Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Question about differential geometry

  1. Feb 8, 2013 #1

    Jip

    User Avatar

    Hi, I read in Padmanabhan's book that [itex]\nabla_a J^a=0[/itex] implies that there exists an antisymetric tensor P such that [itex]J^a= \nabla_b P^{ba}[/itex]. What's the name of the theorem? Any reference?
    Thanks
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 8, 2013
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 8, 2013 #2

    jedishrfu

    Staff: Mentor

    having trouble reading your latex rendering. Can you fix it?
     
  4. Feb 8, 2013 #3

    stevendaryl

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    [itex]\nabla_a J^a=0 [/itex] implies that there exists an antisymetric tensor [itex] P[/itex] such that [itex]J^a= \nabla_b P^{ba}[/itex]
     
  5. Feb 8, 2013 #4

    dextercioby

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    It should be the Poincaré's lemma for the codifferential. You might check Nakahara's text.
     
  6. Feb 8, 2013 #5

    WannabeNewton

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Check out appendix B in Wald's "General Relativity" and also problem 5 in chapter 4. It is essentially the converse of the poincare lemma. The lemma itself comes out of a combination of differential and algebraic topology; for its proof you would need to consult a proper text on differentiable manifolds.
     
  7. Feb 8, 2013 #6

    dextercioby

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    It's not the converse. It's the direct lemma.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincaré_lemma#Poincar.C3.A9_lemma

    Because d2 = 0, any exact form is automatically closed. The question of whether every closed form is exact depends on the topology of the domain of interest. On a contractible domain, every closed form is exact by the Poincaré lemma. More general questions of this kind on an arbitrary differentiable manifold are the subject of de Rham cohomology, that allows one to obtain purely topological information using differential methods.
     
  8. Feb 8, 2013 #7

    WannabeNewton

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    The result [itex]\partial _{a }v^{a} = 0 \Rightarrow \exists P^{ab} = -P^{ba}:v^{a}=\partial _{b}P^{ab}[/itex] is gotten by applying a consequence of the poincare lemma. The result needed by the OP comes from the fact that if [itex]d\alpha = 0[/itex] then locally [itex]\exists \beta :\alpha = d\beta [/itex]. Maybe converse wasn't the word to use here if that's what you are saying dexter; Wald does use that word but Lee doesn't so I don't know what to say other than that Wald might not be using it in the logical sense but rather in an informal/literal sense of the word (EDIT: Lee proves it and Wald doesn't - for the OP's interest)
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2013
  9. Feb 8, 2013 #8

    stevendaryl

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    It seems to me that the converse is just a generalization of the various 3D vector equations:

    • [itex]\vec{\nabla} \times (\vec{\nabla} \Phi) = 0[/itex]
      [itex]\vec{\nabla} \cdot (\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{A}) = 0[/itex]

    The converses in the 3D case are:
    • If [itex]\vec{F}[/itex] is a vector field such that [itex]\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{F}= 0[/itex], then [itex]\vec{F} = \nabla \Phi[/itex] for some scalar field [itex]\Phi[/itex].
    • If [itex]\vec{F}[/itex] is a vector field such that [itex]\vec{\nabla} \cdot \vec{F}= 0[/itex], then [itex]\vec{F} = \nabla \times \vec{A}[/itex] for some vector field [itex]\vec{A}[/itex].

    I think that these cases follow from Gauss' theorem and
     
  10. Feb 8, 2013 #9

    micromass

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor
    2016 Award

    Yeah, the converse is just that [itex]d^2=0[/itex], where d is the exterior derivative. This is of course crucial for establishing the De Rham cohomology.
     
  11. Feb 9, 2013 #10

    haushofer

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Some weeks ago there was a question about this also here. You can check Tomas Ortin's book "Gravity and Strings" on this theorem, it probably states its name.
     
  12. Feb 9, 2013 #11

    dextercioby

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I couldn't find it in Ortin (excellent book, btw).
     
  13. Feb 9, 2013 #12

    dextercioby

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I don't use Wald for a mathematical reference. He's picked the 'Poincaré lemma' part from Flanders's text on Differential Forms*. But merely stating that the exterior differential is nilpotent to the second order is not an interesting/difficult result, but rather

    <Poincare lemma. Let U be an open ball in E and let A be a differential
    form of degree >= 1 on U such that dA = 0. Then there exists a differential
    form B on U such that dB = A.>

    This is the mathematical standard result picked up from <Serge Lang, Differential Manifolds, Springer Verlag, 1985>.

    Let's go to <Spivak, Calculus on Manifolds, Addison-Wesley> Page 94:

    <4-11 Theorem (Poincare Lemma). If [itex] A\subset \mathbb{R}^{n} [/itex] is an open
    set star-shaped with respect to 0, then every closed form on A
    is exact.>

    *From Flanders's text, his first words from this preface to the first (1963) edition (quoted by Wald).

    <Last spring the author gave a series of lectures on exterior differential
    forms to a group of faculty members and graduate students from the Purdue
    Engineering Schools. The material that was covered in these lectures is
    presented here in an expanded version. The book is aimed primarily at
    engineers and physical scientists in the hope of making available to them new
    tools of very great power in modern mathematics
    .>
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2013
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Question about differential geometry
Loading...