Solving Derivative Operator Equations: Need Advice

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a proof involving derivative operator equations, specifically focusing on a complex identity involving covariant derivatives in the context of general relativity or differential geometry.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of the non-commutativity of covariant derivatives, question the nature of the vectors involved, and reference the Jacobi identity as a fundamental aspect of the operator algebra.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants offering various insights and references to definitions and properties relevant to the problem. Some guidance has been provided regarding the use of symmetry properties and the Jacobi identity, but no consensus has been reached on the necessity of certain assumptions.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted lack of specific information about the vectors involved, and participants are considering the implications of using a coordinate basis. The discussion also touches on related concepts such as torsion and the Bianchi identities, indicating potential complexities in the problem setup.

latentcorpse
Messages
1,411
Reaction score
0
im working through a proof and am stuck on the last line. i can't understand why

[itex]\nabla_a \nabla_b \omega_c - \nabla_b \nabla_a \omega_c + \nabla_b \nabla_c \omega_a - \nabla_c \nabla_b \omega_a + \nabla_c \nabla_a \omega_b - \nabla_a \nabla_c \omega_b=0[/itex]?

any advice?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is the some reason that [itex][\nabla_{a},\nabla_{b}]\neq0[/itex] (e.g. are you doing GR, and these are covariant derivatives)?
 
Use Wald's definition of the Reimann curvature tensor and appeal to its symmetry properties. (Unless this you are trying to prove the appropriate symmetry property in the first place, in which case you'll want to use 3.1.14 along with the symmetry of the Christoffel connections)
 
You haven't given much information but I assume the [tex]\omega[/tex] are tangent vectors (co-vectors?) and your identity has to do with the fact that you are using a coordinate basis.

Below the surface of this is the more fundamental Jacobi identity which reflects the underlying associativity of the operator algebra.

Jacobi Identity: [tex][[\nabla_a,\nabla_b],\nabla_c] +[[\nabla_b,\nabla_c],\nabla_a]+[[\nabla_c,\nabla_a],\nabla_b]=0[/tex]

Which holds for any algebraic system where the [tex]\nabla[/tex] are elements and where the bracket is a commutator of an associative product:
[tex][\nabla_a,\nabla_b]\equiv \nabla_a\nabla_b - \nabla_b\nabla_a[/tex]

You will note that if you expand all the commutators in the Jacobi identity all terms will cancel (provided you apply the associativity property of the underlying product).

Now assuming the [tex]\{\omega_a\}[/tex] are basis vectors of the tangent space in a coordinate basis i.e. then you can think of them as derivatives of the point function p(x) which maps coordinate values to a point on the manifold. Since the point itself is a scalar (it is by definition invariant under transformations at that point) you can apply either coordinate derivatives [tex]\partial_a[/tex] or covariant derivatives equivalently. So taking the l.h.s. of the Jacobi identity and applying it to the "point function" p(x) and you get your identity via:

[tex]\omega_a \equiv \nabla_a \mathbf{p}(x)[/tex]

I'm a bit fuzzy on whether the coordinate basis condition is necessary. I'll do some more research and check back later. (Anyone else recall?) I know there are issues relating Torsion and the Bianchi identities.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K