Geodesic equations and Christoffel symbols

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between Christoffel symbols and geodesics on surfaces, particularly in the context of differential geometry. Participants explore whether geodesics can be derived from Christoffel symbols and clarify terminology related to the first fundamental form and metrics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that Christoffel symbols can be determined from the first fundamental form and question if geodesics can be derived from these symbols.
  • Others express confusion regarding the terminology, specifically questioning the use of "first fundamental form" versus "metric" in the context of manifolds.
  • A participant raises a specific example involving a helicoid and inquires about computing geodesics from the first fundamental form at a given point.
  • There is a suggestion that the discussion may be limited to embedded submanifolds in Euclidean space, as indicated by the terminology used.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the terminology used or the derivation of geodesics from Christoffel symbols. Confusion and differing interpretations of the concepts are evident throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the terminology and the scope of the discussion, particularly concerning embedded submanifolds versus general manifolds.

Demon117
Messages
162
Reaction score
1
I've been thinking about this quite a bit. So it is clear that one can determine the Christoffel symbols from the first fundamental form. Is it possible to derive the geodesics of a surface from the Christoffel symbols?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Demon117 said:
I've been thinking about this quite a bit. So it is clear that one can determine the Christoffel symbols from the first fundamental form. Is it possible to derive the geodesics of a surface from the Christoffel symbols?

What about the geodesic equation? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesic#Riemannian_geometry
 
I'm a little bit confused by the language. Is the overall metric for a manifold usually referred to as the "first fundamental form"? From my readings, I've only encountered the language "first fundamental form" in the case of embedded submanifolds for which the "first fundamental form" is the (restricted) metric on the embedded submanifold, and the second fundamental form is the extrinsic curvature.

So are you talking about geodesics on an embedded submanifold? I'm just wondering why you use the language "first fundamental form" instead of the more often seen word "metric". o.O
 
Matterwave said:
I'm a little bit confused by the language. Is the overall metric for a manifold usually referred to as the "first fundamental form"? From my readings, I've only encountered the language "first fundamental form" in the case of embedded submanifolds for which the "first fundamental form" is the (restricted) metric on the embedded submanifold, and the second fundamental form is the extrinsic curvature.

So are you talking about geodesics on an embedded submanifold? I'm just wondering why you use the language "first fundamental form" instead of the more often seen word "metric". o.O

Since he uses terminology like "surface" and "first fundamental form", I assume that he only works with embedded submanifolds in ##\mathbb{R}^n##. A lot of introductory differential geometry books will only treat this case and don't work with general manifolds and metrics.
 
Well, here is the issue. Suppose I have a helicoid parameterized by Y(u,\theta) = (sinh(u)cos(\theta), -sinh(u)sin(\theta), \theta). For some point on this surface with the coordinate (u,\theta), how can one easily compute the geodesic passing through that point using the first fundamental form? Or is that even possible? Call the point p.

This has bugged me for quite some time :/
 
nevermind.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K