Spivak's Calculus on Manifolds: Theorem 5-3

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Theorem 5-3 from Spivak's "Calculus on Manifolds," specifically addressing the independence of the differential of a p-form, dω(x), from the choice of coordinate systems. The participants analyze the transformation of p-forms under different coordinate systems and emphasize the necessity of smooth coordinate transformations to apply the chain rule. The conclusion drawn is that the definition of dω(x) remains consistent across various coordinate systems, affirming Spivak's assertion regarding forms.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of manifolds and p-forms
  • Familiarity with coordinate transformations in differential geometry
  • Knowledge of the chain rule in the context of smooth functions
  • Proficiency in Spivak's "Calculus on Manifolds" concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of smooth maps and their derivatives in differential geometry
  • Explore the concept of differential forms and their applications
  • Learn about coordinate transformations and their implications on manifold theory
  • Review the chain rule for differentiable functions in multiple dimensions
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of differential geometry, and anyone studying advanced calculus or manifold theory will benefit from this discussion.

exclamationmarkX10
Messages
25
Reaction score
3
I am trying to finish the last chapter of Spivak's Calculus on Manifolds book. I am stuck in trying to understand something that seems like it's supposed to be trivial but I can't figure it out.

Suppose M is a manifold and \omega is a p-form on M. If f: W \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n is a coordinate system around x = f(a) and v_1, \ldots, v_{p+1} \in M_x, there are unique w_1, \ldots, w_{p+1} \in \mathbb{R}_a^k such that f_{\ast}(w_i) = v_i. Define d\omega(x)(v_1, \ldots, v_{p+1}) = d(f^{\ast}\omega)(a)(w_1, \ldots, w_{p+1}).

Now he says that d\omega(x) defined this way is independent of the choice of coordinate system around x. Any hints on how this can be shown?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Take another coordinate system and show that the definition results in the same p-form.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jim mcnamara
Orodruin said:
Take another coordinate system and show that the definition results in the same p-form.

Taking the suggested path, I reduced the problem to showing for all j, d(\omega_{i_1, \ldots, i_p} \circ g)(b)(w_j^{\prime}) = d(\omega_{i_1, \ldots, i_p} \circ f)(a)(w_j) where \omega_{i_1, \ldots, i_p} are components of \omega, g: V \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n is another coordinate system around x = g(b), and w_1^{\prime}, \ldots, w_{p+1}^{\prime} \in \mathbb{R}_b^k are the unique vectors such that g_{\ast}(w_i^{\prime}) = v_i.

Now this would follow immediately if we could use chain rule but we can't since the components are defined only on the manifold.
 
Last edited:
You need to use the fact that the coordinate transformation between the two systems is smooth and that you can apply the chain rule for it.
 
Orodruin said:
You need to use the fact that the coordinate transformation between the two systems is smooth and that you can apply the chain rule for it.

Maybe that is what Spivak meant when he says "Precisely the same considerations hold for forms" on page 116.

I see it now, thanks for all your help Orodruin.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K