity with covariant derivatives and the concept of parallel transport
  • Knowledge of Christoffel symbols and their role in differential geometry
  • Proficiency in tensor calculus and index manipulation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of covariant derivatives in Riemannian geometry
  • Learn about the derivation and application of Christoffel symbols in tensor calculus
  • Explore the implications of index notation in differential geometry
  • Investigate the relationship between covariant derivatives and geodesics in curved spaces
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, physics, and engineering who are working with differential geometry, particularly those dealing with covariant derivatives and tensor analysis.

Markus Kahn
Messages
110
Reaction score
14
TL;DR
I'm having a hard time relating two things that should be the same, but don't appear to be the same...
I've stumbled over this article and while reading it I saw the following statement (##\xi## a vectorfield and ##d/d\tau## presumably a covariant derivative***):
$$\begin{align*}\frac{d \xi}{d \tau}&=\frac{d}{d \tau}\left(\xi^{\alpha} \mathbf{e}_{\alpha}\right)=\frac{d \xi^{\alpha}}{d \tau} \mathbf{e}_{\alpha}+\xi^{\alpha} \frac{d \mathbf{e}^{\alpha}}{d \tau} \\& =\frac{d \xi^{\alpha}}{d \tau} \mathbf{e}_{\alpha}+\xi^{\alpha} \frac{d x^{\mu}}{d \tau} \frac{\partial \mathbf{e}^{\alpha}}{\partial x^{\mu}} \\& =\frac{d \xi^{\alpha}}{d \tau} \mathbf{e}_{\alpha}+ \xi^{\sigma} u^{\mu} \Gamma_{\mu \sigma}^{\alpha} \mathbf{e}_{\alpha}.\end{align*}$$

Question:
This gives me some headaches... especially the
$$\frac{d \mathbf{e}^{\alpha}}{d \tau}$$
part. First of all, why does ##\alpha## gets shifted up? I don't see any metric or the like to compensate for that... Second, how exactly does one come to
$$ \frac{d \mathbf{e}^{\alpha}}{d \tau} =\frac{d x^{\mu}}{d \tau} \frac{\partial \mathbf{e}^{\alpha}}{\partial x^{\mu}}= u^{\mu} \Gamma_{\mu \sigma}^{\alpha} \mathbf{e}_{\alpha}.$$
(just to make it clear, I don't mean using the chain rule, this much would be obvious, see below for a clearer explanation...)

I know that for any function ##f## and vector field ##X## we have ##\nabla_{X}f = Xf## so in particular ##\nabla_{\frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu}}f = \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu}f##. I therefore just assumed that ##\frac{d}{d\tau} \mathbf{e}_\alpha = \nabla_{\frac{d}{d\tau}} \mathbf{e}_\alpha##. Now if ##\mathbf{e}_\alpha## is a function of ##x##, which is parametrized over ##\tau## , then how can you show that
$$\nabla_{\frac{d}{d\tau}} \mathbf{e}_\alpha(x(\tau)) = u^{\mu} \Gamma_{\mu \sigma}^{\alpha} \mathbf{e}_{\alpha}$$

---------------------
*** I'm pretty sure it is b.c. we are trying to prove that
$$\frac{D^{2}}{D \tau^{2}} \delta x^{\mu}=R_{\nu \sigma \rho}^{\mu} \frac{d x^{\nu}}{d \tau} \frac{d x^{\sigma}}{d \tau} \delta x^{\rho}$$
and apparently
$$\frac{\partial \mathbf{e}^{\alpha}}{\partial x^{\mu}}= \Gamma_{\mu \sigma}^{\alpha} \mathbf{e}_{\alpha}.$$
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Markus Kahn said:
why does ##\alpha## gets shifted up?

Because the article is being sloppy with notation. It should be down, since each term should have no free indexes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
For the second part of the question, for some vector ##\mathbf Y##, if we define ##\nabla \mathbf Y## to be the (1,1) tensor that gives ##\nabla_{\mathbf X} \mathbf Y## when contracted with the vector ##\mathbf X##, then from the definition ##\Gamma^a_{bc} = \left < \mathbf e^a, \mathbf \nabla_{\mathbf e_b} \mathbf e_c \right >##, we can write ##\nabla \mathbf e_c =\Gamma^a_{bc} \mathbf e^b \otimes \mathbf e_a##. Contracting with ##\mathbf X = \frac{d}{d\tau} = X^a \mathbf e_a## we get ##\nabla_{\mathbf X} \mathbf e_c =\Gamma^a_{bc} X^b \mathbf e_a##. Then ##\xi^c \nabla_{\mathbf X} \mathbf e_c = \xi^c \Gamma^a_{bc} X^b \mathbf e_a##, and since ##X^b = \frac{dx^b}{d\tau} = u^b## this is the expression you originally have when you account for the mistakenly shifted up ##\alpha##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
469
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
709
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K