Let $(M, g, \nabla)$ be a Riemannian manifold (with $\nabla$ the Levi-Civita connection of $g$), and let {$E_i$} be a local orthonormal basis of vector fields ($g(E_i, E_j) = \delta_{ij} )$.

What can I say about $[E_i, E_j]$ or equivalently (using the torsion-free property of Levi-Civita connection) about $\nabla_{E_i} E_j$? Is it true that $[E_i, E_j]$ vanishes?

  • $\begingroup$ @Travis did you delete your answer? I can't find it anymore $\endgroup$ – Ngicco Feb 18 '17 at 9:31
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, but only temporarily. I've corrected and undeleted it. $\endgroup$ – Travis Willse Feb 18 '17 at 11:37

Given a local frame $(X_i)$, the Koszul formula gives an expression for $\nabla$ in terms of the derivatives of the metric coefficients and the commutation coefficients of the frame: $$\begin{multline}2 g(\nabla_{X_i} X_j, X_k) = X_i \cdot g(X_j, X_k) + X_j \cdot g(X_i, X_k) - X_k \cdot (X_i, X_j) \\ + g([X_i, X_j], X_k) - g([X_i, X_k], X_j) - g([X_j, X_k], X_i)\end{multline} .$$

If $(E_i)$ is orthonormal, by definition $g(E_j, E_k) = \delta_{jk}$ and so the first three terms on the right-hand side vanish, $$g(\nabla_{E_i} E_j, E_k) = \frac{1}{2}\big(g([E_i, E_j], E_k) - g([E_i, E_k], E_j) - g([E_j, E_k], E_i)\big) ,$$ and we can recover an simple explicit formula for the covariant derivative in terms of the metric and the Lie bracket alone: $$\begin{align}\nabla_{E_i} E_j &= \sum_k g(\nabla_{E_i} E_j, E_k) E_k \\ &= \frac{1}{2}\sum_k \big(g([E_i, E_j], E_k) - g([E_i, E_k], E_j) - g([E_j, E_k], E_i)\big) E_k\end{align}$$ In particular, we can see that $g(\nabla_{E_i} E_j, E_k)$ is skew in $j, k$. (On the other hand, for coordinate frames $(X_i) = (\partial_{x^i})$, it is the other three terms that automatically vanish, giving the usual coordinate formula for Christoffel symbols.)

Now, if $[E_i, E_j] = 0$ for all $i, j$, then $\nabla_{E_i} E_j = 0$ for all $i, j$, and so substituting in the definition of curvature gives that the restriction of $g$ to the domain of the local frame is actually flat, so this is not generally true. (On the other hand, as levap's answer shows, even for flat $g$ the brackets need not vanish.)

  • $\begingroup$ Can you show explicitly the first relation? Since, if $\nabla _{E_i} E_j = \sum f_{ij}^a E_a$, one can say $$0 = \nabla _{E_k} g(E_i,E_j)= g( \nabla _{E_k} E_i, E_j) + g(E_i, \nabla _{E_k} E_j) = f_{ki}^j+ f_{kj}^i $$ which is not the skew-symmetry property. I am sure I make a mistake. $\endgroup$ – Ngicco Feb 17 '17 at 12:47
  • $\begingroup$ No, it was my original answer that was mistaken. I've corrected it. $\endgroup$ – Travis Willse Feb 18 '17 at 11:36

The commutator doesn't have to vanish, even if the metric is flat. For example, the calculations here show that $[\hat{r}, \hat{\theta}] = \frac{1}{r} \hat{\theta}$ when

$$ \hat{r} = \cos \theta \hat{x} + \sin \theta \hat{y},\\ \hat{\theta} = -\sin \theta \hat{x} + \cos \theta \hat{y} $$

is the local orthonormal frame associated to the polar coordinate system on $\mathbb{R}^2 \setminus \{ 0 \}$ (with the standard metric).


Actually it should work just by Schwartz's theorem on exchanging second derivatives in $\mathbb{R}^n$:

in fact, what you are doing is choosing local coordinates $x_{i}$ such that $E_i=\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}$, and thus, around the point where you have defined your basis, you have $[E_i, E_j](f)=(\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\frac{\partial}{\partial x^j} - \frac{\partial}{\partial x^j}\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i})(f)=0$ for any $f\in C^{\infty}(M)$, due to Schwartz indeed.

  • $\begingroup$ Surely using coordinate vector fields, there is no problem. However, it is always possible? Generally speaking, coordinate vector fields are not an orthonormal basis $g(\partial_i, \partial_j) = g_{ij}$ which can be not equal to $\delta_{ij}$. $\endgroup$ – Ngicco Feb 17 '17 at 12:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is not true in general: In fact, one can only choose coordinates $(x^i)$ (around an arbitrary point) such that $E_i = \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}$ if the manifold is locally flat! $\endgroup$ – Travis Willse Feb 17 '17 at 12:05
  • $\begingroup$ If you can choose coordinates so that $\partial \over \partial x_i$ is orthonormal, your manifold is flat ie locally isometric to an Euclidian space. $\endgroup$ – Thomas Feb 17 '17 at 18:39
  • $\begingroup$ @Travis. Apparently our comments are the same... $\endgroup$ – Thomas Feb 18 '17 at 6:37

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.