Recover Covariant Derivative from Parallel Transport The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InParallel transport for a conformally equivalent metricA connection is the limit of the newton quotient of the parallel transportIs parallel transport injective?When parallel transport determines a connectionQuestions about definition of covariant derivative and characterization of geodesicsCovariant derivative and parallel transportHow do you formulate the linearity condition for a covariant derivative on a vector bundle in terms of parallel transport?Defining covariant derivative via parallel transport.Conectionless parallel transportDefining connection from parallel transport

Why didn't the Event Horizon Telescope team mention Sagittarius A*?

For what reasons would an animal species NOT cross a *horizontal* land bridge?

Did any laptop computers have a built-in 5 1/4 inch floppy drive?

Kerning for subscripts of sigma?

Worn-tile Scrabble

Can a flute soloist sit?

If I can cast sorceries at instant speed, can I use sorcery-speed activated abilities at instant speed?

The phrase "to the numbers born"?

Mathematics of imaging the black hole

Can there be female White Walkers?

Why doesn't UInt have a toDouble()?

Output the Arecibo Message

Is an up-to-date browser secure on an out-of-date OS?

Why can't devices on different VLANs, but on the same subnet, communicate?

What is this business jet?

Are there any other methods to apply to solving simultaneous equations?

Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?

Why don't hard Brexiteers insist on a hard border to prevent illegal immigration after Brexit?

What is preventing me from simply constructing a hash that's lower than the current target?

Inverse Relationship Between Precision and Recall

Why isn't the circumferential light around the M87 black hole's event horizon symmetric?

Can withdrawing asylum be illegal?

How can I define good in a religion that claims no moral authority?

Is bread bad for ducks?



Recover Covariant Derivative from Parallel Transport



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InParallel transport for a conformally equivalent metricA connection is the limit of the newton quotient of the parallel transportIs parallel transport injective?When parallel transport determines a connectionQuestions about definition of covariant derivative and characterization of geodesicsCovariant derivative and parallel transportHow do you formulate the linearity condition for a covariant derivative on a vector bundle in terms of parallel transport?Defining covariant derivative via parallel transport.Conectionless parallel transportDefining connection from parallel transport










5












$begingroup$


It is well known that one can recover the connection from the parallel transport. I struggle to understand this concept.



Since $Gamma(gamma)^t_s:E_gamma(s)to E_gamma(t)$ is an isomorphism between the fibers, it holds that $Gamma(gamma)^t_s(e_s)=e_t$ for the unique parallel translate $e_t=e(gamma(t))in E_gamma(t)$ of a section $e$ in the vector bundle along a curve $gamma:Ito M$ . Consequently, $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=lim_hto 0(Gamma(gamma)^0_h(e_h)-e_0)/h=0$.



However, how do we "recover" $nabla_Xe$ for an arbitrary section $e$ that might not be parallel along $gamma$ where $dotgamma(0)=X$?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Doesn't the link answer your question? Maybe I am misunderstanding something.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 12:37










  • $begingroup$
    @Braindead Is it true that for any section, there exists a curve to which it is parallel? I am confused since the formula linked equals zero for any section...
    $endgroup$
    – gofvonx
    May 17 '14 at 12:40










  • $begingroup$
    I don't think that is true, but I don't think that's relevant to your question. Basically, the parallel transport gives you a means of comparing the value of a section over two different points in the base space by transporting one of the vectors to the other point. This allows you to take their difference over a common point. There is no reason for this to be zero all the time.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 12:47










  • $begingroup$
    @Braindead But the parallel transport $Gamma$ is defined by $Gamma(gamma)_s^t(e_s)=e_t$ for the solution of $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=0$ and then $Gamma(gamma)_s^0(e_s)equiv e_0$, so the difference in the limes is always zero, isn't it?
    $endgroup$
    – gofvonx
    May 17 '14 at 12:51










  • $begingroup$
    You can apply the parallel transport to a non-parallel arbitrary section. Also, the parallel transport in the wikipedia article is not defined by that equation. See if my answer below makes sense to you.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 13:12
















5












$begingroup$


It is well known that one can recover the connection from the parallel transport. I struggle to understand this concept.



Since $Gamma(gamma)^t_s:E_gamma(s)to E_gamma(t)$ is an isomorphism between the fibers, it holds that $Gamma(gamma)^t_s(e_s)=e_t$ for the unique parallel translate $e_t=e(gamma(t))in E_gamma(t)$ of a section $e$ in the vector bundle along a curve $gamma:Ito M$ . Consequently, $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=lim_hto 0(Gamma(gamma)^0_h(e_h)-e_0)/h=0$.



However, how do we "recover" $nabla_Xe$ for an arbitrary section $e$ that might not be parallel along $gamma$ where $dotgamma(0)=X$?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Doesn't the link answer your question? Maybe I am misunderstanding something.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 12:37










  • $begingroup$
    @Braindead Is it true that for any section, there exists a curve to which it is parallel? I am confused since the formula linked equals zero for any section...
    $endgroup$
    – gofvonx
    May 17 '14 at 12:40










  • $begingroup$
    I don't think that is true, but I don't think that's relevant to your question. Basically, the parallel transport gives you a means of comparing the value of a section over two different points in the base space by transporting one of the vectors to the other point. This allows you to take their difference over a common point. There is no reason for this to be zero all the time.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 12:47










  • $begingroup$
    @Braindead But the parallel transport $Gamma$ is defined by $Gamma(gamma)_s^t(e_s)=e_t$ for the solution of $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=0$ and then $Gamma(gamma)_s^0(e_s)equiv e_0$, so the difference in the limes is always zero, isn't it?
    $endgroup$
    – gofvonx
    May 17 '14 at 12:51










  • $begingroup$
    You can apply the parallel transport to a non-parallel arbitrary section. Also, the parallel transport in the wikipedia article is not defined by that equation. See if my answer below makes sense to you.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 13:12














5












5








5


3



$begingroup$


It is well known that one can recover the connection from the parallel transport. I struggle to understand this concept.



Since $Gamma(gamma)^t_s:E_gamma(s)to E_gamma(t)$ is an isomorphism between the fibers, it holds that $Gamma(gamma)^t_s(e_s)=e_t$ for the unique parallel translate $e_t=e(gamma(t))in E_gamma(t)$ of a section $e$ in the vector bundle along a curve $gamma:Ito M$ . Consequently, $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=lim_hto 0(Gamma(gamma)^0_h(e_h)-e_0)/h=0$.



However, how do we "recover" $nabla_Xe$ for an arbitrary section $e$ that might not be parallel along $gamma$ where $dotgamma(0)=X$?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




It is well known that one can recover the connection from the parallel transport. I struggle to understand this concept.



Since $Gamma(gamma)^t_s:E_gamma(s)to E_gamma(t)$ is an isomorphism between the fibers, it holds that $Gamma(gamma)^t_s(e_s)=e_t$ for the unique parallel translate $e_t=e(gamma(t))in E_gamma(t)$ of a section $e$ in the vector bundle along a curve $gamma:Ito M$ . Consequently, $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=lim_hto 0(Gamma(gamma)^0_h(e_h)-e_0)/h=0$.



However, how do we "recover" $nabla_Xe$ for an arbitrary section $e$ that might not be parallel along $gamma$ where $dotgamma(0)=X$?







differential-geometry vector-bundles






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited May 17 '14 at 16:46









Braindead

3,4051839




3,4051839










asked May 17 '14 at 12:21









gofvonxgofvonx

1,052828




1,052828











  • $begingroup$
    Doesn't the link answer your question? Maybe I am misunderstanding something.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 12:37










  • $begingroup$
    @Braindead Is it true that for any section, there exists a curve to which it is parallel? I am confused since the formula linked equals zero for any section...
    $endgroup$
    – gofvonx
    May 17 '14 at 12:40










  • $begingroup$
    I don't think that is true, but I don't think that's relevant to your question. Basically, the parallel transport gives you a means of comparing the value of a section over two different points in the base space by transporting one of the vectors to the other point. This allows you to take their difference over a common point. There is no reason for this to be zero all the time.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 12:47










  • $begingroup$
    @Braindead But the parallel transport $Gamma$ is defined by $Gamma(gamma)_s^t(e_s)=e_t$ for the solution of $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=0$ and then $Gamma(gamma)_s^0(e_s)equiv e_0$, so the difference in the limes is always zero, isn't it?
    $endgroup$
    – gofvonx
    May 17 '14 at 12:51










  • $begingroup$
    You can apply the parallel transport to a non-parallel arbitrary section. Also, the parallel transport in the wikipedia article is not defined by that equation. See if my answer below makes sense to you.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 13:12

















  • $begingroup$
    Doesn't the link answer your question? Maybe I am misunderstanding something.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 12:37










  • $begingroup$
    @Braindead Is it true that for any section, there exists a curve to which it is parallel? I am confused since the formula linked equals zero for any section...
    $endgroup$
    – gofvonx
    May 17 '14 at 12:40










  • $begingroup$
    I don't think that is true, but I don't think that's relevant to your question. Basically, the parallel transport gives you a means of comparing the value of a section over two different points in the base space by transporting one of the vectors to the other point. This allows you to take their difference over a common point. There is no reason for this to be zero all the time.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 12:47










  • $begingroup$
    @Braindead But the parallel transport $Gamma$ is defined by $Gamma(gamma)_s^t(e_s)=e_t$ for the solution of $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=0$ and then $Gamma(gamma)_s^0(e_s)equiv e_0$, so the difference in the limes is always zero, isn't it?
    $endgroup$
    – gofvonx
    May 17 '14 at 12:51










  • $begingroup$
    You can apply the parallel transport to a non-parallel arbitrary section. Also, the parallel transport in the wikipedia article is not defined by that equation. See if my answer below makes sense to you.
    $endgroup$
    – Braindead
    May 17 '14 at 13:12
















$begingroup$
Doesn't the link answer your question? Maybe I am misunderstanding something.
$endgroup$
– Braindead
May 17 '14 at 12:37




$begingroup$
Doesn't the link answer your question? Maybe I am misunderstanding something.
$endgroup$
– Braindead
May 17 '14 at 12:37












$begingroup$
@Braindead Is it true that for any section, there exists a curve to which it is parallel? I am confused since the formula linked equals zero for any section...
$endgroup$
– gofvonx
May 17 '14 at 12:40




$begingroup$
@Braindead Is it true that for any section, there exists a curve to which it is parallel? I am confused since the formula linked equals zero for any section...
$endgroup$
– gofvonx
May 17 '14 at 12:40












$begingroup$
I don't think that is true, but I don't think that's relevant to your question. Basically, the parallel transport gives you a means of comparing the value of a section over two different points in the base space by transporting one of the vectors to the other point. This allows you to take their difference over a common point. There is no reason for this to be zero all the time.
$endgroup$
– Braindead
May 17 '14 at 12:47




$begingroup$
I don't think that is true, but I don't think that's relevant to your question. Basically, the parallel transport gives you a means of comparing the value of a section over two different points in the base space by transporting one of the vectors to the other point. This allows you to take their difference over a common point. There is no reason for this to be zero all the time.
$endgroup$
– Braindead
May 17 '14 at 12:47












$begingroup$
@Braindead But the parallel transport $Gamma$ is defined by $Gamma(gamma)_s^t(e_s)=e_t$ for the solution of $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=0$ and then $Gamma(gamma)_s^0(e_s)equiv e_0$, so the difference in the limes is always zero, isn't it?
$endgroup$
– gofvonx
May 17 '14 at 12:51




$begingroup$
@Braindead But the parallel transport $Gamma$ is defined by $Gamma(gamma)_s^t(e_s)=e_t$ for the solution of $nabla_dotgamma(0)e=0$ and then $Gamma(gamma)_s^0(e_s)equiv e_0$, so the difference in the limes is always zero, isn't it?
$endgroup$
– gofvonx
May 17 '14 at 12:51












$begingroup$
You can apply the parallel transport to a non-parallel arbitrary section. Also, the parallel transport in the wikipedia article is not defined by that equation. See if my answer below makes sense to you.
$endgroup$
– Braindead
May 17 '14 at 13:12





$begingroup$
You can apply the parallel transport to a non-parallel arbitrary section. Also, the parallel transport in the wikipedia article is not defined by that equation. See if my answer below makes sense to you.
$endgroup$
– Braindead
May 17 '14 at 13:12











3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















7












$begingroup$

Although he discusses it for the tangent bundle only, John M. Lee mentions a theorem in his book Riemannian Manifolds, from which it should get clearer:




Theorem 4.11. (Parallel translation) Given a curve $gamma:Irightarrow M,~t_0in I$, and an [arbitrary] vector $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$, there exists a unique parallel vector field $W$ along
$gamma$ s.t. $W(t_0):=W(gamma(t_0))=V_0$




Here, I took the liberty of renaming the vector field.



Now, what does parallel vector field $W$ along $gamma$ mean? Simple, it's $D_tWequiv0$. What's $D_t$, I hear you wondering. Well, if $W$ is a smooth vector field on $M$, then $D_tW(t_0)=nabla_dotgamma(t_0)W$. So, as not to wreak any more havoc in this definition jungle, we shall simply restrict to this case (since the ODE $D_tWequiv0$ then becomes $nabla_dotgammaWequiv0$, which is the way it's written in your link).



What John does next is, he defines




If $gamma:Irightarrow M$ is a curve and $t_0,~t_1in I$, the parallel translation defines an operator $$P_t_0t_1:T_gamma(t_0)Mrightarrow T_gamma(t_1)M$$ with $P_t_0t_1V_0=W(t_1)$, where $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$ and $W$ is the parallel vector field from the theorem.




This is, by the theorem, an isomorphism between tangent spaces and therefore gives you for each vector at each point of the curve a uniquely determined vector - at another point in the image of the curve - which 'looks like the original vector', if you will.



The formula would then, in John's book, look like this
$$D_tV(t_0)=lim_trightarrow t_0fracP^-1_t_0tV(t)-V(t_0)t-t_0=lim_trightarrow t_0fracW_t(t_0)-V(t_0)t-t_0,$$ where $W_t$ is the parallel vector field determined by $D_tW_tequiv0$ and $W_t(t)=V(t)$.



Hope that cleared things up.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    0












    $begingroup$

    I am not sure of the extent of your mathematical background, so I apologize if I am writing something that's completely obvious to you.



    Let $e : M to E$ be a section of a vector bundle $E to M$.



    We want to be able to compare values of $e$ over different base points.



    $e(p)$ and $e(q)$ live in different vector spaces $E_p$ and $E_q$, $e(p) - e(q)$ makes no sense. How can we compare them?



    We can do it if there was some way to transport all the vectors in $E_q$ to $E_p$. To make sure all the vectors get transported in the right way, it makes sense to use an isomorphism. It also makes sense to think of this notion of transporting as being done over a path from $p$ to $q$ in $M$.



    It turns out for general manifolds there is no canonical way to do this. The definition of Parallel Transport in your article reflects this: different curves in the base space give you different isomorphisms.



    So pick a curve: $gamma: [0,1] to M$, with $gamma(0) = p$ and $gamma(1) = q$.



    Now, $Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) in E_p$, so the difference $(Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) - e(p)) in E_p$ and it all makes sense.



    There is no reason for this difference to be 0.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$




















      0












      $begingroup$

      [Using Lee's hint]: Let $ nabla $ be a linear connection of $ M $ and $ gamma: [0,1] to M $ smooth curve, we want to prove:



      $$
      D_tV(t_0) = lim_t to 0 fracP_t_0,t^-1V(t) - V(t_0)t - t_0
      $$



      Proof: Let $ epsilon > 0 $ with $ (U,psi = (x^1,...,x^n)) $ chart and $ gamma([0,1] cap (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)) subset U $. consider local basis $partial_i = fracpartialpartial x^i$.



      Let $ (E_i(t)) $ fields such that $ E_i(0) = partial_i $ and $ D_tE_i = 0 $. Since parallel translations are isomorphisms, $ (E_i(t)) $ is a local basis.



      Let $ V(t) = V^i(t) E_i(t) $ for $ t in (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)cap [0,1] $, note that $ P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) = V^i(t)partial_i $.



      $$
      frac1t - t_0(P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) - V(t_0))
      =
      $$

      $$
      frac(V^i(t) - V^i(t_0)t - t_0partial_i
      to
      dotV^i(t_0)partial_i
      $$



      On the other hand



      $$
      D_tV (t_0)
      =
      (D_tV^i(t) E_i(t) )(t_0)
      =
      $$

      $$
      left(
      dotV^i(t_0)E_i(t_0)
      +
      V^i(t_0) (D_tE_i)(t_0)
      right)
      =
      dotV^i(t)partial_i
      $$






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$













        Your Answer





        StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
        return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
        StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
        StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
        );
        );
        , "mathjax-editing");

        StackExchange.ready(function()
        var channelOptions =
        tags: "".split(" "),
        id: "69"
        ;
        initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

        StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
        // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
        if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
        StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
        createEditor();
        );

        else
        createEditor();

        );

        function createEditor()
        StackExchange.prepareEditor(
        heartbeatType: 'answer',
        autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
        convertImagesToLinks: true,
        noModals: true,
        showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
        reputationToPostImages: 10,
        bindNavPrevention: true,
        postfix: "",
        imageUploader:
        brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
        contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
        allowUrls: true
        ,
        noCode: true, onDemand: true,
        discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
        ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
        );



        );













        draft saved

        draft discarded


















        StackExchange.ready(
        function ()
        StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f798997%2frecover-covariant-derivative-from-parallel-transport%23new-answer', 'question_page');

        );

        Post as a guest















        Required, but never shown

























        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes








        3 Answers
        3






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        7












        $begingroup$

        Although he discusses it for the tangent bundle only, John M. Lee mentions a theorem in his book Riemannian Manifolds, from which it should get clearer:




        Theorem 4.11. (Parallel translation) Given a curve $gamma:Irightarrow M,~t_0in I$, and an [arbitrary] vector $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$, there exists a unique parallel vector field $W$ along
        $gamma$ s.t. $W(t_0):=W(gamma(t_0))=V_0$




        Here, I took the liberty of renaming the vector field.



        Now, what does parallel vector field $W$ along $gamma$ mean? Simple, it's $D_tWequiv0$. What's $D_t$, I hear you wondering. Well, if $W$ is a smooth vector field on $M$, then $D_tW(t_0)=nabla_dotgamma(t_0)W$. So, as not to wreak any more havoc in this definition jungle, we shall simply restrict to this case (since the ODE $D_tWequiv0$ then becomes $nabla_dotgammaWequiv0$, which is the way it's written in your link).



        What John does next is, he defines




        If $gamma:Irightarrow M$ is a curve and $t_0,~t_1in I$, the parallel translation defines an operator $$P_t_0t_1:T_gamma(t_0)Mrightarrow T_gamma(t_1)M$$ with $P_t_0t_1V_0=W(t_1)$, where $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$ and $W$ is the parallel vector field from the theorem.




        This is, by the theorem, an isomorphism between tangent spaces and therefore gives you for each vector at each point of the curve a uniquely determined vector - at another point in the image of the curve - which 'looks like the original vector', if you will.



        The formula would then, in John's book, look like this
        $$D_tV(t_0)=lim_trightarrow t_0fracP^-1_t_0tV(t)-V(t_0)t-t_0=lim_trightarrow t_0fracW_t(t_0)-V(t_0)t-t_0,$$ where $W_t$ is the parallel vector field determined by $D_tW_tequiv0$ and $W_t(t)=V(t)$.



        Hope that cleared things up.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$

















          7












          $begingroup$

          Although he discusses it for the tangent bundle only, John M. Lee mentions a theorem in his book Riemannian Manifolds, from which it should get clearer:




          Theorem 4.11. (Parallel translation) Given a curve $gamma:Irightarrow M,~t_0in I$, and an [arbitrary] vector $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$, there exists a unique parallel vector field $W$ along
          $gamma$ s.t. $W(t_0):=W(gamma(t_0))=V_0$




          Here, I took the liberty of renaming the vector field.



          Now, what does parallel vector field $W$ along $gamma$ mean? Simple, it's $D_tWequiv0$. What's $D_t$, I hear you wondering. Well, if $W$ is a smooth vector field on $M$, then $D_tW(t_0)=nabla_dotgamma(t_0)W$. So, as not to wreak any more havoc in this definition jungle, we shall simply restrict to this case (since the ODE $D_tWequiv0$ then becomes $nabla_dotgammaWequiv0$, which is the way it's written in your link).



          What John does next is, he defines




          If $gamma:Irightarrow M$ is a curve and $t_0,~t_1in I$, the parallel translation defines an operator $$P_t_0t_1:T_gamma(t_0)Mrightarrow T_gamma(t_1)M$$ with $P_t_0t_1V_0=W(t_1)$, where $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$ and $W$ is the parallel vector field from the theorem.




          This is, by the theorem, an isomorphism between tangent spaces and therefore gives you for each vector at each point of the curve a uniquely determined vector - at another point in the image of the curve - which 'looks like the original vector', if you will.



          The formula would then, in John's book, look like this
          $$D_tV(t_0)=lim_trightarrow t_0fracP^-1_t_0tV(t)-V(t_0)t-t_0=lim_trightarrow t_0fracW_t(t_0)-V(t_0)t-t_0,$$ where $W_t$ is the parallel vector field determined by $D_tW_tequiv0$ and $W_t(t)=V(t)$.



          Hope that cleared things up.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$















            7












            7








            7





            $begingroup$

            Although he discusses it for the tangent bundle only, John M. Lee mentions a theorem in his book Riemannian Manifolds, from which it should get clearer:




            Theorem 4.11. (Parallel translation) Given a curve $gamma:Irightarrow M,~t_0in I$, and an [arbitrary] vector $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$, there exists a unique parallel vector field $W$ along
            $gamma$ s.t. $W(t_0):=W(gamma(t_0))=V_0$




            Here, I took the liberty of renaming the vector field.



            Now, what does parallel vector field $W$ along $gamma$ mean? Simple, it's $D_tWequiv0$. What's $D_t$, I hear you wondering. Well, if $W$ is a smooth vector field on $M$, then $D_tW(t_0)=nabla_dotgamma(t_0)W$. So, as not to wreak any more havoc in this definition jungle, we shall simply restrict to this case (since the ODE $D_tWequiv0$ then becomes $nabla_dotgammaWequiv0$, which is the way it's written in your link).



            What John does next is, he defines




            If $gamma:Irightarrow M$ is a curve and $t_0,~t_1in I$, the parallel translation defines an operator $$P_t_0t_1:T_gamma(t_0)Mrightarrow T_gamma(t_1)M$$ with $P_t_0t_1V_0=W(t_1)$, where $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$ and $W$ is the parallel vector field from the theorem.




            This is, by the theorem, an isomorphism between tangent spaces and therefore gives you for each vector at each point of the curve a uniquely determined vector - at another point in the image of the curve - which 'looks like the original vector', if you will.



            The formula would then, in John's book, look like this
            $$D_tV(t_0)=lim_trightarrow t_0fracP^-1_t_0tV(t)-V(t_0)t-t_0=lim_trightarrow t_0fracW_t(t_0)-V(t_0)t-t_0,$$ where $W_t$ is the parallel vector field determined by $D_tW_tequiv0$ and $W_t(t)=V(t)$.



            Hope that cleared things up.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            Although he discusses it for the tangent bundle only, John M. Lee mentions a theorem in his book Riemannian Manifolds, from which it should get clearer:




            Theorem 4.11. (Parallel translation) Given a curve $gamma:Irightarrow M,~t_0in I$, and an [arbitrary] vector $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$, there exists a unique parallel vector field $W$ along
            $gamma$ s.t. $W(t_0):=W(gamma(t_0))=V_0$




            Here, I took the liberty of renaming the vector field.



            Now, what does parallel vector field $W$ along $gamma$ mean? Simple, it's $D_tWequiv0$. What's $D_t$, I hear you wondering. Well, if $W$ is a smooth vector field on $M$, then $D_tW(t_0)=nabla_dotgamma(t_0)W$. So, as not to wreak any more havoc in this definition jungle, we shall simply restrict to this case (since the ODE $D_tWequiv0$ then becomes $nabla_dotgammaWequiv0$, which is the way it's written in your link).



            What John does next is, he defines




            If $gamma:Irightarrow M$ is a curve and $t_0,~t_1in I$, the parallel translation defines an operator $$P_t_0t_1:T_gamma(t_0)Mrightarrow T_gamma(t_1)M$$ with $P_t_0t_1V_0=W(t_1)$, where $V_0in T_gamma(t_0)M$ and $W$ is the parallel vector field from the theorem.




            This is, by the theorem, an isomorphism between tangent spaces and therefore gives you for each vector at each point of the curve a uniquely determined vector - at another point in the image of the curve - which 'looks like the original vector', if you will.



            The formula would then, in John's book, look like this
            $$D_tV(t_0)=lim_trightarrow t_0fracP^-1_t_0tV(t)-V(t_0)t-t_0=lim_trightarrow t_0fracW_t(t_0)-V(t_0)t-t_0,$$ where $W_t$ is the parallel vector field determined by $D_tW_tequiv0$ and $W_t(t)=V(t)$.



            Hope that cleared things up.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited May 19 '14 at 8:39

























            answered May 18 '14 at 8:01









            Jo BeJo Be

            6751519




            6751519





















                0












                $begingroup$

                I am not sure of the extent of your mathematical background, so I apologize if I am writing something that's completely obvious to you.



                Let $e : M to E$ be a section of a vector bundle $E to M$.



                We want to be able to compare values of $e$ over different base points.



                $e(p)$ and $e(q)$ live in different vector spaces $E_p$ and $E_q$, $e(p) - e(q)$ makes no sense. How can we compare them?



                We can do it if there was some way to transport all the vectors in $E_q$ to $E_p$. To make sure all the vectors get transported in the right way, it makes sense to use an isomorphism. It also makes sense to think of this notion of transporting as being done over a path from $p$ to $q$ in $M$.



                It turns out for general manifolds there is no canonical way to do this. The definition of Parallel Transport in your article reflects this: different curves in the base space give you different isomorphisms.



                So pick a curve: $gamma: [0,1] to M$, with $gamma(0) = p$ and $gamma(1) = q$.



                Now, $Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) in E_p$, so the difference $(Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) - e(p)) in E_p$ and it all makes sense.



                There is no reason for this difference to be 0.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$

















                  0












                  $begingroup$

                  I am not sure of the extent of your mathematical background, so I apologize if I am writing something that's completely obvious to you.



                  Let $e : M to E$ be a section of a vector bundle $E to M$.



                  We want to be able to compare values of $e$ over different base points.



                  $e(p)$ and $e(q)$ live in different vector spaces $E_p$ and $E_q$, $e(p) - e(q)$ makes no sense. How can we compare them?



                  We can do it if there was some way to transport all the vectors in $E_q$ to $E_p$. To make sure all the vectors get transported in the right way, it makes sense to use an isomorphism. It also makes sense to think of this notion of transporting as being done over a path from $p$ to $q$ in $M$.



                  It turns out for general manifolds there is no canonical way to do this. The definition of Parallel Transport in your article reflects this: different curves in the base space give you different isomorphisms.



                  So pick a curve: $gamma: [0,1] to M$, with $gamma(0) = p$ and $gamma(1) = q$.



                  Now, $Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) in E_p$, so the difference $(Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) - e(p)) in E_p$ and it all makes sense.



                  There is no reason for this difference to be 0.






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$















                    0












                    0








                    0





                    $begingroup$

                    I am not sure of the extent of your mathematical background, so I apologize if I am writing something that's completely obvious to you.



                    Let $e : M to E$ be a section of a vector bundle $E to M$.



                    We want to be able to compare values of $e$ over different base points.



                    $e(p)$ and $e(q)$ live in different vector spaces $E_p$ and $E_q$, $e(p) - e(q)$ makes no sense. How can we compare them?



                    We can do it if there was some way to transport all the vectors in $E_q$ to $E_p$. To make sure all the vectors get transported in the right way, it makes sense to use an isomorphism. It also makes sense to think of this notion of transporting as being done over a path from $p$ to $q$ in $M$.



                    It turns out for general manifolds there is no canonical way to do this. The definition of Parallel Transport in your article reflects this: different curves in the base space give you different isomorphisms.



                    So pick a curve: $gamma: [0,1] to M$, with $gamma(0) = p$ and $gamma(1) = q$.



                    Now, $Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) in E_p$, so the difference $(Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) - e(p)) in E_p$ and it all makes sense.



                    There is no reason for this difference to be 0.






                    share|cite|improve this answer











                    $endgroup$



                    I am not sure of the extent of your mathematical background, so I apologize if I am writing something that's completely obvious to you.



                    Let $e : M to E$ be a section of a vector bundle $E to M$.



                    We want to be able to compare values of $e$ over different base points.



                    $e(p)$ and $e(q)$ live in different vector spaces $E_p$ and $E_q$, $e(p) - e(q)$ makes no sense. How can we compare them?



                    We can do it if there was some way to transport all the vectors in $E_q$ to $E_p$. To make sure all the vectors get transported in the right way, it makes sense to use an isomorphism. It also makes sense to think of this notion of transporting as being done over a path from $p$ to $q$ in $M$.



                    It turns out for general manifolds there is no canonical way to do this. The definition of Parallel Transport in your article reflects this: different curves in the base space give you different isomorphisms.



                    So pick a curve: $gamma: [0,1] to M$, with $gamma(0) = p$ and $gamma(1) = q$.



                    Now, $Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) in E_p$, so the difference $(Gamma(gamma)_1^0 e(q) - e(p)) in E_p$ and it all makes sense.



                    There is no reason for this difference to be 0.







                    share|cite|improve this answer














                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer








                    edited May 17 '14 at 13:14

























                    answered May 17 '14 at 13:04









                    BraindeadBraindead

                    3,4051839




                    3,4051839





















                        0












                        $begingroup$

                        [Using Lee's hint]: Let $ nabla $ be a linear connection of $ M $ and $ gamma: [0,1] to M $ smooth curve, we want to prove:



                        $$
                        D_tV(t_0) = lim_t to 0 fracP_t_0,t^-1V(t) - V(t_0)t - t_0
                        $$



                        Proof: Let $ epsilon > 0 $ with $ (U,psi = (x^1,...,x^n)) $ chart and $ gamma([0,1] cap (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)) subset U $. consider local basis $partial_i = fracpartialpartial x^i$.



                        Let $ (E_i(t)) $ fields such that $ E_i(0) = partial_i $ and $ D_tE_i = 0 $. Since parallel translations are isomorphisms, $ (E_i(t)) $ is a local basis.



                        Let $ V(t) = V^i(t) E_i(t) $ for $ t in (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)cap [0,1] $, note that $ P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) = V^i(t)partial_i $.



                        $$
                        frac1t - t_0(P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) - V(t_0))
                        =
                        $$

                        $$
                        frac(V^i(t) - V^i(t_0)t - t_0partial_i
                        to
                        dotV^i(t_0)partial_i
                        $$



                        On the other hand



                        $$
                        D_tV (t_0)
                        =
                        (D_tV^i(t) E_i(t) )(t_0)
                        =
                        $$

                        $$
                        left(
                        dotV^i(t_0)E_i(t_0)
                        +
                        V^i(t_0) (D_tE_i)(t_0)
                        right)
                        =
                        dotV^i(t)partial_i
                        $$






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$

















                          0












                          $begingroup$

                          [Using Lee's hint]: Let $ nabla $ be a linear connection of $ M $ and $ gamma: [0,1] to M $ smooth curve, we want to prove:



                          $$
                          D_tV(t_0) = lim_t to 0 fracP_t_0,t^-1V(t) - V(t_0)t - t_0
                          $$



                          Proof: Let $ epsilon > 0 $ with $ (U,psi = (x^1,...,x^n)) $ chart and $ gamma([0,1] cap (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)) subset U $. consider local basis $partial_i = fracpartialpartial x^i$.



                          Let $ (E_i(t)) $ fields such that $ E_i(0) = partial_i $ and $ D_tE_i = 0 $. Since parallel translations are isomorphisms, $ (E_i(t)) $ is a local basis.



                          Let $ V(t) = V^i(t) E_i(t) $ for $ t in (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)cap [0,1] $, note that $ P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) = V^i(t)partial_i $.



                          $$
                          frac1t - t_0(P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) - V(t_0))
                          =
                          $$

                          $$
                          frac(V^i(t) - V^i(t_0)t - t_0partial_i
                          to
                          dotV^i(t_0)partial_i
                          $$



                          On the other hand



                          $$
                          D_tV (t_0)
                          =
                          (D_tV^i(t) E_i(t) )(t_0)
                          =
                          $$

                          $$
                          left(
                          dotV^i(t_0)E_i(t_0)
                          +
                          V^i(t_0) (D_tE_i)(t_0)
                          right)
                          =
                          dotV^i(t)partial_i
                          $$






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$















                            0












                            0








                            0





                            $begingroup$

                            [Using Lee's hint]: Let $ nabla $ be a linear connection of $ M $ and $ gamma: [0,1] to M $ smooth curve, we want to prove:



                            $$
                            D_tV(t_0) = lim_t to 0 fracP_t_0,t^-1V(t) - V(t_0)t - t_0
                            $$



                            Proof: Let $ epsilon > 0 $ with $ (U,psi = (x^1,...,x^n)) $ chart and $ gamma([0,1] cap (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)) subset U $. consider local basis $partial_i = fracpartialpartial x^i$.



                            Let $ (E_i(t)) $ fields such that $ E_i(0) = partial_i $ and $ D_tE_i = 0 $. Since parallel translations are isomorphisms, $ (E_i(t)) $ is a local basis.



                            Let $ V(t) = V^i(t) E_i(t) $ for $ t in (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)cap [0,1] $, note that $ P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) = V^i(t)partial_i $.



                            $$
                            frac1t - t_0(P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) - V(t_0))
                            =
                            $$

                            $$
                            frac(V^i(t) - V^i(t_0)t - t_0partial_i
                            to
                            dotV^i(t_0)partial_i
                            $$



                            On the other hand



                            $$
                            D_tV (t_0)
                            =
                            (D_tV^i(t) E_i(t) )(t_0)
                            =
                            $$

                            $$
                            left(
                            dotV^i(t_0)E_i(t_0)
                            +
                            V^i(t_0) (D_tE_i)(t_0)
                            right)
                            =
                            dotV^i(t)partial_i
                            $$






                            share|cite|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$



                            [Using Lee's hint]: Let $ nabla $ be a linear connection of $ M $ and $ gamma: [0,1] to M $ smooth curve, we want to prove:



                            $$
                            D_tV(t_0) = lim_t to 0 fracP_t_0,t^-1V(t) - V(t_0)t - t_0
                            $$



                            Proof: Let $ epsilon > 0 $ with $ (U,psi = (x^1,...,x^n)) $ chart and $ gamma([0,1] cap (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)) subset U $. consider local basis $partial_i = fracpartialpartial x^i$.



                            Let $ (E_i(t)) $ fields such that $ E_i(0) = partial_i $ and $ D_tE_i = 0 $. Since parallel translations are isomorphisms, $ (E_i(t)) $ is a local basis.



                            Let $ V(t) = V^i(t) E_i(t) $ for $ t in (t-epsilon,t+epsilon)cap [0,1] $, note that $ P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) = V^i(t)partial_i $.



                            $$
                            frac1t - t_0(P_t_0,t^-1 V(t) - V(t_0))
                            =
                            $$

                            $$
                            frac(V^i(t) - V^i(t_0)t - t_0partial_i
                            to
                            dotV^i(t_0)partial_i
                            $$



                            On the other hand



                            $$
                            D_tV (t_0)
                            =
                            (D_tV^i(t) E_i(t) )(t_0)
                            =
                            $$

                            $$
                            left(
                            dotV^i(t_0)E_i(t_0)
                            +
                            V^i(t_0) (D_tE_i)(t_0)
                            right)
                            =
                            dotV^i(t)partial_i
                            $$







                            share|cite|improve this answer












                            share|cite|improve this answer



                            share|cite|improve this answer










                            answered Mar 30 at 21:09









                            Gustavo LabegaliniGustavo Labegalini

                            466




                            466



























                                draft saved

                                draft discarded
















































                                Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                But avoid


                                • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                draft saved


                                draft discarded














                                StackExchange.ready(
                                function ()
                                StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f798997%2frecover-covariant-derivative-from-parallel-transport%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                );

                                Post as a guest















                                Required, but never shown





















































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown

































                                Required, but never shown














                                Required, but never shown












                                Required, but never shown







                                Required, but never shown







                                Popular posts from this blog

                                Triangular numbers and gcdProving sum of a set is $0 pmod n$ if $n$ is odd, or $fracn2 pmod n$ if $n$ is even?Is greatest common divisor of two numbers really their smallest linear combination?GCD, LCM RelationshipProve a set of nonnegative integers with greatest common divisor 1 and closed under addition has all but finite many nonnegative integers.all pairs of a and b in an equation containing gcdTriangular Numbers Modulo $k$ - Hit All Values?Understanding the Existence and Uniqueness of the GCDGCD and LCM with logical symbolsThe greatest common divisor of two positive integers less than 100 is equal to 3. Their least common multiple is twelve times one of the integers.Suppose that for all integers $x$, $x|a$ and $x|b$ if and only if $x|c$. Then $c = gcd(a,b)$Which is the gcd of 2 numbers which are multiplied and the result is 600000?

                                Ingelân Ynhâld Etymology | Geografy | Skiednis | Polityk en bestjoer | Ekonomy | Demografy | Kultuer | Klimaat | Sjoch ek | Keppelings om utens | Boarnen, noaten en referinsjes Navigaasjemenuwww.gov.ukOffisjele webside fan it regear fan it Feriene KeninkrykOffisjele webside fan it Britske FerkearsburoNederlânsktalige ynformaasje fan it Britske FerkearsburoOffisjele webside fan English Heritage, de organisaasje dy't him ynset foar it behâld fan it Ingelske kultuergoedYnwennertallen fan alle Britske stêden út 'e folkstelling fan 2011Notes en References, op dizze sideEngland

                                Հադիս Բովանդակություն Անվանում և նշանակություն | Դասակարգում | Աղբյուրներ | Նավարկման ցանկ