Partial derivatives as basis vectors?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of partial derivatives as basis vectors on a manifold, particularly in the context of general relativity (GR) and the relationship between scalar fields and basis vectors in flat spacetime. Participants explore the implications of this notation and its application in various mathematical and physical contexts.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether it is permissible to define a scalar field, such as f(x,y,z,t) = x + y + z + t, to recover Cartesian basis vectors in flat spacetime.
  • Another participant clarifies that partial derivatives act on smooth functions defined on a manifold, and that the tangent space at any point on the manifold is a vector space where these derivative operators serve as basis vectors.
  • Some participants argue that the use of partial derivative operators is largely a matter of notation, suggesting that there is no significant physics involved in their application.
  • In contrast, others assert that they find the interpretation of tangent vectors as derivative operators to be productive, particularly in the context of differential equations and other applications.
  • A participant seeks clarification on whether a four-velocity vector in flat spacetime has the same components as a corresponding tangent vector on a manifold, to which another participant confirms this equivalence.
  • A detailed explanation is provided regarding the relationship between curves on a manifold and their tangent vectors, including the use of coordinate systems and the chain rule to express tangent vectors in terms of partial derivatives.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance of using partial derivatives as basis vectors, with some emphasizing the notation aspect and others highlighting its practical utility in calculations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the broader implications of this notation in physics.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the discussion involves complex mathematical concepts, including the nature of tangent spaces, vector fields, and the transformation properties of derivative operators. There are also references to specific mathematical expressions and the application of the chain rule, which may require further elaboration for clarity.

Rearden
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm having trouble understanding how people can make calculations using the partial derivatives as basis vectors on a manifold. Are you allowed to specify a scalar field on which they can operate? eg. in GR, can you define f(x,y,z,t) = x + y + z + t, in order to recover the Cartesian basis vectors of flat spacetime? Or am I missing the point?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They act on smooth functions f:M\rightarrow\mathbb R, where M is the manifold. Note that M isn't (usually) a vector space, but its tangent space T_pM at any point p\in M is. The derivative operators are basis vectors for those vector spaces.

See also this post.
 
It's purely a matter of notation. There is no interesting physics involved. You never really use the partial derivative operators to take the partial derivative of any actual function. The reason the notation makes sense is that derivative operators have the transformation properties implied by the notation.
 
I think I understand. So does a four-velocity vector expressed in flat spacetime with a Cartesian basis have exactly the same components as the corresponding tangent vector on a manifold, despite the nominally different basis vectors?
 
bcrowell said:
It's purely a matter of notation. There is no interesting physics involved. You never really use the partial derivative operators to take the partial derivative of any actual function.

False. I use them to take derivatives all the time: as operators in differential equations, for calculating commutators of Killing vectors, etc. I find the literal interpretation of tangent vectors as derivative operators to be quite productive.

I also use the basis 1-forms as linear functionals acting on vectors.
 
Rearden said:
I think I understand. So does a four-velocity vector expressed in flat spacetime with a Cartesian basis have exactly the same components as the corresponding tangent vector on a manifold, despite the nominally different basis vectors?
Yes. Suppose that C:[a,b]\rightarrow M is a curve in a manifold, and x:U\rightarrow\mathbb R^n is a coordinate system such that C([a,b])\subset U. The union of all the tangent spaces TM=\bigcup_{p\in M}T_pM is called the tangent bundle. A function V:[a,b]\rightarrow TM[/itex] such that V(t)\in T_{C(t)}M for all t\in[a,b], is called a vector field along the curve C. We&#039;re interested in a particular vector field along the curve, called the velocity vector field of C, or the tangent vector field of C. It&#039;s often written as \dot C and is defined by<br /> <br /> \dot C(t)(f)=(f\circ C)&amp;#039;(t)<br /> <br /> To find its components, we need to express \dot C(t) as a linear combination of the \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\bigg|_{C(t)}. This isn&#039;t hard if we know the chain rule.<br /> <br /> (f\circ C)&amp;#039;(t)=(f\circ x^{-1}\circ x\circ C)&amp;#039;(t)=(f\circ x^{-1})_{,i}(x(C(t)))(x\circ C)^i&amp;#039;(t)=(x\circ C)^i&amp;#039;(t)\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\bigg|_{C(t)}f<br /> <br /> so<br /> <br /> \dot C(t)=(x\circ C)^i&amp;#039;(t)\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\bigg|_{C(t)}<br /> <br /> Define \tilde x=x\circ C. This is a curve in \mathbb R^n, and the tangent vector at \tilde x(t) of such a curve, is defined as \tilde x&amp;#039;(t)=(\tilde x^1&amp;#039;(t),\dots,\tilde x^n&amp;#039;(t)). So its components can be written as \tilde x^i&amp;#039;(t)=(x\circ C)^i&amp;#039;(t), which as we just saw, are also the components of \dot C(t) in the basis that consists of the partial derivative operators at C(t), constructed from the coordinate system x.
 
Last edited:
Exactly what I needed,

Thanks a lot!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
  • · Replies 146 ·
5
Replies
146
Views
12K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K