Contravariant derivative of a tensor field in terms of generalized coordinates?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the contravariant derivative of a tensor field expressed in terms of generalized coordinates, specifically addressing the relationship between covariant and contravariant derivatives. The Laplacian is defined using the determinant of the metric tensor, denoted as ##Z##, and the generalized coordinates ##Z_i##. Pavel Grinfeld's book suggests that the contravariant derivative can be expressed as $$\nabla^{i} V = Z^{ij}\nabla_{j} V$$. The conversation raises questions about the interpretation of the contravariant derivative and its application in tensor calculus, particularly in the context of generalized coordinates.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of tensor calculus and derivatives
  • Familiarity with generalized coordinates and metric tensors
  • Knowledge of the Laplacian operator in differential geometry
  • Basic concepts of Christoffel symbols and their role in covariant derivatives
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the Laplacian in the context of Riemannian geometry
  • Explore the derivation and applications of Christoffel symbols in tensor calculus
  • Learn about the implications of raising and lowering indices in tensor notation
  • Investigate the relationship between covariant and contravariant derivatives in various coordinate systems
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students studying differential geometry, particularly those interested in tensor analysis and the application of generalized coordinates in theoretical frameworks.

yucheng
Messages
232
Reaction score
57
Homework Statement
N/A
Relevant Equations
N/A
1. The laplacian is defined such that
$$ \vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{\nabla} V = \nabla_i \nabla^i V = \frac{1}{\sqrt{Z}} \frac{\partial}{\partial Z^{i}} \left(\sqrt{Z} Z^{ij} \frac{\partial V}{\partial Z^{j}}\right)$$

(##Z## is the determinant of the metric tensor, ##Z_i## is a generalized coordinate)

But

$$\vec{\nabla} V = \vec{e}^i\nabla_{i} V = \vec{e}^{i} \partial_i V$$

So we need to express the gradient in terms of contravariant components before using the divergence formula.In Pavel Grinfeld's book, the author claims that $$\nabla^{i} V = Z^{ij}\nabla_{j} V$$ and the author calls this the 'contravariant' derivative.

However, I am concerned because:
https://math.stackexchange.com/ques...erivative-or-why-are-all-derivatives-covarian

and I cannot find the term 'contravariant derivative' anywhere. So...?

Since the contravariant derivative is defined as

$$\nabla_{i} F^{j} = \frac{\partial F^{j}}{\partial Z^{i}} + F^{k} \Gamma^{j}_{ki}$$ ,is there a similar interpretation for $$\nabla^{i} F^{j}$$?

Thanks in advance!

P.S. This might be of interest, but maybe not

https://math.stackexchange.com/ques...-application-of-contravariant-derivative-on-a
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You can raise the index on ##\nabla## with the metric as per usual, i.e. ##\nabla^i = Z^{ij} \nabla_j##
 
ergospherical said:
You can raise the index on ##\nabla## with the metric as per usual, i.e. ##\nabla^i = Z^{ij} \nabla_j##
But is there an interpretation for

$$Z^{mi} \nabla_{i} F^{j} = Z^{mi}\frac{\partial F^{j}}{\partial Z^{i}} + F^{k}Z^{mi} \Gamma^{j}_{ki}$$?
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
614
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K