Projection of the co-derivative = co-derivative of the projection ?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter plasticfloor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Projection
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on proving the equation \(\nabla_M b a = \text{pr}(\nabla_N b a)\), where \(M\) is a Riemannian sub-manifold of \(N\), and \(a, b\) are vector fields on \(M\). The participants express confusion regarding the immediate implications of the definitions of covariant derivatives and projections. It is established that the covariant derivative on a sub-manifold can be viewed as the projection of the covariant derivative from the ambient manifold, clarifying the relationship between these derivatives in different dimensions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Riemannian geometry and sub-manifolds
  • Familiarity with covariant derivatives and their properties
  • Knowledge of tangent bundles and projection functions
  • Basic concepts of vector fields in differential geometry
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Riemannian connections in detail
  • Learn about tangent bundles and their projections in differential geometry
  • Explore the implications of covariant derivatives in higher dimensions
  • Investigate examples of vector fields on Riemannian sub-manifolds
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for mathematicians, particularly those specializing in differential geometry, as well as students and researchers exploring the relationships between Riemannian manifolds and their sub-manifolds.

plasticfloor
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hey,

here is the formal question.

M is a riemannian sub-manifold in N. a,b are vector fields such that for each p\inM, ap,bp \in TpM \subset TpN

prove

\nablaMba = pr(\nablaNba)

where pr is the projection funtion pr:TpN\rightarrowTpM
and \nablaN and \nablaM are the covariant derivative operators (by riemannian connection) in N and M respectively.

I don't really understand why is this not immediate from definitions. the covariant derivative is taking a regular derivative and then projecting onto the tangent bundle. in a manifold the tangent bundle is just the manifold itself so the regular derivate is already the covariant derivative because the projection part is just identity. thus when I will project this vector on TpM ofcourse I wil get the covariant derivative on M because it's the projection onto Tp[\SUB]M of the regular derivative of vector fields on M.

is what I'm asked to prove actually just that the covariant derivative equal to the regular derivative when the vector fields in question belong to a sub manifold?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
please tell me what is meaning of dimension i knew only three dimension what about four ,five..... ialso want to know that any point in the three dimension is a vector than why we writing vector as a special case suppose u(2,3,5) is any point in the three dimension than why we writing it as a u=2i+3j+5K please reply me via email indetai
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
10K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
14K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K