Natural direction of pushforwards and pullbacks

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ergospherical
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Direction Natural
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the natural directions of pushforwards and pullbacks in the context of differential geometry, specifically regarding the behavior of vectors, 1-forms, and functions under diffeomorphisms. Participants explore the definitions and implications of these operations, considering both intuitive and technical aspects.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that vectors are naturally pushed forward due to their relationship with curves, as the tangent of a curve in one manifold corresponds to the tangent of the image curve in another manifold.
  • Others argue that the inability to define pullbacks of vector fields from non-injective maps highlights a fundamental difference in how vectors and functions behave under these operations.
  • It is suggested that the natural behavior of functions being pulled back is clear because it involves composition with the map, while dual objects like 1-forms behave oppositely.
  • One participant notes that pushforwards and pullbacks are dual operations, which can be represented through commutative diagrams, emphasizing the relationship between the Jacobi matrix and its transpose.
  • There is a mention of the visualization challenge with 1-forms compared to vectors, indicating a difference in intuitive understanding of these mathematical objects.
  • A later reply introduces a hypothetical scenario involving smooth functions on dual spaces, suggesting that exploring such setups could lead to confusion regarding directions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the naturalness of pushforwards and pullbacks, with no consensus reached on the underlying reasons for these differences. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the definitions and implications of these operations.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the dependence on the definitions of diffeomorphisms and the conditions under which pushforwards and pullbacks are defined. The discussion also touches on the implications of injectivity and bijectivity in these contexts.

ergospherical
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,100
Reaction score
1,387
Given a diffeo ##\phi : M \rightarrow M'## (and with ##f## a function on ##M'##), vectors ##X## can be "naturally" pushed forward with ##\phi_*## from ##T_{p}M## to ##T_{\phi(p)}M'## subject to ##\phi_{*}X(f) \bigg{|}_{\phi(p)} = X(\phi^* f) \bigg{|}_{p}##. And 1-forms ##\omega## are naturally pulled back from ##T^*_{\phi(p)}M'## to ##T^*_p M## subject to ##\langle \phi^* \omega, X \rangle \bigg{|}_{p} = \langle \omega, \phi_* X \rangle \bigg{|}_{\phi(p)}##.

Making use of the inverse ##\phi^{-1}: M' \rightarrow M##, I think it's possible to also push forward 1-forms (##\omega \mapsto \phi_* \omega##) subject to e.g. ##\langle \phi_* \omega, X \rangle \bigg{|}_{\phi(p)} = \langle \omega, {(\phi^{-1})}_* X \rangle \bigg{|}_p##. And similarly I think we can also pull back vectors (##X \mapsto \phi^* X##) subject to e.g. ##\phi^* X(f') \bigg{|}_p = X({(\phi^{-1})}^* f') \bigg{|}_{\phi(p)}##, where ##f'## is a function on ##M## [are these right?].

In any case my question is why do vectors seem to naturally be pushed forward, whilst 1-forms and functions seem too be naturally pulled back... is it simply a matter of definition? Thanks
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Physics news on Phys.org
A tangent vector is naturally pushed forward since it is the tangent of a curve ##\gamma## in ##M## and ##\phi\circ\gamma## is then a curve in ##M’## whose tangent is the pushforward.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cianfa72, ergospherical and vanhees71
Intuitively in the general case in which ##\phi : M \rightarrow M'## is not injective we cannot define a pullback of a vector field from ##M'## to ##M## the same way we cannot define a pushforward of a scalar field (function) from ##M## to ##M'##.

In the latter case which would be the value of the function at the point P in ##M'## having as inverse image through ##\phi^{-1}## different values of the scalar field (function) defined on multiple points in ##M## ?
 
ergospherical said:
In any case my question is why do vectors seem to naturally be pushed forward, whilst 1-forms and functions seem too be naturally pulled back... is it simply a matter of definition? Thanks
I'd say for functions is quite clear, because it is just composing with the map. For dual objects it goes the opposite way. Since vectors evaluate on functions, they are pushed forward. One forms evaluate on vectors, so they are pulled back.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ergospherical
If you have a bijection, then you are automatically disposing of all directions. But bijection in this case means diffeomorphism, which is quite a strong condition.

Pullbacks and pushforwards are dual operators and their existence can be described by commutative diagrams. For short: one is the Jacobi matrix, the other one is its transpose.

Pushforwards are easier to visualize because we can imagine a vector, but not so much a 1-form. It's
$$
(\varphi_*(v))(f)=v(f \circ \varphi) \text{ versus } (\varphi^*\nu)(x) = \nu(\varphi(x))
$$

Your question is a bit like: What if I start with a smooth function ##f^*\, : \,M^*\longrightarrow N^*## on the dual spaces? But don't demand to work this out. I would get lost in directions. However, it's a legitimate setup.

I tried to sort it out here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/pantheon-derivatives-part-iii/
but it is more about definitions than about the why's.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ergospherical and vanhees71

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
862
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K