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.

Let $M$ be a smooth manifold. If $\nabla$ is a linear connection on $M$, I would like to induce a unique linear connection on an open subset $U\subseteq M$. I know that for all $p\in U$ there is a natural isomorphism $T_pU\cong T_pM$, so I can restrict global vector fields to local vector fields on $U$. Unfortunately there are some local vector fields on $U$ that don't came from a restriction of global vector fields.

For this reason I can't find a reasonable linear connection $\nabla^U$ over $U$ induced by $\nabla$. I need help.

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

The connection $\nabla$ on a manifold $M$ is a local operator. The value of $\nabla_X(Y)$ at a point $p \in M$ depends only on $X_p$ and the value of $Y$ in an arbitrary small neighborhood around $p$. This is enough to define the connection on $TU$ when $U \subset M$ is an open subset, without extending the vector fields involved to the whole of $M$. More generally, you may want to read about the pullback of a connection which allows you to restrict a connection to more general submanifolds and even more.

share|improve this answer
    
The proposition about the local behavior of the connection says: If Y and Z are GLOBAL vector fields that coincide on an open neighborhood of $p$ then $\nabla_XY=\nabla_XZ$ (The same thing is true for $X$). I don't understand in which way I can apply this statement to the problem. –  Dubious Dec 8 '12 at 17:58

Take an open cover $\{U_j\}$ of $U$ given by relatively compact open sets in $U$ and a partition of unity $\{\phi_j\}$ subordinated to $\{U_j\}$ (i.e. $\mathrm{supp}\phi_j\subset U_j$).

For any vector-field $X$ on $U$, $X=\sum \phi_j\cdot X$ and $\phi_j X$ is a vector-field on $M$. Therefore we can define $$\nabla^U_XY=\sum\nabla_{\phi_j X}Y$$ and $$\nabla^U_YX=\sum\nabla_Y\phi_j X$$ The definition is locally meaningful, because the covering is locally finite, and so are the sums.

Hope it helps.

share|improve this answer
    
why $\phi_jX$ is a vector field on $M$? For every $p\in U$ we have that $(\phi_jX)_p=\phi(p)X_p$, but if $p$ is in $X\setminus U$ what is the sense? –  Dubious Dec 8 '12 at 17:42
1  
The point is that on $X\setminus U$, we have $\phi(p) = 0$, so it doesn't matter what you choose for $X_p$ - even if you choose some horribly discontinuous thing for $X_p$, $\phi(p) X_p = 0_p$. So $\phi X$ is still a smooth vector field on all of $M$. –  Jason DeVito Dec 8 '12 at 18:01
1  
@Galoisfan: Well, I'm thinking more about $\phi X$ than $\sum \phi_j X$. Note that $\phi X$ is not an extension of $X$ to all of $M$ because there are points $p\in U$ with $\phi(p)X_p \neq X_p$. It's more like: Shrink $X$ to an even smaller open subset and then extend the smaller thing to all of $M$. –  Jason DeVito Dec 8 '12 at 18:16
1  
No, $\sum\phi_j X$ is the vector-field $X$, which is a section of $TM$ on $U$; but the things you add up, $\phi_j X$ for each $j$, can be extended to global sections, just define them to be zero outside $U$. A locally finite series of global sections is by no means bound to be a global section, unless you have some kind of uniform estimates. –  wisefool Dec 8 '12 at 18:18
1  
Actually, you can combine what I'm saying with what levap said... with the terminology of Jason DeVito, you shrink down $X$ considering it only around a point $p$ and cutting it off with a smooth function, then you extend this things to be 0 outside, obtaining a global object. The germ of this vector-field in $p$ and the germ of the original one coincide, therefore you can define the connection on germs and, by the locality property, you know it's well defined and that everything works. –  wisefool Dec 8 '12 at 18:21

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.