Directional covariant derivative

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the directional covariant derivative in the context of tensor calculus, particularly focusing on its properties and implications in relation to geodesics. Participants explore the mathematical formulation and interpretations of the covariant derivative, as well as its application in physics, referencing specific texts such as Schutz's "First Course."

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the correctness of the expression for the directional covariant derivative of a vector field.
  • Another participant suggests using the product rule for covariant derivatives to clarify the relationship between the components of the vector and the basis vectors.
  • A participant proposes that the covariant derivative of a type (a,b) tensor results in a type (a,b+1) tensor, while the directional covariant derivative remains type (a,b) due to the inner product with the directional vector.
  • Further elaboration includes expanding vectors in terms of basis vectors and applying the product rule, leading to a detailed expression involving Christoffel symbols.
  • One participant reflects on the geodesic equation as presented in Schutz's text, indicating a connection between the covariant derivative of the tangent vector and the concept of no acceleration along a geodesic.
  • A later reply acknowledges the clarity gained from reviewing specific sections in Schutz's book, reinforcing the relationship between parallel transport and geodesics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the formulation and interpretation of the directional covariant derivative, with no consensus reached on the correctness of the initial expressions or the implications of the covariant derivative in the context of geodesics.

Contextual Notes

Some participants reference specific mathematical steps and assumptions related to the properties of covariant derivatives and their application to geodesics, but these remain unresolved and are subject to interpretation.

snoopies622
Messages
852
Reaction score
29
Is this correct?

[tex] <br /> \nabla _{\vec{p}} \vec{p} = (\nabla_a \vec{p} ) p^a<br /> <br /> =< (\nabla_a p^0 ) p^a, (\nabla_a p^1 ) p^a , (\nabla_a p^2 ) p^a, (\nabla_a p^3 ) p^a ><br /> [/tex]

(where the a's are summed from 0 to 3)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi again, atyy. Perhaps I should re-formulate; I think this is right but I was hoping for confirmation:

The covariant derivative of a type (a,b) tensor is a type (a,b+1) tensor, but the directional covariant derivative is still type (a,b), since one takes the inner product of the covariant derivative and the directional vector, thereby losing the extra lower rank.

I was wondering about this because somewhere in Schutz's First Course he writes the geodesic equation simply as [tex]\nabla _{\vec{p}} \vec{p} = 0[/tex], and I wasn't certain what [tex]\nabla _{\vec{p}} \vec{p}[/tex] meant.
 
I think it's something like this.

Expand u in basis vectors (linearity):
[tex] \nabla _{\bold{u}} \bold{v} <br /> = \nabla _{{u^i}\bold{e_i}} \bold{v} <br /> ={u^i} \nabla _{i} \bold{v}[/tex]

Expand v in basis vectors (product rule or Leibniz property):
[tex] {u^i} \nabla _{i} \bold{v}<br /> ={u^i} \nabla _{i} v^j\bold{e_j}<br /> ={u^i} (v^j\nabla _{i} \bold{e_j}+\bold{e_j}\nabla _{i} v^j})[/tex]

Use definition of Christoffel symbols and covariant derivative of a scalar field:
[tex] \begin{equation*}<br /> \begin{split}<br /> \{}{u^i} (v^j\nabla _{i} \bold{e_j}+\bold{e_j}\nabla _{i} v^j}) \\<br /> &={u^i} (v^j\Gamma^{k}_{ij} \bold{e_k}+\bold{e_j}{\frac {\partial v^j}{\partial x_i}}) \\<br /> &=({u^i}v^j\Gamma^{k}_{ij} \bold{e_k}+{u^i}\bold{e_j}{\frac {\partial v^j}{\partial x_i}}) \\<br /> &=({u^i}v^j\Gamma^{k}_{ij} \bold{e_k}+{u^i}\bold{e_k}{\frac {\partial v^k}{\partial x_i}}) \\<br /> &=({u^i}v^j\Gamma^{k}_{ij} \bold+{u^i}{\frac {\partial v^k}{\partial x_i}}){\bold{e_k}}<br /> \end{equation*}<br /> \end{split}[/tex]

For Schutz's equation, let the unknown coordinates of the curve be [tex]x_i=x_i(\tau)[/tex].

Set [tex]u^i=v^i=({\frac {dx(\tau)}{d\tau}})^i={\frac {dx{_i}(\tau)}{d\tau}}[/tex] as the tangent vector along the curve.

For a geodesic, set the covariant derivative of the tangent vector along the curve to zero (ie. no acceleration):
[tex]{\frac {dx{_i}}{d\tau}}{\frac {dx{_j}}{d\tau}}\Gamma^{k}_{ij} \bold+{\frac {dx{_i}}{d\tau}}({\frac {d^2x{_k}}{d\tau^2}}{\frac {d\tau}{dx{_i}}})}={\frac {dx{_i}}{d\tau}}{\frac {dx{_j}}{d\tau}}\Gamma^{k}_{ij} \bold+{\frac {d^2x{_k}}{d\tau^2}}}=0[/tex]

We can also get the same differential equation by requiring the integrated proper time along the curve to be extremal. A given metric fixes the Christoffel symbols. Solving the differential equation will give you the coordinates of a geodesic [tex]x_i=x_i(\tau)[/tex].
 
Need a day to process...
 
Thanks, atyy; I follow now. And it turns out that the relationship I was looking for is right here in Schutz's section 6.4, "Parallel-transport, geodesics and curvature":

[tex] <br /> \nabla _ {\vec U} \vec U = 0 \Rightarrow[/tex] "in component notation" [tex]U^{\beta} U^{\alpha} _{;\beta}=...=0[/tex]

I guess in general it pays to read page 166 before page 186.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
944
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K