Differential forms and divergence

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of differential forms in the context of divergence, particularly in R^2 and R^3. Participants explore the relationship between differential forms and vector calculus operations such as gradient, curl, and divergence, while addressing the interpretation of these concepts in different dimensions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how to obtain the 2-dimensional version of divergence from differential forms in R^2, noting that differentiating a 0-form yields a gradient and a 1-form yields a curl.
  • Another participant asserts that differentiating a 1-form results in a 2-form, but emphasizes that the differential of a 2-form is zero, leading to confusion about the meaning of divergence in this context.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that the website's statement is correct under a specific interpretation, clarifying that divergence is an operator for vector fields and cannot be directly applied to differential 1-forms.
  • One participant outlines a process involving transposing a vector field to a differential 1-form, applying Hodge duality, and then differentiating to arrive at a scalar field, which they equate to divergence.
  • There is a discussion about the commonality of the transpose notation, with some participants expressing uncertainty about its usage in the literature.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of a "volume element" necessary for transforming a vector field to a 2-form.
  • Further contributions mention the volume form and the Hodge star operator, with references to relevant literature for deeper understanding.
  • One participant relates the transpose operation to the Riesz map in functional analysis, highlighting the differences in focus between various mathematical frameworks.
  • Another participant notes the importance of being aware of different notations and mathematical packages used across various scientific disciplines.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of divergence in relation to differential forms, with no consensus reached on how to reconcile these concepts in R^2 and R^3.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the definitions of divergence and the operations on differential forms, as well as the potential confusion arising from different notations and terminologies used across disciplines.

Damidami
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone, I'm new to this forum.
I have a doubt about differential forms, related to the divergence.
On a website I read this:
"In general, it is true that in R^3 the operation of d on a differential 0-form gives the gradient of that differential 0-form, that on a differential 1-form give the curl of that differential 1-form, and that on a differential 2-form gives its divergence."

My question is: In R^2 how can I obtain de 2-d version of the divergence by differentiating a form? Because if I differentiate a 0-form it gives me the 2-d version of the gradient, and if I differentiate a 1-form it gives me the 2-d version of the curl.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You don't. Any 1-form is of the form f(x,y)dx+ g(x,y)dy and any 2-form is h(x,y)dxdy. Strictly speaking the differental d(fdx+ gdy)= f_x dxdx+ f_y dydx+ g_x dxdy+ g_ydydy but because the "product" is skew symmetric, dxdx and dydy are both 0 so d(fdx+ gdy)= (g_x- f_y)dxdy. There cannot be a product of three of &quot;dx&quot; and &quot;dy&quot; so the differential of any 2-form is 0.<br /> <br /> (In R<sup>3</sup>, the differential of a 2-form is d(fdxdy+ gdydz+ hdxdz)= f_zdzdxdy+ g_xdxdydz+ h_ydydxdz= (f_z+ g_x- h_y)dxdydz so I am not at all sure what is meant by &amp;quot;its divergence&amp;quot; there.)
 
The website is correct, under a suitable interpretation of the word "gives".

For example, strictly speaking, divergence is an operator that takes a vector field and returns a scalar field. So, you can't even apply it to a differential 1-form!

But once you've chosen a metric, there are two duality operations you can apply: there is the transpose (a.k.a. "raising" and "lowering" indices) and there is Hodge duality.

So, to produce divergence in 3-space, you have to do the following:

(1) Apply a transpose to convert your vector field into a differential 1-form
(2) Apply Hodge duality to produce a differential 2-form
(3) Apply d to produce a differential 3-form
(4) Apply Hodge duality to produce a scalar field. (a.k.a. differential 0-form)

If (x, y, z) are orthonormal coordinates, then in these coordinates we start with

f \frac{\partial}{\partial x} + g \frac{\partial}{\partial y} + h \frac{\partial}{\partial z}

transposing gives

f \, dx + g \, dy + h \, dz

Hodge duality gives

f \, dy dz + g \, dz dx + h \, dx dy

differentiation gives

(f_x + g_y + h_z) \, dx dy dz

and hodge duality gives

f_x + g_y + h_z

So

\mathop{\mathrm{div}} v = \mathord{*} d \mathord{*} v^T
 
Last edited:
Cool. Is the transpose notation common?
 
I don't think so, but I don't know for sure; this isn't my specialty. I know I've heard the operation called the "metric transpose" often enough, but I'm not sure if I've actually seen that notation used. Some sort of index notation (abstract or concrete) is usually used.
 
for correct transformation vector field to 2 form you need to use the notion of so-called "volume element" (\Omega=*1=dxdydz)
 
Often called volume form and written \omega = dx \wedge dy \wedge dz. More generally, whenever you have a coframe field in a Riemannian or Lorenztian n-manifold, \omega = \sigma^1 \wedge \sigma^2 \wedge \dots \sigma^n The transpose is also known by the overused word dual. Did anyone mention the Hodge star operator? The book by Flanders is a good source of information for all these topics.
 
Last edited:
In functional analysis one would say that the transpose here is actually the Riesz map (or the inverse?) acted pointwise.
 
That's mainly because in functional analysis we're more interested in topological duals of a TVS, rather than its algebraic dual. The Riesz map establishes the homeomorphism between a Hilbert space and its topological dual.
 
  • #10
In general you must be oriented not only for notation, which can be different in various branch of science, but also on some mathematical package which you are going to use. As for me I prefer Reduce with "excalc" and "eds" packages.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K