Parallel transport of a 1-form aound a closed loop

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of parallel transport of a 1-form around a closed loop, particularly in relation to the gradient theorem and the Riemann Curvature Tensor. Participants explore the implications of parallel transporting a gradient field and whether it leads to a result of zero, as well as the relationship between 1-forms and gradient fields.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that since the gradient theorem allows evaluation of a line integral through a gradient field at endpoints, parallel transporting a gradient around a closed curve should yield zero.
  • Another participant counters that a general 1-form is not necessarily a gradient field, implying that the initial assumption may not hold.
  • Some participants agree that if a gradient is indeed a 1-form, the issue raised might still be valid, while others assert that the issue is non-existent and that the parallel transport equation for 1-forms remains valid.
  • Concerns are raised about the relationship between parallel transport and the exterior derivative, with one participant explaining that the exterior derivative does not depend on the connection, and thus the concepts are not equivalent.
  • Examples are provided to illustrate that a gradient may not be parallel along a curve, challenging the initial assumptions about the behavior of the gradient under parallel transport.
  • Several participants express uncertainty about the implications of their statements and indicate a need for further study to clarify their understanding of 1-forms and parallel transport.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether parallel transporting a gradient 1-form around a closed loop results in zero. There are competing views regarding the nature of 1-forms and their relationship to gradients, leading to an unresolved discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express confusion about the definitions and relationships involved, indicating potential limitations in their understanding of 1-forms and parallel transport. The discussion reflects varying levels of familiarity with the underlying mathematical concepts.

Phinrich
Messages
82
Reaction score
14
TL;DR
If we parrallell transport a gradient vector of a scalar around a closed loop do we get a none-zero result?
Good day all.

Since the gradient theorem, also known as the fundamental theorem of calculus for line integrals, says that a line integral through a gradient field can be evaluated by evaluating the original scalar field at the endpoints of the curve. Then If we form the Gradient vector field of the Scalar (a 1-form) and if we parrallell transport it around a Closed Curve would we not get a result of zero since we would evaluate the scalar at the start and end (the same point) and subtract. If this is yes then since we define the Riemann Curvature Tensor by parallell transporting a vector around a closed loop, If we tried to similarly define a Riemann Curvature Tensor by parrallell transport of the Gradient of a scalar around a closed point and get zero that suggests we cannot define such a Riemann Curvature Tensor for the Gradient Field?
Or am I TOTALLY wrong here ?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A general 1-form is not necessarily a gradient field.
 
Thank you. I agree. But of we agree that a Gradient is a 1-form then do we have the issue I mentioned?
 
Orodruin said:
A general 1-form is not necessarily a gradient field.
Interesting reply. What does the relativity of simultaneity to do with it ? Are we suggesting that not all observers would agree the two points are the same ?
 
Phinrich said:
Thank you. I agree. But of we agree that a Gradient is a 1-form then do we have the issue I mentioned?
Your issue is non-existent. The parallel transport equation for 1-forms would still be valid.

Phinrich said:
Interesting reply. What does the relativity of simultaneity to do with it ? Are we suggesting that not all observers would agree the two points are the same ?
Nothing. You are reading my signature, which is in all my posts.
 
That explains my confusion about where that answer came from. And I hear what you say about the non-existence of my issue. I will think that one over carefully.

Thanks
 
I agree that the formula remains valid. My only question is will the answer always be zero for the transport of a Gradient vector of a scaar? OK I am here associating parallel transport of a vector/1-form along a line with the line integral of the vector or 1-form. If that's correct?
 
Phinrich said:
I agree that the formula remains valid. My only question is will the answer always be zero for the transport of a Gradient vector of a scaar? OK I am here associating parallel transport of a vector/1-form along a line with the line integral of the vector or 1-form. If that's correct?

The exterior derivative has no a priori dependence on the connection. As such, the parallel transport (which is given by the connection) is not the same concept. I am sorry, but I do not see how you make this connection. For an exact 1-form ##df##, you have ##\int_\gamma df = f(b) - f(a)##, but there is nothing here telling you that the one-form is parallel along ##\gamma##. For this to be the case you would need ##\nabla_{\dot\gamma} df = 0##, which in coordinate form would be ##\dot x^\nu [\partial_\nu \partial_\mu f - \Gamma_{\nu\mu}^\rho \partial_\rho f] = 0##. For example, if you take ##f(x,y) = x^2 + y^2## in ##\mathbb R^2##, you would have ##\nabla f = 2 \vec x##. This is certainly not parallel along any curve with the usual connection on ##\mathbb R^2##.
 
Orodruin said:
The exterior derivative has no a priori dependence on the connection. As such, the parallel transport (which is given by the connection) is not the same concept. I am sorry, but I do not see how you make this connection. For an exact 1-form ##df##, you have ##\int_\gamma df = f(b) - f(a)##, but there is nothing here telling you that the one-form is parallel along ##\gamma##. For this to be the case you would need ##\nabla_{\dot\gamma} df = 0##, which in coordinate form would be ##\dot x^\nu [\partial_\nu \partial_\mu f - \Gamma_{\nu\mu}^\rho \partial_\rho f] = 0##. For example, if you take ##f(x,y) = x^2 + y^2## in ##\mathbb R^2##, you would have ##\nabla f = 2 \vec x##. This is certainly not parallel along any curve with the usual connection on ##\mathbb R^2##.

Thank you for your response. It is obvious that I do not fully understand the concept of the 1-form. I will study your response in detail ad hope that it will improve my understanding.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K