Understanding the Wedge Product on a 3-dim Manifold

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the wedge product in the context of cohomology rings on a 3-dimensional manifold. Participants explore the definitions, properties, and implications of the wedge product between cohomology classes and differential forms, as well as the multiplication of elements within the cohomology ring.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines the cohomology ring and asks how the wedge product acts between two elements of the ring, specifically in the case of a 3-dimensional manifold.
  • Another participant explains that the De Rham cohomology group is a quotient of closed forms and that the wedge product can only be taken between differential forms representing cohomology classes, not directly between the classes themselves.
  • It is noted that if the indices of the forms exceed the dimension of the manifold, the wedge product results in zero.
  • Several participants seek clarification on the multiplication of elements within the cohomology ring, emphasizing that it involves summing products of individual components.
  • One participant provides an example of how to multiply elements of a cohomology ring, illustrating the process with specific forms and coefficients.
  • Another participant confirms the correctness of the multiplication example provided, contingent on no algebraic mistakes being present.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the multiplication of elements in the cohomology ring and the application of the wedge product. There is no clear consensus on the specifics of the multiplication process, as some participants seek further clarification while others provide examples and confirmations.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express confusion regarding the distinction between cohomology classes and differential forms, and how this affects the operations defined on them. The discussion does not resolve these nuances, leaving some assumptions and definitions implicit.

Silviu
Messages
612
Reaction score
11
Hello! The cohomology ring on an M-dim manifold is defined as ##H^*(M)=\oplus_{r=1}^mH^r(M)## and the product on ##H^*## is provided by the wedge product between cohomology classes i.e. ## [a]## ##\wedge## ##[c]## ##= [a \wedge c]##, where ##[a]\in H^r(M)##, ##[c]\in H^p(M)## and ##[a \wedge c]\in H^{r+p}(M)##. Can someone write down for me how does the wedge product act between 2 elements of ##H^*##? Let's say the dim of M is 3 and we want to take the wedge product of 2 elements. The elements would be ##(a^1,a^2,a^3)## and ##(c^1,c^2,c^2)##, with ##a^i \in H^i(M)## and same for c. Is this right? Now the wedge product would be ##(a^i \wedge c^i)##? And how you define it when the upper index is greater than the dim of M? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The De Rham cohomology group ##H^{i}(M)## is the quotient group of closed ##i##-forms modulo exact ##i##-forms.

Two closed ##{i}##-forms ##α_1## and ##α_2## represent the same cohomology class if ##α_1 = α_2 + dω## where ##ω## is an ##i-1## form and ##dω## is its exterior derivative.

Since these cohomology classes are elements of a quotient group one cannot take their wedge product. The best one can do is is to take the wedge product of differential forms that represent the cohomology classes. If ##a## and ##b## are elements of ##H^{i}(M)## and ##H^{j}(M)## and if ##α## and ##β## are differential forms representing ##a## and ##b## then one can take their wedge product ##α∧β## to get an ##i+j## form.

Since ##α## and ##β## are closed, ##α∧β## is also closed so it represents some cohomology class in ##H^{i+j}(M)##. One defines the "cup product" on the cohomology groups as ##a∪b= [α∧β]## where ##[α∧β]## is the cohomology class of ##α∧β##.

One must show that this product is well defined. If ##α+dω## is another differential form representing the cohomology class ##a## one must show that ##[α∧β]= [(α+dω)∧β]##.

- If ##i+j## is greater than the dimension of the manifold ##M## then ##α∧β## is zero. This is because the tangent space to ##M## is an n-dimensional vector space at each point of ##M##.
 
Last edited:
lavinia said:
The De Rham cohomology group ##H^{i}(M)## is the quotient group of closed ##i##-forms modulo exact ##i##-forms.

Two closed ##{i}##-forms ##α_1## and ##α_2## represent the same cohomology class if ##α_1 = α_2 + dω## where ##ω## is an ##i-1## form and ##dω## is its exterior derivative.

Since these cohomology classes are elements of a quotient group one cannot take their wedge product. The best one can do is is to take the wedge product of differential forms that represent the cohomology classes. If ##a## and ##b## are elements of ##H^{i}(M)## and ##H^{j}(M)## and if ##α## and ##β## are differential forms representing ##a## and ##b## then one can take their wedge product ##α∧β## to get an ##i+j## form.

Since ##α## and ##β## are closed, ##α∧β## is also closed so it represents some cohomology class in ##H^{i+j}(M)##. One defines the "cup product" on the cohomology groups as ##a∪b= [α∧β]## where ##[α∧β]## is the cohomology class of ##α∧β##.

One must show that this product is well defined. If ##α+dω## is another differential form representing the cohomology class ##a## one must show that ##[α∧β]= [(α+dω)∧β]##.

- If ##i+j## is greater than the dimension of the manifold ##M## then ##α∧β## is zero. This is because the tangent space to ##M## is an n-dimensional vector space at each point of ##M##.
Thank you for your reply. However I understood this part. What I am confuse about is the actual multiplication of 2 elements of the ring. what is the results of ##a \wedge c##, for a and c ##\in H^*(M)##
 
Silviu said:
Thank you for your reply. However I understood this part. What I am confuse about is the actual multiplication of 2 elements of the ring. what is the results of ##a \wedge c##, for a and c ##\in H^*(M)##
I explained the multiplication.
 
lavinia said:
I explained the multiplication.
You explained the multiplication of 2 elements of 2 cohomology groups. I would like to know the multiplication of 2 elements of a cohomology ring i.e. the elements of a cohomology ring are not just cohomology classes but direct sum of these and I am not sure how does that looks explicitly.
 
Silviu said:
You explained the multiplication of 2 elements of 2 cohomology groups. I would like to know the multiplication of 2 elements of a cohomology ring i.e. the elements of a cohomology ring are not just cohomology classes but direct sum of these and I am not sure how does that looks explicitly.

Whenever one has a ring the product ##(Σ_{i}a_{i})⋅(Σ_{j}b_{j})## equals ## Σ_{ij}a_{i}⋅b_{j}##. This rule tells you how to multiply arbitrary elements of the De Rham cohomology ring.
 
lavinia said:
Whenever one has a ring the product ##(Σ_{i}a_{i})⋅(Σ_{j}b_{j}) = Σ_{ij}a_{i}⋅b_{j}##. This rule tells you how to multiply arbitrary elements of the De Rham cohomology group.
So assuming we have a 2D manifold an element of a cohomology ring would be ##a_1+b_1dx+c_1dx\wedge dy## and multiplying 2 elements would give ##(a_1+b_1dx+c_1dx\wedge dy)\wedge (a_2+b_2dx+c_2dx\wedge dy) = a_1a_2+a_1b_2dx+a_1c_2dx\wedge dy + b_1a_2dx+c_1a_2dx\wedge dy##, while all the other terms get to 0? Is this correct?
 
Silviu said:
So assuming we have a 2D manifold an element of a cohomology ring would be ##a_1+b_1dx+c_1dx\wedge dy## and multiplying 2 elements would give ##(a_1+b_1dx+c_1dx\wedge dy)\wedge (a_2+b_2dx+c_2dx\wedge dy) = a_1a_2+a_1b_2dx+a_1c_2dx\wedge dy + b_1a_2dx+c_1a_2dx\wedge dy##, while all the other terms get to 0? Is this correct?

Unless you made an algebraic mistake this looks right.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K