Differential of a one-form eating a vector?Vector field on riemannian manifoldHopf-Rinow theoremIs there a codifferential for a covariant exterior derivative?Covariant derivative of vector field along itself: $nabla_X X$Smooth extension of a tangent vectorRiemannian manifold, $alpha in Omega^p(M)$ parallel implies $alpha$ is closed?Lie bracket of exact differential one-formsLie bracket of local orthonormal basis of vector fieldsIs it true that the second fundamental form of a geodesic as a one-dimensional submanifold is zero?Weitzenböck identity for $TM$-valued differential forms

Working hours and productivity expectations for game artists and programmers

" Logic does not allow you to say this": is this assertion outdated?

Story about encounter with hostile aliens

Is presenting a play showing Military characters in a bad light a crime in the US?

What to call a small, open stone or cement reservoir that supplies fresh water from a spring or other natural source?

Bash - Execute two commands and get exit status 1 if first fails

Why is there no current between two capacitors connected in series?

Trajectory of a satellite whose velocity is less than circular orbital velocity?

What quantum phenomena violate the superposition principle in electromagnetism?

Is it wise to pay off mortgage with 401k?

pwaS eht tirsf dna tasl setterl fo hace dorw

How could Dwarves prevent sand from filling up their settlements

How can sister protect herself from impulse purchases with a credit card?

Good examples of "two is easy, three is hard" in computational sciences

Strange usage of the 'ing' with the want verb

Hotel booking: Why is Agoda much cheaper than booking.com?

How to use Screen Sharing if I don't know the remote Mac's IP address

What does it mean for a program to be 32 or 64 bit?

How do you cope with rejection?

Salesforce bug enabled "Modify All"

Snapshot on Always On Availability Group in suspect mode

Why did Nick Fury not hesitate in blowing up the plane he thought was carrying a nuke?

How can I prevent Bash expansion from passing files starting with "-" as argument?

How could the B-29 bomber back up under its own power?



Differential of a one-form eating a vector?


Vector field on riemannian manifoldHopf-Rinow theoremIs there a codifferential for a covariant exterior derivative?Covariant derivative of vector field along itself: $nabla_X X$Smooth extension of a tangent vectorRiemannian manifold, $alpha in Omega^p(M)$ parallel implies $alpha$ is closed?Lie bracket of exact differential one-formsLie bracket of local orthonormal basis of vector fieldsIs it true that the second fundamental form of a geodesic as a one-dimensional submanifold is zero?Weitzenböck identity for $TM$-valued differential forms













3












$begingroup$


Let $(M,g)$ be a Riemannian manifold with Levi-Civita connection $nabla$, and consider a one-form $alphainOmega^1(M;mathbbR)$ and a vector field $XinGamma(TM)$.



Since $alpha(X)in C^infty(M;mathbbR)$ we can consider it's differential $d(alpha(X))$. Is there a coordinate invariant way to computer this quantity? Maybe something like $d(alpha(X))(Y) = dalpha(X,Y) + alpha(nabla_YX)$? How does this generalize if we consider the differential of the smooth function $beta(X,Y)$ where $beta$ is now a 2-form and $X,Y$ are both vector fields?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Am I the only one who did not understand the question...
    $endgroup$
    – Praphulla Koushik
    1 hour ago















3












$begingroup$


Let $(M,g)$ be a Riemannian manifold with Levi-Civita connection $nabla$, and consider a one-form $alphainOmega^1(M;mathbbR)$ and a vector field $XinGamma(TM)$.



Since $alpha(X)in C^infty(M;mathbbR)$ we can consider it's differential $d(alpha(X))$. Is there a coordinate invariant way to computer this quantity? Maybe something like $d(alpha(X))(Y) = dalpha(X,Y) + alpha(nabla_YX)$? How does this generalize if we consider the differential of the smooth function $beta(X,Y)$ where $beta$ is now a 2-form and $X,Y$ are both vector fields?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Am I the only one who did not understand the question...
    $endgroup$
    – Praphulla Koushik
    1 hour ago













3












3








3





$begingroup$


Let $(M,g)$ be a Riemannian manifold with Levi-Civita connection $nabla$, and consider a one-form $alphainOmega^1(M;mathbbR)$ and a vector field $XinGamma(TM)$.



Since $alpha(X)in C^infty(M;mathbbR)$ we can consider it's differential $d(alpha(X))$. Is there a coordinate invariant way to computer this quantity? Maybe something like $d(alpha(X))(Y) = dalpha(X,Y) + alpha(nabla_YX)$? How does this generalize if we consider the differential of the smooth function $beta(X,Y)$ where $beta$ is now a 2-form and $X,Y$ are both vector fields?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Let $(M,g)$ be a Riemannian manifold with Levi-Civita connection $nabla$, and consider a one-form $alphainOmega^1(M;mathbbR)$ and a vector field $XinGamma(TM)$.



Since $alpha(X)in C^infty(M;mathbbR)$ we can consider it's differential $d(alpha(X))$. Is there a coordinate invariant way to computer this quantity? Maybe something like $d(alpha(X))(Y) = dalpha(X,Y) + alpha(nabla_YX)$? How does this generalize if we consider the differential of the smooth function $beta(X,Y)$ where $beta$ is now a 2-form and $X,Y$ are both vector fields?







differential-geometry manifolds differential-forms






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 1 hour ago









Ivo Terek

48k956151




48k956151










asked 1 hour ago









pomegranatepomegranate

31316




31316











  • $begingroup$
    Am I the only one who did not understand the question...
    $endgroup$
    – Praphulla Koushik
    1 hour ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Am I the only one who did not understand the question...
    $endgroup$
    – Praphulla Koushik
    1 hour ago















$begingroup$
Am I the only one who did not understand the question...
$endgroup$
– Praphulla Koushik
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
Am I the only one who did not understand the question...
$endgroup$
– Praphulla Koushik
1 hour ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

Since $rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = Y(alpha(X))$, we indeed get from $$rm dalpha(X,Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - Y(alpha(X)) - alpha([X,Y])$$that $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha([X,Y]) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$but this is not very satisfying as we still have $X(alpha(Y))$ on the right side. Since $nabla$ is torsion free, we may improve the right side to obtain $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = (nabla_Xalpha)(Y) + alpha(nabla_YX) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$where $(nabla_Xalpha)(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha(nabla_XY)$ is the covariant derivative of $alpha$ in the direction of $X$. So if $iota_X$ denotes interior product, we can write $$ rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha + alpha circ nabla X - iota_X(rm dalpha), $$which is as coordinate-free as we can get. I'm not sure how this would actually be useful in practice, though. One can do the same and get more complicated formulas for $k$-forms with $k>1$ by using the same strategy, by using that if $omega$ is a $k$-form, then $nabla_Xomega$ is a $k$-form with $$(nabla_Xomega)(X_1,ldots, X_k) = X(omega(X_1,ldots,X_k)) - sum_i=1^k omega(X_1,ldots, nabla_XX_i,ldots, X_k).$$You will also have to use $$beginalign rm domega(X_0,ldots,X_k) &= sum_i=0^k (-1)^k X_i(omega(X_0,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, X_k)) \ &qquad + sum_0leq i<jleq k (-1)^i+j omega([X_i,X_j],X_1,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, widehatX_j,ldots, X_k). endalign$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Thank you! I will work through this in some more detail today. The form you provide is quite useful to me since I have that $X$ is a parallel vector field and $alpha$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    So you hit the jackpot there, the formula just boils down to $rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha$ then :)
    $endgroup$
    – Ivo Terek
    1 hour ago


















3












$begingroup$

You can use Cartan's magical formula
$$
mathcalL_X omega = i_X domega + d(i_X omega),
$$

where $omega$ is an $n$-form, $mathcalL$ is the Lie derivative and $i$ stands for the interior product. Note that all these operations and the exterior derivative make sense on a differentiable manifold (not necessarily a Riemmannian manifold) so one does not need the Levi-Civita connection in order to get a coordinate free expression. However, I believe there are formulas that relate the Lie derivative with the Levi-Civita connection, so you can use these if you want expressions using the Levi-Civita connection.



For the $1$-form $alpha$ this gives:
$$
d(alpha(X)) = d(i_X alpha) = mathcalL_X alpha - i_X dalpha.
$$



For the $2$-form $beta$ one can repeatedly apply Cartan's formula:
$$
beginalign*
d(beta(X,Y)) &= d(i_Y i_X beta) \
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y d(i_X beta)\
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y mathcalL_X beta + i_Y i_X dbeta.
endalign*
$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Ahh... I always forget about Cartan's magic formula!
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago











Your Answer








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%2f3230941%2fdifferential-of-a-one-form-eating-a-vector%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3












$begingroup$

Since $rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = Y(alpha(X))$, we indeed get from $$rm dalpha(X,Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - Y(alpha(X)) - alpha([X,Y])$$that $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha([X,Y]) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$but this is not very satisfying as we still have $X(alpha(Y))$ on the right side. Since $nabla$ is torsion free, we may improve the right side to obtain $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = (nabla_Xalpha)(Y) + alpha(nabla_YX) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$where $(nabla_Xalpha)(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha(nabla_XY)$ is the covariant derivative of $alpha$ in the direction of $X$. So if $iota_X$ denotes interior product, we can write $$ rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha + alpha circ nabla X - iota_X(rm dalpha), $$which is as coordinate-free as we can get. I'm not sure how this would actually be useful in practice, though. One can do the same and get more complicated formulas for $k$-forms with $k>1$ by using the same strategy, by using that if $omega$ is a $k$-form, then $nabla_Xomega$ is a $k$-form with $$(nabla_Xomega)(X_1,ldots, X_k) = X(omega(X_1,ldots,X_k)) - sum_i=1^k omega(X_1,ldots, nabla_XX_i,ldots, X_k).$$You will also have to use $$beginalign rm domega(X_0,ldots,X_k) &= sum_i=0^k (-1)^k X_i(omega(X_0,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, X_k)) \ &qquad + sum_0leq i<jleq k (-1)^i+j omega([X_i,X_j],X_1,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, widehatX_j,ldots, X_k). endalign$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Thank you! I will work through this in some more detail today. The form you provide is quite useful to me since I have that $X$ is a parallel vector field and $alpha$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    So you hit the jackpot there, the formula just boils down to $rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha$ then :)
    $endgroup$
    – Ivo Terek
    1 hour ago















3












$begingroup$

Since $rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = Y(alpha(X))$, we indeed get from $$rm dalpha(X,Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - Y(alpha(X)) - alpha([X,Y])$$that $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha([X,Y]) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$but this is not very satisfying as we still have $X(alpha(Y))$ on the right side. Since $nabla$ is torsion free, we may improve the right side to obtain $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = (nabla_Xalpha)(Y) + alpha(nabla_YX) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$where $(nabla_Xalpha)(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha(nabla_XY)$ is the covariant derivative of $alpha$ in the direction of $X$. So if $iota_X$ denotes interior product, we can write $$ rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha + alpha circ nabla X - iota_X(rm dalpha), $$which is as coordinate-free as we can get. I'm not sure how this would actually be useful in practice, though. One can do the same and get more complicated formulas for $k$-forms with $k>1$ by using the same strategy, by using that if $omega$ is a $k$-form, then $nabla_Xomega$ is a $k$-form with $$(nabla_Xomega)(X_1,ldots, X_k) = X(omega(X_1,ldots,X_k)) - sum_i=1^k omega(X_1,ldots, nabla_XX_i,ldots, X_k).$$You will also have to use $$beginalign rm domega(X_0,ldots,X_k) &= sum_i=0^k (-1)^k X_i(omega(X_0,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, X_k)) \ &qquad + sum_0leq i<jleq k (-1)^i+j omega([X_i,X_j],X_1,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, widehatX_j,ldots, X_k). endalign$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Thank you! I will work through this in some more detail today. The form you provide is quite useful to me since I have that $X$ is a parallel vector field and $alpha$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    So you hit the jackpot there, the formula just boils down to $rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha$ then :)
    $endgroup$
    – Ivo Terek
    1 hour ago













3












3








3





$begingroup$

Since $rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = Y(alpha(X))$, we indeed get from $$rm dalpha(X,Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - Y(alpha(X)) - alpha([X,Y])$$that $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha([X,Y]) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$but this is not very satisfying as we still have $X(alpha(Y))$ on the right side. Since $nabla$ is torsion free, we may improve the right side to obtain $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = (nabla_Xalpha)(Y) + alpha(nabla_YX) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$where $(nabla_Xalpha)(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha(nabla_XY)$ is the covariant derivative of $alpha$ in the direction of $X$. So if $iota_X$ denotes interior product, we can write $$ rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha + alpha circ nabla X - iota_X(rm dalpha), $$which is as coordinate-free as we can get. I'm not sure how this would actually be useful in practice, though. One can do the same and get more complicated formulas for $k$-forms with $k>1$ by using the same strategy, by using that if $omega$ is a $k$-form, then $nabla_Xomega$ is a $k$-form with $$(nabla_Xomega)(X_1,ldots, X_k) = X(omega(X_1,ldots,X_k)) - sum_i=1^k omega(X_1,ldots, nabla_XX_i,ldots, X_k).$$You will also have to use $$beginalign rm domega(X_0,ldots,X_k) &= sum_i=0^k (-1)^k X_i(omega(X_0,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, X_k)) \ &qquad + sum_0leq i<jleq k (-1)^i+j omega([X_i,X_j],X_1,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, widehatX_j,ldots, X_k). endalign$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Since $rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = Y(alpha(X))$, we indeed get from $$rm dalpha(X,Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - Y(alpha(X)) - alpha([X,Y])$$that $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha([X,Y]) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$but this is not very satisfying as we still have $X(alpha(Y))$ on the right side. Since $nabla$ is torsion free, we may improve the right side to obtain $$rm d(alpha(X))(Y) = (nabla_Xalpha)(Y) + alpha(nabla_YX) - rm dalpha(X,Y),$$where $(nabla_Xalpha)(Y) = X(alpha(Y)) - alpha(nabla_XY)$ is the covariant derivative of $alpha$ in the direction of $X$. So if $iota_X$ denotes interior product, we can write $$ rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha + alpha circ nabla X - iota_X(rm dalpha), $$which is as coordinate-free as we can get. I'm not sure how this would actually be useful in practice, though. One can do the same and get more complicated formulas for $k$-forms with $k>1$ by using the same strategy, by using that if $omega$ is a $k$-form, then $nabla_Xomega$ is a $k$-form with $$(nabla_Xomega)(X_1,ldots, X_k) = X(omega(X_1,ldots,X_k)) - sum_i=1^k omega(X_1,ldots, nabla_XX_i,ldots, X_k).$$You will also have to use $$beginalign rm domega(X_0,ldots,X_k) &= sum_i=0^k (-1)^k X_i(omega(X_0,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, X_k)) \ &qquad + sum_0leq i<jleq k (-1)^i+j omega([X_i,X_j],X_1,ldots, widehatX_i,ldots, widehatX_j,ldots, X_k). endalign$$







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 1 hour ago









Ivo TerekIvo Terek

48k956151




48k956151







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Thank you! I will work through this in some more detail today. The form you provide is quite useful to me since I have that $X$ is a parallel vector field and $alpha$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    So you hit the jackpot there, the formula just boils down to $rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha$ then :)
    $endgroup$
    – Ivo Terek
    1 hour ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Thank you! I will work through this in some more detail today. The form you provide is quite useful to me since I have that $X$ is a parallel vector field and $alpha$ is closed.
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    So you hit the jackpot there, the formula just boils down to $rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha$ then :)
    $endgroup$
    – Ivo Terek
    1 hour ago







1




1




$begingroup$
Thank you! I will work through this in some more detail today. The form you provide is quite useful to me since I have that $X$ is a parallel vector field and $alpha$ is closed.
$endgroup$
– pomegranate
1 hour ago





$begingroup$
Thank you! I will work through this in some more detail today. The form you provide is quite useful to me since I have that $X$ is a parallel vector field and $alpha$ is closed.
$endgroup$
– pomegranate
1 hour ago





1




1




$begingroup$
So you hit the jackpot there, the formula just boils down to $rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha$ then :)
$endgroup$
– Ivo Terek
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
So you hit the jackpot there, the formula just boils down to $rm d(alpha(X)) = nabla_Xalpha$ then :)
$endgroup$
– Ivo Terek
1 hour ago











3












$begingroup$

You can use Cartan's magical formula
$$
mathcalL_X omega = i_X domega + d(i_X omega),
$$

where $omega$ is an $n$-form, $mathcalL$ is the Lie derivative and $i$ stands for the interior product. Note that all these operations and the exterior derivative make sense on a differentiable manifold (not necessarily a Riemmannian manifold) so one does not need the Levi-Civita connection in order to get a coordinate free expression. However, I believe there are formulas that relate the Lie derivative with the Levi-Civita connection, so you can use these if you want expressions using the Levi-Civita connection.



For the $1$-form $alpha$ this gives:
$$
d(alpha(X)) = d(i_X alpha) = mathcalL_X alpha - i_X dalpha.
$$



For the $2$-form $beta$ one can repeatedly apply Cartan's formula:
$$
beginalign*
d(beta(X,Y)) &= d(i_Y i_X beta) \
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y d(i_X beta)\
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y mathcalL_X beta + i_Y i_X dbeta.
endalign*
$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Ahh... I always forget about Cartan's magic formula!
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago















3












$begingroup$

You can use Cartan's magical formula
$$
mathcalL_X omega = i_X domega + d(i_X omega),
$$

where $omega$ is an $n$-form, $mathcalL$ is the Lie derivative and $i$ stands for the interior product. Note that all these operations and the exterior derivative make sense on a differentiable manifold (not necessarily a Riemmannian manifold) so one does not need the Levi-Civita connection in order to get a coordinate free expression. However, I believe there are formulas that relate the Lie derivative with the Levi-Civita connection, so you can use these if you want expressions using the Levi-Civita connection.



For the $1$-form $alpha$ this gives:
$$
d(alpha(X)) = d(i_X alpha) = mathcalL_X alpha - i_X dalpha.
$$



For the $2$-form $beta$ one can repeatedly apply Cartan's formula:
$$
beginalign*
d(beta(X,Y)) &= d(i_Y i_X beta) \
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y d(i_X beta)\
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y mathcalL_X beta + i_Y i_X dbeta.
endalign*
$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Ahh... I always forget about Cartan's magic formula!
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago













3












3








3





$begingroup$

You can use Cartan's magical formula
$$
mathcalL_X omega = i_X domega + d(i_X omega),
$$

where $omega$ is an $n$-form, $mathcalL$ is the Lie derivative and $i$ stands for the interior product. Note that all these operations and the exterior derivative make sense on a differentiable manifold (not necessarily a Riemmannian manifold) so one does not need the Levi-Civita connection in order to get a coordinate free expression. However, I believe there are formulas that relate the Lie derivative with the Levi-Civita connection, so you can use these if you want expressions using the Levi-Civita connection.



For the $1$-form $alpha$ this gives:
$$
d(alpha(X)) = d(i_X alpha) = mathcalL_X alpha - i_X dalpha.
$$



For the $2$-form $beta$ one can repeatedly apply Cartan's formula:
$$
beginalign*
d(beta(X,Y)) &= d(i_Y i_X beta) \
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y d(i_X beta)\
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y mathcalL_X beta + i_Y i_X dbeta.
endalign*
$$






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



You can use Cartan's magical formula
$$
mathcalL_X omega = i_X domega + d(i_X omega),
$$

where $omega$ is an $n$-form, $mathcalL$ is the Lie derivative and $i$ stands for the interior product. Note that all these operations and the exterior derivative make sense on a differentiable manifold (not necessarily a Riemmannian manifold) so one does not need the Levi-Civita connection in order to get a coordinate free expression. However, I believe there are formulas that relate the Lie derivative with the Levi-Civita connection, so you can use these if you want expressions using the Levi-Civita connection.



For the $1$-form $alpha$ this gives:
$$
d(alpha(X)) = d(i_X alpha) = mathcalL_X alpha - i_X dalpha.
$$



For the $2$-form $beta$ one can repeatedly apply Cartan's formula:
$$
beginalign*
d(beta(X,Y)) &= d(i_Y i_X beta) \
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y d(i_X beta)\
&= mathcalL_Y(i_X beta) - i_Y mathcalL_X beta + i_Y i_X dbeta.
endalign*
$$







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 1 hour ago









Ernie060Ernie060

3,179822




3,179822







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Ahh... I always forget about Cartan's magic formula!
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Ahh... I always forget about Cartan's magic formula!
    $endgroup$
    – pomegranate
    1 hour ago







1




1




$begingroup$
Ahh... I always forget about Cartan's magic formula!
$endgroup$
– pomegranate
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
Ahh... I always forget about Cartan's magic formula!
$endgroup$
– pomegranate
1 hour ago

















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%2f3230941%2fdifferential-of-a-one-form-eating-a-vector%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

Siegen Nawigatsjuun

Log på Navigationsmenu

Log på Navigationsmenu