$$\mathbf{A} = A^{1}\mathbf{e_{1}}+A^{2}\mathbf{e_{2}}$$ $$A= \sum_{i=1}^{n}A^{i}\mathbf{e_{i}}$$

Taking the derivative wrt the tangent basis vector and dropping the summation by Einstein convention: $$\left ( \frac{\partial A^{i}}{\partial x^{j}}+\Gamma _{jk}^{i}A^{k}\right )\mathbf{e_{i}}$$

The covariant derivative of this contravector is

$$\nabla_{j}A^{i}\equiv \frac{\partial A^{i}}{\partial x^{j}}+\Gamma _{jk}^{i} A^{k}$$

Now, I would like to determine the covariant derivative of a covariant vector but ran into some problem. Namely, with the red highlighted parts in bold which does not appear in my sketch.

$$\nabla_{j}A_{i}\equiv\frac{\partial A_{i}}{\partial x^{j}}{\color{Red} -}\Gamma_{{\color{Red} ij}}^{{\color{Red} k}}A_{k}$$ which the above is a covariant derivative of a covariant vector.

Any help is appreciated.

  • $\begingroup$ Your formula seems incomplete. Should there not be a contraction of the $A_i$ with the Christoffel symbols? $\endgroup$ – Muphrid Oct 27 '15 at 3:22
  • $\begingroup$ ah yes! Thanks for the heads up. Haven't had my cup of coffee. $\endgroup$ – Mathematicing Oct 27 '15 at 3:26
  • $\begingroup$ Your indices on $A$ should be down, not up in that formula. Notice that means it's impossible to contract $A$ with the index $i$ in the Christoffel symbol. $\endgroup$ – Muphrid Oct 27 '15 at 3:28
  • $\begingroup$ Edit has been done. $\endgroup$ – Mathematicing Oct 27 '15 at 3:40
  • $\begingroup$ Okay, do you still have a question? Your formula is now correct, save for the index still being up in the partial derivative. $\endgroup$ – Muphrid Oct 27 '15 at 3:42

I will proceed with Einstein summation as you have.

Let $\partial_i$ denote $\dfrac{\partial}{\partial x^i}$. Let $u^m$ be a contravector and $\mu_m$ a covector.

First note that by the product rule, \begin{align} \partial_i(\mu_m u^m) &= (\partial_i \mu_m)u^m + \mu_m(\partial_i u^m)\\ \mathrm{So\ by\ rearranging,}\quad (\partial_i \mu_m)u^m &= \partial_i(\mu_m u^m) - \mu_m(\partial_i u^m) \end{align} We now proceed by finding how $\nabla_i\mu_m$ acts on an arbitrary vector to show how it acts on all vectors. (The covariant derivative of a covector is itself a covector, i.e. a map that acts on vectors, so this is precisely what we must find out.) \begin{align} (\nabla_i\mu_m)(u^m) &= \partial_i (\mu_m u^m) - \mu_m(\nabla_i u^m)\\ &= \partial_i (\mu_m u^m) - \mu_m(\partial_iu^m + \Gamma_{ij}^m u^j) \mathrm{\quad(by\ the\ formula\ given\ in\ your\ question)}\\ &= (\partial_i\mu_m)u^m - \Gamma_{ij}^m \mu_m u^j \mathrm{\quad(by\ the\ product\ rule\ above)} \end{align} By the summation convention, we have that $(\partial_i\mu_m)u^m - \Gamma_{ij}^m \mu_m u^j = (\partial_i\mu_m)u^m - \Gamma_{ij}^p \mu_p u^j$. (As the two terms in the equation are linked by subtraction, we do not change anything by re-labelling the second $m$ index to another letter.) In the same way, we relabel the $j$ to $m$. $$(\nabla_i\mu_m)(u^m) = (\partial_i\mu_m)u^m - \Gamma_{im}^p \mu_p u^m$$ As the contravector was arbitrary, this shows that $$\nabla_i\mu_m = \partial_i\mu_m- \Gamma_{im}^p \mu_p$$


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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