Curvature is tensorial: Difference between revisions
(→Proof) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| 2 || The Leibniz-like axiom that is part of the definition of a connection || For a function <math>f</math> and vector fields <math>A,B</math>, and a connection <math>\nabla</math>, we have <math>\nabla_A(fB) = (Af)(B) + f\nabla_A(B)</math> | | 2 || The Leibniz-like axiom that is part of the definition of a connection || For a function <math>f</math> and vector fields <math>A,B</math>, and a connection <math>\nabla</math>, we have <math>\nabla_A(fB) = (Af)(B) + f\nabla_A(B)</math> | ||
|- | |- | ||
| 3 || [[uses::Corollary of Leibniz rule for Lie bracket]] (in turn follows from [[uses:: | | 3 || [[uses::Corollary of Leibniz rule for Lie bracket]] (in turn follows from [[uses::Leibniz rule for derivations]]|| For a function <math>f</math> and vector fields <math>X,Y</math>: | ||
<br><math>\! f[X,Y] = [fX,Y] + (Yf)X</math><br><math>f[X,Y] = [X,fY] - (Xf)Y</math> | <br><math>\! f[X,Y] = [fX,Y] + (Yf)X</math><br><math>\! f[X,Y] = [X,fY] - (Xf)Y</math> | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
| 5 || <math>f(\nabla_X\nabla_Y - \nabla_Y\nabla_X) - \nabla_{f[X,Y]}</math> || Fact (3) || <math>[fX,Y] + (Yf)X \to f[X,Y]</math> | | 5 || <math>f(\nabla_X\nabla_Y - \nabla_Y\nabla_X) - \nabla_{f[X,Y]}</math> || Fact (3) || <math>[fX,Y] + (Yf)X \to f[X,Y]</math> | ||
|- | |- | ||
| 6 || <math>f(\nabla_X\nabla_Y - \nabla_Y\nabla_X - \nabla_{[X,Y]}) || Fact (1) || <math>\nabla_{f[X,Y]} \to f\nabla_{[X,Y]}</math> | | 6 || <math>f(\nabla_X\nabla_Y - \nabla_Y\nabla_X - \nabla_{[X,Y]})</math> || Fact (1) || <math>\nabla_{f[X,Y]} \to f\nabla_{[X,Y]}</math> | ||
|} | |} | ||
Latest revision as of 17:36, 6 January 2012
This article gives the statement, and possibly proof, that a map constructed in a certain way is tensorial
View other such statements
Statement
Let be a connection on a vector bundle over a differential manifold . The Riemann curvature tensor of is given as a map defined by:
We claim that is a tensorial map in each of the variables .
Related facts
- Curvature is antisymmetric in first two variables
- Curvature is antisymmetric in last two variables
- Curvature is symmetric in the pairs of first and last two variables
Facts used
| Fact no. | Name | Statement with symbols |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Any connection is -linear in its subscript argument | for any -function and vector field . |
| 2 | The Leibniz-like axiom that is part of the definition of a connection | For a function and vector fields , and a connection , we have |
| 3 | Corollary of Leibniz rule for Lie bracket (in turn follows from Leibniz rule for derivations | For a function and vector fields :
|
Proof
To prove tensoriality in a variable, it suffices to show -linearity in that variable. This is because linearity in -functions guarantees linearity in a function that is 1 at exactly one point, and zero at others.
The proofs for and are analogous, and rely on manipulation of the Lie bracket and the property of a connection being in the subscript vector. These proofs do not involve any explicit use of . The proof for relies simply on repeated application of the product rule, and the fact that .
Tensoriality in the first variable
Given: is a -function.
To prove: , or more explicitly,
We start out with the left side:
Each step below is obtained from the previous one via some manipulation explained along side.
| Step no. | Current status of left side | Facts/properties used | Specific rewrites |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fact (1): is -linear in its subscript argument. | ||
| 2 | Fact (2) | . To understand this more clearly imagine an input to the whole expression, so that the rewrite becomes . In the notation of fact (3), , , and . | |
| 3 | Fact (1) | ||
| 4 | is additive in its subscript argument | ||
| 5 | Fact (3) | ||
| 6 | Fact (1) |
Tensoriality in the second variable
Given: is a -function.
To prove: , or more explicitly, .
We start out with the left side:
Each step below is obtained from the previous one via some manipulation explained along side.
| Step no. | Current status of left side | Facts/properties used | Specific rewrites |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fact (1) | . | |
| 2 | Fact (2) | . To make this more concrete, imagine an input . Then, the rewrite becomes . This comes setting , , in Fact (3). | |
| 3 | Fact (1) | ||
| 4 | is additive in its subscript argument. | . | |
| 5 | Fact (3) | ||
| 6 | Fact (1) |
Tensoriality in the third variable
Given: A -function .
To prove: . More explicitly, .
We start out with the left side:
Each step below is obtained from the previous one via some manipulation explained along side.
| Step no. | Current status of left side | Facts/properties used | Specific rewrites |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fact (2) | and | |
| 2 | Fact (2) | , etc. | |
| 3 | -- | cancellations | |
| 4 | use , definition | cancellation |