Find Null Paths in Differentiable Manifolds Using One-Forms

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on finding null paths in differentiable manifolds using one-forms, specifically through the metric ds² = -dt² + dx². The analysis demonstrates that treating one-forms like differentials can lead to incorrect conclusions, as highlighted by the example derived from Carroll's work. The discussion emphasizes the importance of recognizing one-forms as operators that act on tangent vectors, rather than treating them as mere scalars, which can obscure the underlying mathematical structure.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of differentiable manifolds and their properties
  • Familiarity with one-forms and tangent vectors
  • Knowledge of calculus, particularly in the context of differential equations
  • Basic concepts of metric tensors and their applications in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of one-forms in differentiable manifolds
  • Explore the implications of treating one-forms as operators versus scalars
  • Investigate the commutation relations of differential forms
  • Examine examples where incorrect manipulation of one-forms leads to erroneous results
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for mathematicians, physicists, and students studying differential geometry, particularly those interested in the rigorous application of one-forms in theoretical physics and general relativity.

victorvmotti
Messages
152
Reaction score
5
Suppose that we have this metric and want to find null paths:

ds^2=-dt^2+dx^2

We can easily treat dt and dx "like" differentials in calculus and obtain for $$ds=0$$

dx=\pm dt \to x=\pm t

Now switch to the more abstract and rigorous one-forms in differentiable manifolds.

Here \mathrm{d}t (v) is a one-form that takes a tangent vector from T_p and returns a real number, \mathrm {d}t(v) \in \mathbb {R}.

The tangent vector to a curve x^{\mu}(\lambda) in the basis \partial_\mu is

v=\frac {dx^\mu}{d\lambda}\partial_\mu

Now apply the one-form to this vector

$$\mathrm {d}t(\frac {dx^\mu}{d\lambda}\partial_\mu)=\frac{dx^\mu}{d\lambda}\mathrm {d}t(\partial_\mu)$$
$$ =\frac{dx^\mu}{d\lambda}\frac {\partial t}{\partial x^\mu}$$
$$=\frac {dt}{d\lambda}$$

Now the above metric, in terms of one-forms read

$$0=-\mathrm {d}t^2(v,v)+\mathrm {d}x^2(v,v)=-\mathrm {d}t(v)\mathrm {d}t(v)+\mathrm{d}x(v)\mathrm {d}x(v)$$$$=-(\frac {dt}{d\lambda})^2+(\frac {dx}{d\lambda})^2$$

If we use the chain rule $$\frac {dx}{dt}=\frac {dx}{d\lambda}\frac {d\lambda}{dt}$$

We eventually obtain $$dx=\pm dt \to x=\pm t$$

The above is from Carroll's page 77. He reminds us that we should stick to the second more formal one-forms, that is not using differentials as in calculus, because in the first shortcut we have "sloppily" did not make the distinction between $$\mathrm {d}t^2(v)$$ and $$dt^2$$.

Now my question is that can someone please provide an example that unlike the above example, treating the one-form in differentiable manifolds as a differential in calculus will indeed produce incorrect results or conclusions.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, while I agree that it's good to conceptually remember that one-forms are operators (which operate on vectors) which return scalar values, I'm not aware of any difficulties if you happen to forget to be that formal and just manipulate the operators as if they were scalars, rather than operators.

The operators are linear, and associative. I suppose the only issue is if they commute, I haven't tried to think about this rigorously enough to come to any conclusion. Specifically we should ask if dx*dy = dy*dx, if they both operate on v^2.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K