Why does a parallelizable manifold imply zero Riemann tensor?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Silviu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Manifold
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between parallelizable manifolds and the Riemann tensor, specifically questioning whether a parallelizable manifold necessarily implies a zero Riemann tensor. Participants explore the implications of parallel transport and the conditions under which the Riemann tensor can be defined.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that a parallelizable manifold does not imply a zero Riemann tensor but rather allows for the definition of a connection that results in a zero Riemann tensor.
  • Others highlight that closed flat Riemannian manifolds cannot be simply connected and must have a fundamental group containing a subgroup isomorphic to ##Z^{n}##, suggesting that parallelizable closed manifolds with finite fundamental groups cannot be flat.
  • It is noted that every orientable closed 3-manifold is parallelizable, indicating a broader context for parallelizability beyond flatness.
  • Some participants express confusion regarding the definitions and implications presented in a referenced book, seeking clarification on the relationship between parallel transport and the Riemann tensor.
  • There is a discussion about the assumptions regarding the Levi-Civita connection and how it relates to the definitions of parallel transport and curvature tensors.
  • A later reply acknowledges a misunderstanding regarding the nature of parallel transport and its dependence on the chosen connection, indicating that the properties of parallelizable manifolds may not be universally applicable across different connections.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views remain regarding the implications of parallelizability on the Riemann tensor and the nature of connections used in defining curvature.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the type of connection being considered (e.g., Levi-Civita connection vs. other connections) and the implications of these assumptions on the discussion of parallel transport and the Riemann tensor.

Silviu
Messages
612
Reaction score
11
Hello! Can someone explain to me why does a parallelizable manifold implies zero Riemann tensor? In the book I read this is mentioned but not proved. This would imply that parallel-transporting a vector would be path independent. But I am not sure how to show it. Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Parallelizable does not imply zero Riemann tensor; Parallelizable implies that it is possible to define a connection such that the resulting Riemann tensor is zero.
 
Silviu said:
Hello! Can someone explain to me why does a parallelizable manifold implies zero Riemann tensor? In the book I read this is mentioned but not proved. This would imply that parallel-transporting a vector would be path independent. But I am not sure how to show it. Thank you!

Look at what your book says again.

A closed flat Riemannian manifold can not be simply connected. A fundamental theorem says that its fundamental group must contain a subgroup isomorphic to ##Z^{n}##. So in fact, any parallizable closed manifold with a finite fundamental group e.g. ##S^3## and ##RP^3## can never be made flat.

But this is far from the whole story. For instance every orientable closed 3 manifold is parallelizable.

The fundamental group of a closed flat Riemannian manifold has a special structure.

It is an extension of an n-dimensional free abelian group by a finite group

##0→Z^{n}→π_{1}(M)→G→1##

and has no elements of finite order. For instance, for a torus ##G## is the trivial group.

- There are parallelizable flat Riemannian manifolds that are not tori. For them parallel translation of vectors around closed loops depends upon the homotopy class of the loop..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Spinnor
lavinia said:
Look at what you book says again.

A closed flat Riemannian manifold can not be simply connected. A fundamental theorem says that its fundamental group must contain a subgroup isomorphic to ##Z^{n}##. So in fact, any parallizable closed manifold with a finite fundamental group e.g. ##S^3## and ##RP^3## can never be made flat.

But this is far from the whole story. For instance every orientable closed 3 manifold is parallelizable.

The fundamental group of a closed flat Riemannian manifold has a special structure.

It is an extension of an n-dimensional free abelian group by a finite group

##0→Z^{n}→π_{1}(M)→G→1##

and has no elements of finite order. For instance, for a torus ##G## is the trivial group.

- There are parallelizable flat Riemannian manifolds that are not tori. For them parallel translation of vectors around closed loops depends upon the homotopy class of the loop..
Thank you for your reply. However I am a bit confused. I attached the part of my book that I took this from (it is from Nakahara, Geometry Topology and Physics). As far as I understand, parallelizable manifold, implies zero Riemann tensor. Could you please explain this to me a bit further (i.e. what am I reading wrong)?
 

Attachments

  • Differential Geometry.png
    Differential Geometry.png
    47.8 KB · Views: 718
I will have to think about what the book is saying.

What I said is correct. I am assuming a Levi-Civita connection and your book is not. That has to be what is going on.
 
The key passage is:
A vector ##V_p \in T_pM## is defined to be parallel to ##V_q \in T_qM## if ...
This defines the connection and therefore the curvature tensor. There is no a priori reason why this connection should be the Levi-Civita connection or even a metric compatible connection.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: lavinia
Orodruin said:
The key passage is:

This defines the connection and therefore the curvature tensor. There is no a priori reason why this connection should be the Levi-Civita connection or even a metric compatible connection.
Oh, I misunderstood this. So by this they mean that by parallel transporting a vector between 2 points, you keep it having the same coordinates in the respective tangent planes. I thought that this is a general property of a parallelizable manifold (i.e. independent of connection). Thank you!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
11K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K