Where did the error occur in calculating the Lie derivative using an example?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion focuses on the calculation of the Lie derivative using the equation \(\mathcal{L}_X = d\circ i_X + i_X\circ d\). The user provides a detailed example involving one-forms and vector fields, ultimately identifying a mistake in the application of the interior product \(i_X\) with the two-form \(\mu\). The correct formulation involves recognizing the antisymmetry of the wedge product, leading to the conclusion that \(\mathcal{L}_X\omega\) is indeed equal to the derived expression, confirming the validity of the Lie derivative calculation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of differential forms and their operations
  • Familiarity with the Lie derivative and its properties
  • Knowledge of the interior product \(i_X\) and exterior derivative \(d\)
  • Basic concepts of vector fields in differential geometry
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the exterior derivative and its relationship with the Lie derivative
  • Explore the concept of antisymmetry in differential forms and its implications
  • Learn about the applications of the Lie derivative in physics and geometry
  • Investigate advanced examples of Lie derivatives in various coordinate systems
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students of differential geometry who are working with differential forms and vector fields, particularly those interested in the applications of the Lie derivative in theoretical contexts.

jostpuur
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
19
I'm trying to use an example to make sense out of the equation

<br /> \mathcal{L}_X = d\circ i_X + i_X\circ d.<br />

Some simple equations:

<br /> \omega = \omega^1 dx_1 + \omega^2 dx_2<br />

<br /> i_X\omega = X_1\omega^1 + X_2\omega^2<br />

<br /> (d\omega)^{11} = (d\omega)^{22} = 0,\quad (d\omega)^{12} = \frac{1}{2}(\partial_1\omega^2 - \partial_2\omega^1) = - (d\omega)^{21}<br />


<br /> \mu = \mu^{12} dx_1\wedge dx_2 + \mu^{21} dx_2\wedge dx_1<br />

<br /> (i_X\mu)^1 = X_1 \mu^{11} + X_2 \mu^{21} = X_2 \mu^{21},\quad\quad (i_X\mu)^2 = X_1 \mu^{12}<br />


<br /> \eta = \eta^0<br />

<br /> (d\eta)^1 = \partial_1 \eta^0,\quad\quad (d\eta)^2 = \partial_2 \eta^0<br />

Applying them:

<br /> ((d\circ i_X)\omega)^1 = \partial_1 (i_X\omega) = \partial_1(X_1\omega^1 + X_2\omega^2)<br />

<br /> ((d\circ i_X)\omega)^2 = \partial_2 (i_X\omega) = \partial_2(X_1\omega^1 + X_2\omega^2)<br />

<br /> ((i_X\circ d)\omega)^1 = X_2 (d\omega)^{21} = -\frac{X_2}{2}(\partial_1\omega^2 - \partial_2\omega^1)<br />

<br /> ((i_X\circ d)\omega)^2 = X_1 (d\omega)^{12} = \frac{X_1}{2}(\partial_1\omega^2 - \partial_2\omega^1)<br />

<br /> ((d\circ i_X \;+\; i_X\circ d)\omega)^1 = (\partial_1 X_1)\omega^1 \;+\; (\partial_1 X_2)\omega^2 \;+\; X_1\partial_1\omega^1 \;+\; \frac{X_2}{2}\partial_1\omega^2 \;+\; \frac{X_2}{2}\partial_2\omega^1<br />

<br /> ((d\circ i_X \;+\; i_X\circ d)\omega)^2 = (\partial_2 X_1)\omega^1 \;+\; (\partial_2 X_2)\omega^2 \;+\; \frac{X_1}{2}\partial_2 \omega^1 \;+\; X_2\partial_2\omega^2 \;+\; \frac{X_1}{2}\partial_1 \omega^2<br />

There exists a following formula for the Lie derivative:

<br /> (\mathcal{L}_X\omega)^{i_1,\ldots ,i_k} = X\cdot \omega^{i_1,\ldots ,i_k} \;+\; \sum_{\alpha = 1}^k (\partial_{i_{\alpha}} X_j) \omega^{i_1,\ldots ,i_{\alpha - 1},j, i_{\alpha + 1}, \ldots , i_k}<br />

In this example it becomes

<br /> (\mathcal{L}_X\omega)^1 = X_1\partial_1 \omega^1 \;+\; X_2\partial_2\omega^1 \;+\; (\partial_1 X_1) \omega^1 \;+\; (\partial_1 X_2) \omega^2<br />

<br /> (\mathcal{L}_X\omega)^2 = X_1\partial_1 \omega^2 \;+\; X_2\partial_2 \omega^2 \;+\; (\partial_2 X_1)\omega^1 \;+\; (\partial_2 X_2) \omega^2<br />

But this starts to look like

<br /> \mathcal{L}_X \omega \neq (d\circ i_X + i_X\circ d)\omega<br />

Where is this going wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For your particular example of \omega being a one-form and X the vector field, I get

<br /> <br /> [di_{X}+i_{X}d ]\omega = d[\omega(X)] + d\omega (X) \\<br /> = d(\omega_{\mu}X^{\mu}) + 2[\partial_{[\mu}\omega_{\nu]}dx^{\mu}\wedge dx^{\nu}] (X)<br /> <br />

This becomes

<br /> [\omega_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}X^{\mu} + X^{\mu}\partial_{\nu}\omega_{\mu}]dx^{\nu} + X^{\mu}[\partial_{\mu}\omega_{\nu} - \partial_{\nu}\omega_{\mu}]dx^{\nu}<br />

We see that two terms cancel and we obtain

<br /> <br /> [\omega_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}X^{\mu} + X^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}\omega_{\nu}]dx^{\nu}<br /> <br />

This looks like the Lie-derivative:

<br /> <br /> \mathcal{L}_{X}\omega = [X^{\nu}\partial_{\nu}\omega_{\mu} + \partial_{\mu}X^{\nu}\omega_{\nu}]dx^{\mu}<br /> <br />

If this doesn't clarify your problem I can look at all those explicit index-stuff you wrote down, but hopefully this helps :P
 
jostpuur said:
<br /> (i_X\mu)^1 = X_1 \mu^{11} + X_2 \mu^{21} = X_2 \mu^{21},\quad\quad (i_X\mu)^2 = X_1 \mu^{12}<br />

The mistake was here. That was the same thing as

<br /> i_X\mu = i_X\big(\mu^{ij} dx_i\wedge dx_j\big) = X_i \mu^{ij} dx_j<br />

when it should have been

<br /> i_X\mu = \frac{1}{2}i_X\big((\mu^{ij} - \mu^{ji})dx_i\otimes dx_j\big) = \frac{1}{2} X_i(\mu^{ij} - \mu^{ji})dx_j<br />

I found that when following your calculation, and looking where it started going differently.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
12K