Undergrad The Road to Reality - exercise on scalar product

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around proving the consistency of the scalar product with the derivative of a scalar function using the chain rule, as outlined in Penrose's "The Road to Reality." Participants explore the application of the chain rule in a coordinate chart and discuss the implications of using the Weierstraß definition of a derivative. The conversation also touches on the properties of symmetric affine connections and the non-commutativity of second-order mixed partial derivatives on curved manifolds. Clarifications are made regarding the definitions of torsion-free and symmetric connections, emphasizing the differences in behavior between flat and curved manifolds. Overall, the thread highlights the complexities of derivatives in differential geometry and the importance of precise definitions in mathematical proofs.
  • #31
fresh_42 said:
This is a non-abelian Lie group. The tangent vectors (at the identity) are
$$X=\begin{pmatrix} 1&0\\0&-1 \end{pmatrix}\, , \,Y=\begin{pmatrix} 0&1\\0&0 \end{pmatrix}$$ with ##[X,Y]=2Y.##
Ah ok, one gets the basis of tangent vectors at the Lie group identity (i.e. Lie algebra basis vectors) calculating the derivatives of group element w.r.t. the parameters ##t## and ##c## and evaluating them at ##t=0,c=0##.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Sorry, regarding my previous statement
cianfa72 said:
I suspect that the meaning of the expression ##\nabla_{\nu} \nabla_{\mu}f## is not actually ##\nabla_{\nu}( \nabla_{\mu}f)## but ##(\nabla \nabla f)_{\nu \mu}##. Note that ##\nu,\mu## are indices (1,2,3...) in any local chart.
What is the actual meaning of ##\nabla_{\nu} \nabla_{\mu}f## ?
Thanks.
 
  • #33
cianfa72 said:
Sorry, regarding my previous statement

What is the actual meaning of ##\nabla_{\nu} \nabla_{\mu}f## ?
Thanks.
The first derivative produces a one form, the second derivative is of that one form.
 
  • #34
martinbn said:
The first derivative produces a one form, the second derivative is of that one form.
I think it is matter of notation: ##\nabla_{\nu}\nabla_{\mu}f## should be written as $$(\mathbf {\nabla} (\mathbf {\nabla} f))_{\nu \mu}$$ i.e. starting from a scalar field ##f## take the covariant derivative to get its gradient (1-form) then apply the covariant derivative again. You get a (0,2) tensor. Fix a basis ##\{\mathbf e_{\alpha}\}## in the tangent space at any point and insert basis vectors in order into the (0,2) tensor "slots" (i.e. do the contractions). This way you get the ##\nu,\mu## components of the (0,2) tensor in that basis.

Now it makes sense what is going on in post #4: since on manifolds the Connection coefficients in general do not vanish, the covariant derivative of the gradient doesn't result in second-order mixed partial derivatives of ##f##, hence the aforementioned expression doesn't commute in ##\nu, \mu##.
 
Last edited:
  • #35
Btw, even in ##\mathbb R^n## if one picks a non-standard affine connection (i.e. a non Levi-Civita connection), then ##\nabla_{\nu} \nabla_{\mu}f## doesn't commute as well.
 
  • #36
cianfa72 said:
Btw, even in ##\mathbb R^n## if one picks a non-standard affine connection (i.e. a non Levi-Civita connection), then ##\nabla_{\nu} \nabla_{\mu}f## doesn't commute as well.
As long as the torsion is not zero.
 
  • #37
Just for practice I did the explicit calculation. From here covariant derivative start from a 1-form ##\theta = \theta_{\eta}dx^{\eta}## written in the chart with coordinates ##\{ x^{\eta} \}##.

The gradient ##\nabla f## is by definition the 1-form/covector field ##\nabla f = \left ( \partial_{\mu} f \right ) dx^{\mu}##. Hence $$\nabla_{\nu} \nabla_{\mu} f = (\nabla \nabla f)_{\nu \mu} = \left ( \nabla ((\partial_{\eta}f) dx^{\eta}) \right )_{\nu \mu}= \left ( \partial_{\nu} \partial_{\mu}f - (\partial_{\eta}f)\Gamma^{\eta}_{ \mu \nu} \right ) dx^{\nu} \otimes dx^{\mu}$$
From the above we can see that whether the connection ##\Gamma## is symmetric in the lower indices (or vanish) in such coordinates (hence in all coordinates) then ##\nabla_{\nu} \nabla_{\mu} f = \nabla_{\mu} \nabla_{\nu} f## i.e. they commute.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K