Maurer-Cartan Form: Is it a One Form?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Silviu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Form
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the Maurer-Cartan form on a Lie group, specifically whether it qualifies as a one-form or a different type of tensor. Participants explore definitions and properties related to one-forms and tensors in the context of differential geometry.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the classification of the Maurer-Cartan form as a one-form, suggesting it appears to be a (1,1) tensor based on its definition and properties.
  • Another participant asserts that the Maurer-Cartan form is a \(\mathfrak{g}\)-valued one-form, implying it has a specific structure that differs from traditional one-forms.
  • Some participants discuss the equivalence of (1,1) tensors to linear maps, indicating that the Maurer-Cartan form can be interpreted in terms of its action on vectors.
  • There is confusion about the role of basis vectors in the context of the Maurer-Cartan form, with participants seeking clarification on how these relate to the definitions being discussed.
  • One participant reiterates the definition of a one-form as a function from vectors to real numbers, questioning how the \(\mathfrak{g}\)-valued nature fits into this definition.
  • Another response emphasizes that while it is not a traditional one-form, it retains characteristics of a one-form by being \(\mathfrak{g}\)-valued.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the Maurer-Cartan form should be classified strictly as a one-form or as a (1,1) tensor. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing interpretations presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence on definitions and the specific mathematical structures involved, indicating that the classification of the Maurer-Cartan form may hinge on nuanced interpretations of tensor properties and forms.

Silviu
Messages
612
Reaction score
11
Hello! I am reading Geometry Topology and Physics by Nakahara and in Chapter 5.6.4 he defines the canonical (Maurer-Cartan) one form on a Lie group G as: ##\theta : T_gG \to T_eG##. Then he states a theorem in which ##\theta = V_\mu \otimes \theta^\mu##. Both by the tensor product and by the definition from a vector space to another vector space, ##\theta## seems to be a ##(1,1)## tensor, not a one form, as it is stated in the book. Am I missing something? Is it a one form or not? Did I get wrong the definition of one form? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is a ##\mathfrak g## valued one form.
 
Every ##(1,1)## tensor, say ##\varphi \otimes v \in U^* \otimes V## is equivalent to the linear map ##u \longmapsto \varphi(u)\cdot v##. Here we have ##v \in T_gG## and ##\varphi \in T_e^*G##.
 
martinbn said:
It is a ##\mathfrak g## valued one form.
Isn't a one-form by definition a function from vectors to real numbers? And ##\mathfrak{g}## is isomorphic to ##T_gG## so it should behave the same whether it acts on vector fields or on simple vectors (tangents at e). But regardless of how you take it, I still don't understand why there is a basis vector (##V_\mu##), if it acts only on vectors and not on one-forms.
 
fresh_42 said:
Every ##(1,1)## tensor, say ##\varphi \otimes v \in U^* \otimes V## is equivalent to the linear map ##u \longmapsto \varphi(u)\cdot v##. Here we have ##v \in T_gG## and ##\varphi \in T_e^*G##.
I am not sure I understand. Do you mean that a ##(1,1)## tensor can be transformed into a one-form by passing to it a one-form, which cancels the vector basis? But in our case, what would be that one-form? Like to me ##\theta## is clearly a ##(1,1)## tensor, and by the definition in the book the exactly same ##\theta##, without any modification is called a one-form. I am not sure I understand it...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K