Covector and Vectors 2 Basic Questions.

  • Thread starter binbagsss
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Vectors
In summary: R^n## is a vector space, and a covector is a function that takes each vector in ##\big(\frac{\partial}{\partial...x^j}\big)\subseteq \mathbb R^n## to a covector at that vector.Q2) I'm trying to understand why df=\partial _a(f )dxa is a covector?The gradient of a function is a covector.
  • #1
binbagsss
1,254
11
I am just being introduced to the notion of covectors.

I see that the gradient of a scalar function is thought of as a covector.

Q1) On another source I have read to think of contravariant vector field as a differential operator: Va [itex]\partial _a[/itex] and to think of a covariant vector field as differential: wadxa.

From the fact that the gradient function is a covector, I thought this would be the other way around?

Q2) I'm trying to understand why df=[itex]\partial _a[/itex](f )dxa is a covector?

My thoughts:

[itex]\partial _a[/itex]f is a covector.
dxa is a vector.

So, isn't this just the definition of a contraction - multiplication of a covector and a vector to yield a scalar.

Thanks very much in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
##\partial_a## is a contravariant vector ##\partial_a(f)## is a scalar. It's just a number. It's the coefficient of the ##dx^a##. Think about it.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Dick said:
##\partial_a## is a contravariant vector ##\partial_a(f)## is a scalar. It's just a number. It's the coefficient of the ##dx^a##. Think about it.

I thought ##\partial_a##=##\frac{\partial}{\partial x_a}##.
That these are components of the gradient function, which when operating on a scalar, should be regarded as a covector.
 
  • #4
binbagsss said:
I thought ##\partial_a##=##\frac{\partial}{\partial x_a}##.
That these are components of the gradient function, which when operating on a scalar, should be regarded as a covector.

It is a contravariant vector as an operator. Once it operates on a function then it just yields another function.
 
  • #5
binbagsss said:
I see that the gradient of a scalar function is thought of as a covector.
It's not a cotangent vector, but it can be thought of as associating an n-tuple with each coordinate system, and those n-tuples transform covariantly. That makes "it" (actually the association of n-tuples with coordinate systems, not the original gradient) a covector according to the old-fashioned definitions. I'll quote myself:

Fredrik said:
The gradient of a function ##f:\mathbb R^n\to\mathbb R## is the function ##\nabla f:\mathbb R^n\to\mathbb R^n## defined by
$$\nabla f(x)=(f_{,1}(x),\dots,f_{,n}(x)),$$ for all ##x\in\mathbb R^n##. For each ##i\in\{1,\dots,n\}##, ##f_{,i}## denotes the ith partial derivative of f. In differential geometry, partial derivatives are defined using both a coordinate system and the conventional type of partial derivatives. For example, if ##x:U\to\mathbb R^n## is a coordinate system on ##U\subseteq\mathbb R^n##, and ##p\in U##, then for all ##i\in\{1,\dots,n\}##, we have
$$\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\bigg|_p f= (f\circ x^{-1})_{,i}(x(p)).$$ This statement defines the notation on the left.

The conventional partial derivatives in a gradient can be interpreted as partial derivatives in the sense of differential geometry, if we use the fact that the identity map ##I##, defined by ##I(x)=x## for all ##x\in\mathbb R^n##, is a coordinate system. We have
$$\frac{\partial}{\partial I^i}\bigg|_p f = (f\circ I^{-1})_{,i}(I(p)) = f_{,i}(p).$$
It doesn't make much sense to say that the gradient (the n-tuple with components ##f_{,i}(p)##) "transforms" when we change the coordinates, because it's just one n-tuple. To discuss "transformation", we have to associate an n-tuple with each coordinate system. The formula at the end of the quote gives us an obvious way to do that. For each coordinate system x that has p in its domain, we define the "gradient of f, at p, in the coordinate system x" as the n-tuple with components ##\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\!\big|_p f##, and we also define the ordered basis of ##T_pM## associated with x as the n-tuple ##\big(\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\!\big|_p\big)_{i=1}^n##.

It follows immediately from our definitions that "the gradient of f at p in the coordinate system x" transforms covariantly. To transform covariantly is to transform the same way as the ordered basis, and "the gradient of f at p in the coordinate system" is just an n-tuple whose components are the elements of the ordered basis acting on f.

To be a little more explicit, the transformation of the ordered basis is given by ##\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\!\big|_p\to \frac{\partial}{\partial y^i}\!\big|_p##. The ##\frac{\partial}{\partial y^i}\!\big|_p## are elements of ##T_pM##, which is spanned by the ##\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\!\big|_p##, so there must exist numbers ##M^j{}_i## such that ##\frac{\partial}{\partial y^i}\!\big|_p=M^j{}_i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}\!\big|_p##. So the transformation of the ordered basis can be written as
$$\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\!\big|_p\to M^j{}_i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}\!\big|_p.$$ This implies that the transformation of the gradient at p is given by
$$\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\!\big|_p f\to M^j{}_i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}\!\big|_p f.$$ Since the numbers that appear on the right are ##M^j{}_i## (the same numbers that showed up when we transformed the ordered basis), we say that the gradient of f at p in the coordinate system x "transforms covariantly", i.e. in the same way as the ordered basis.

binbagsss said:
Q1) On another source I have read to think of contravariant vector field as a differential operator: Va [itex]\partial _a[/itex] and to think of a covariant vector field as differential: wadxa.
I prefer the terms "vector field" and "cotangent vector field" respectively. Cotangent vector fields are also called 1-forms. A vector field is a function that takes each point in some subset of the manifold to a tangent vector at that point. A cotangent vector field is a function that takes each point in some subset of the manifold to a cotangent vector at that point. ##\big(\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\!\big|_p\big)_{i=1}^n## is an ordered basis for the tangent space at p. ##\big(\mathrm dx^i\big|_p\big)_{i=1}^n## is an ordered basis for the cotangent space at p.

binbagsss said:
From the fact that the gradient function is a covector, I thought this would be the other way around?
An ordered basis of the tangent space transforms covariantly (obviously, since that means "in the same way as the ordered basis"). This implies that the components of any tangent space transforms contravariantly. This is easy to see when you expand an arbitrary tangent vector in two different bases: ##v=v^i e_i =v'^ie'_i##. For this to hold, the transformation of the components has to be the "opposite" of the transformation of the ordered basis. See this post for a lot more details about this sort of thing.

binbagsss said:
Q2) I'm trying to understand why df=[itex]\partial _a[/itex](f )dxa is a covector?
A cotangent vector is an element of the cotangent space. df is by definition a linear map from the tangent space into the real numbers (defined by ##df(v)=v(f)## for all smooth functions f), so it's by definition a cotangent vector.
 

1. What is the difference between a covector and a vector?

A covector is a linear function that takes in a vector as its input and returns a scalar value. It can also be thought of as a row or column of numbers. A vector, on the other hand, is a quantity that has both magnitude and direction. It is represented by an arrow in space.

2. How are covectors and vectors related?

Covectors and vectors are related through a mathematical operation called the dot product. The dot product takes in a covector and a vector, and returns a scalar value. This scalar value represents the projection of the vector onto the direction of the covector.

3. What is the significance of covectors and vectors in physics?

In physics, covectors and vectors are used to describe physical quantities such as force, velocity, and acceleration. Vectors represent the physical quantity itself, while covectors represent the rate of change of that quantity with respect to time.

4. Can covectors and vectors be added or multiplied together?

No, covectors and vectors cannot be added or multiplied together. They belong to different mathematical spaces and have different properties. However, the dot product is a way to combine a covector and a vector to obtain a scalar value.

5. How do covectors and vectors relate to tensors?

Tensors are mathematical objects that can represent both covectors and vectors. They are used to describe more complex physical quantities, such as stress and strain. In fact, a tensor can be thought of as a generalization of both covectors and vectors.

Similar threads

  • Differential Geometry
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
10
Views
716
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
833
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
470
  • Differential Geometry
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
670
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
Back
Top