Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Given a metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ it is possible to find the equations of the geodesic on the Riemannian manifold $M$ defined by the metric itself:

$$\frac{d^2x^a}{ds^2} + \Gamma^{a}_{bc}\frac{dx^b}{ds}\frac{dx^c}{ds} = 0$$ where: $$\Gamma^a_{bc} = \frac{1}{2} g^{ad} \left( g_{cd,b} + g_{bd,c} - g_{bc,d} \right)$$ are the Christoffel symbols and $$g_{ab,c} = \frac{\partial {g_{ab}}}{\partial {x^c}}$$ Now, given a parametric equation of a curve, is it possible to find the metric of a Riemannian manifold which gives that curve as a geodesic? If the answer is 'Yes', is there a bijective correspondence between the curve and the metric? Or are there many metrics giving the same geodesic? Thanks in advance.

share|improve this question
5  
In general the answer is of course no. Take any curve $\gamma : [a,b] \to M$ where $\gamma(t_1) = \gamma(t_2)$ and $\gamma'(t_1) = \gamma'(t_2)$ with $t_2 \neq t_1$. Provided it's not true that $\gamma(t+t_2-t_1) = \gamma(t)$ then you've got a counter-example, because geodesics are determined by their velocity vectors at a point. A good counter-example would be a curve that is tangent to itself, but with different curvatures at the point of tangency. –  Ryan Budney Feb 17 '12 at 23:06
    
The title doesn't ask the same thing as the question. –  Ben Crowell Feb 18 '12 at 1:48
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 6 down vote accepted

I'm not sure what happens for general curves, but I think I can prove the following:

Let $\gamma:[0,1]\rightarrow M$ be any injective curve segement. Then there is a Riemannian metric for which $\gamma$ is a geodesic. If instead $\gamma$ is a simple closed curve and $\gamma'(0) = \gamma'(1)$, the conclusion still holds.

I'm not sure what happens in the other cases.

Here's the idea of the proof in the (slightly harder) second case:

Pick a background Riemannian metric once and for all. The normal bundle of $\gamma$ embeds into $M$ via the exponential map (for a suitably short time). Call the image of this embedding $W$. Choose an open set $V$ with the property that $V\subseteq \overline{V}\subseteq W$ and let $U = M-\overline{V}$. Notice that $W\cup U = M$, so we can find partition of unity $\{\lambda_U,\lambda_W\}$ subordinate to $\{U,W\}$.

Now, the classification of vector bundles over circles is easy: There are precisely 2 of any rank - the trivial bundle of rank $k$ and the Möbius bundle + trivial bundle of rank $k-1$. The point is that both of these have (flat) metrics where the $0$ section ($\gamma$) is a geodesic.

Since $W$ is diffeomorphic to a vector bundle over the circle, we can assume it has a metric $g_W$ for which $\gamma$ is a geodesic. Now, pick any Riemannian metric $g_U$ on $U$. Finally, define the metric $g_M$ on $M$ by $\lambda_W g_W + \lambda_U g_U$. This is a convex sum of metrics, and hence is a metric. Near $\gamma$, $\lambda_U \equiv 0$ and $\lambda_W\equiv 1$, so the metric near $\gamma$ looks just like $g_W$, so $\gamma$ is a geodesic in $M$.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I expect that if $M$ is a (connected!) differentiable manifold and $\gamma_1, \gamma_2: S^1 \rightarrow M$ are any two smooth embeddings, there is a diffeomorphism $\Phi: M \rightarrow M$ such that $\gamma_2 = \Phi \circ \gamma_1$. If so, this gives a positive answer to your question restricted to smoothly embedded loops. And something similar should work for smooth embeddings of $\mathbb{R}$ with closed image.

Added: The above is certainly not generally valid: I seem to have forgotten about the fundamental group. It seems like it might still have a chance to hold in the simply connected case. (Also, in the case of surfaces, if you take a metric of constant curvature, I seem to recall that every homotopy class has a unique geodesic representative, so this obstruction is not a problem at least in that case.)

As for the second question: of course there are going to be many Riemannian metrics than geodesic curves: changing the metric in an open set bounded away from the geodesic will certainly not disturb that curve's being a geodesic. As for changes of metric which preserve all geodesic curves rather than just a given one, that's a more interesting question, but at least you can uniformly rescale the metric without affecting any of the geodesics.

share|improve this answer
2  
I don't think your expectation is correct. Consider $M = \mathbb{R}P^2$ and choose as $\gamma_1$ something representing a nontrivial element in $\pi_1$ (this can be chosen to be embedded) and $\gamma_2$ a small contractible loop (which can also be chosen to be embedded). Then no diffeomorphism of $\mathbb{R}P^2$ maps $\gamma_1$ to $\gamma_2$ because no group isomorphism of $\pi_1$ takes the nontrivial element to the trivial element. –  Jason DeVito Feb 17 '12 at 22:26
1  
In fact, I think if $\dim M \geq 3$, and $M$ is not simply connected, you can find such a $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$. (In $\dim M = 2$, you can't always assume your curves are embedded). –  Jason DeVito Feb 17 '12 at 22:29
    
@Jason: You're right. This was a rather naive thought, in retrospect. I wonder whether it's true in the simply connected case? –  Pete L. Clark Feb 18 '12 at 0:19
1  
If you take a nontrivial knot $K$ in $S^3$, then I believe the knot complement is not homeomorphic to the knot complement of an unknot. Thus, there can be no homeomorphism of $S^3$ taking $K$ to the unknot, since the homeomorphism restricted to the knot complements is still a homeomorphism. I don't know what happens if $\dim M \geq 4$ so that there are no knots. –  Jason DeVito Feb 18 '12 at 1:21
1  
@Riccardo: I don't think this should be the accepted answer. –  Pete L. Clark Feb 18 '12 at 7:37
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.