Curvature is tensorial: Difference between revisions

From Diffgeom
 
(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::leibniz rule for derivations]]|| For a function <math>f</math> and vector fields <math>X,Y</math>:
| 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 E over a differential manifold M. The Riemann curvature tensor of is given as a map Γ(TM)Γ(TM)Γ(E)Γ(E) defined by:

R(X,Y)Z=XYZYXZ[X,Y]Z

We claim that R is a tensorial map in each of the variables X,Y,Z.

Related facts

Facts used

Fact no. Name Statement with symbols
1 Any connection is C-linear in its subscript argument fA=fA for any C-function f and vector field A.
2 The Leibniz-like axiom that is part of the definition of a connection For a function f and vector fields A,B, and a connection , we have A(fB)=(Af)(B)+fA(B)
3 Corollary of Leibniz rule for Lie bracket (in turn follows from Leibniz rule for derivations For a function f and vector fields X,Y:


f[X,Y]=[fX,Y]+(Yf)X
f[X,Y]=[X,fY](Xf)Y

Proof

To prove tensoriality in a variable, it suffices to show C-linearity in that variable. This is because linearity in C-functions guarantees linearity in a function that is 1 at exactly one point, and zero at others.

The proofs for X and Y are analogous, and rely on manipulation of the Lie bracket [fX,Y] and the property of a connection being C in the subscript vector. These proofs do not involve any explicit use of Z. The proof for Z relies simply on repeated application of the product rule, and the fact that XYYX=[X,Y].

Tensoriality in the first variable

Given: f:MR is a C-function.

To prove: R(fX,Y)=fR(X,Y), or more explicitly, fXYYfX[fX,Y]=f(XYYX[X,Y]

We start out with the left side:

fXYYfX[fX,Y]

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 fXYY(fX)[fX,Y] Fact (1): is C-linear in its subscript argument. fXfX
2 fXY(Yf)XfYX[fX,Y] Fact (2) Y(fX)(Yf)X+fYX. To understand this more clearly imagine an input Z to the whole expression, so that the rewrite becomes Y(fX(Z))(Yf)X(Z)+fYX(Z). In the notation of fact (3), A=Y, f=f, and B=X(Z).
3 f(XYYX)(Yf)X[fX,Y] Fact (1) (Yf)X(Yf)X
4 f(XYYX)(Yf)X+[fX,Y] is additive in its subscript argument (Yf)X+[fX,Y]=(Yf)X+[fX,Y]
5 f(XYYX)f[X,Y] Fact (3) [fX,Y]+(Yf)Xf[X,Y]
6 f(XYYX[X,Y]) Fact (1) f[X,Y]f[X,Y]

Tensoriality in the second variable

Given: f:MR is a C-function.

To prove: R(X,fY)=fR(X,Y), or more explicitly, XfYfYX[X,fY]=f(XYYX[X,Y].

We start out with the left side:

XfYfYX[X,fY]

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 X(fY)fYX[X,fY] Fact (1) fYfY.
2 (Xf)Y+f(XY)fYX[X,fY] Fact (2) X(fY)(Xf)Y+f(XY). To make this more concrete, imagine an input Z. Then, the rewrite becomes X(fY(Z))(Xf)Y(X)+f(XY(Z)). This comes setting A=X, f=f, B=YZ in Fact (3).
3 f(XYYX)[X,fY]+(Xf)Y Fact (1) (Xf)Y(Xf)Y
4 f(XYYX)[X,fY](Xf)Y is additive in its subscript argument. [X,fY](Xf)Y[X,fY](Xf)Y.
5 f(XYYX)f[X,Y] Fact (3) [X,fY](Xf)Yf[X,Y]
6 f(XYYX[X,Y]) Fact (1) f[X,Y]f[X,Y]

Tensoriality in the third variable

Given: A C-function f:MR.

To prove: R(X,Y)(fZ)=fR(X,Y)Z. More explicitly, XY(fZ)YX(fZ)[X,Y](fZ)=f(XYYX[X,Y])Z+((XYYX[X,Y])f)Z.

We start out with the left side:

XY(fZ)YX(fZ)[X,Y](fZ)

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 X((Yf)(Z)+fYZ)Y((Xf)Z+fXZ)f[X,Y]Z([X,Y]f)Z Fact (2) Y(fZ)(Yf)(Z)+fYZ and X(fZ)(Xf)Z+fXZ
2 (XYf)(Z)+(Yf)XZ+(Xf)YZ+fXYZ(YXf)Z(Xf)YZ(Yf)XZfYXZf[X,Y]Z([X,Y]f)Z Fact (2) X((Yf)Z)X((Yf)Z)+(Yf)XZ, etc.
3 f(XYYX[X,Y])Z+((XYYX[X,Y])f)Z -- cancellations
4 f(XYYX[X,Y])Z+((XYYX[X,Y])f)Z use [X,Y]=XYYX, definition cancellation