Proof of Normal Vector Field for Hypersurface Sigma

WannabeNewton
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
5,848
Reaction score
552
Hi guys, I was wondering if anyone could post or point me to a proof of the statement that given a hypersurface \Sigma, specified by setting a function f(x) = const., the vector field \xi ^{\mu } = \triangledown ^{\mu }f = g^{\mu \nu }\triangledown _{\nu }f will be normal to \Sigma in the sense that \xi ^{\mu } will be orthogonal to all u\in T_{p}(\Sigma ) for some p\in \Sigma. I tried to visualize it for trivial manifolds but I really couldn't. If there isn't really a proof of any kind could someone at least make the statement more intuitive. Thanks in advance.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The simplest way of looking at it is to use the "directional derivative". If f(X) is a real valued function (X is a point in some space) and \vec{v}
is a vector in that space, then the "derivative of f in the diretion \vec{v}", the rate at which f is increasing in that direction, is given by D_\vec{v} f= \nabla f\cdot\vec{v}. In particular, if \vec{v}
is tangent to the surface f(X)= constant then f does not change: D_\vec{v} f= \nabla f\cdot \vec{v}= 0 which says directly that \nabla f and \vec{v}
are perpendicular. Since \vec{v}
could be any vector in the tangent plane, \nabla f is perpendicular to the tangent plane, i.e. normal to the surface.
 
Oh, the fact that I saw it in component form was confusing me. If I could just restate what you said, for my own clarification: since \Sigma is specified by f(x) = const. then on \Sigma, \triangledown _{\nu }f = 0 for all \nu so \xi ^{\mu } = g^{\mu \nu }\triangledown _{\nu }f = 0 identically as well on the hypersurface. Then, for all \mathbf{v}\in T_{p}(\Sigma ), \xi ^{\mu }v_{\mu } = 0 and since \mathbf{v} lies on the tangent space to \Sigma at p, \boldsymbol{\xi} must be orthogonal to it so it is then normal to \Sigma. Is this basically the gist of what you said?
Thank you so very much by the way. Cleared my head up; I think my problem was that I kept thinking of the function everywhere outside the hypersurface and not just what happens on it.
 
Last edited:
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Back
Top