8
$\begingroup$

$\newcommand{\tr}{\operatorname{tr}}$ $\newcommand{\M}{\mathcal{M}}$ $\newcommand{\Ric}{\operatorname{Ric}} $ $\newcommand{\div}{\operatorname{div}} $

Let $\M$ be a Riemannian manifold, $\nabla^{T\M}$ is its Levi-Civita connection. Given $X \in \Gamma(T\M)$, we consider $\nabla^{T\M} X$ as a linear map (vector bundle morphism) $T\M \to T\M$.

Is it true that for all $X,Y \in \Gamma(T\M)$ $$\Ric(Y,X)=\tr (\nabla^{T\M}Y) \cdot \tr(\nabla^{T\M}X) -\tr ( \nabla^{T\M}Y \circ \nabla^{T\M}X), \tag{1}$$

where $\Ric$ is the Ricci curvature of $\M$.

Motivation: I somehow derived (in a very cumbersome way) the equality $$\int_{\M} \Ric(Y,X)= \int_{\M} \tr (\nabla^{T\M}Y) \cdot \tr(\nabla^{T\M}X) -\tr ( \nabla^{T\M}Y \circ \nabla^{T\M}X) , \tag{2}$$

(I assume $\M$ is closed and oriented; the integration is w.r.t the Riemannian volume form of $\M$).

Edit:

As observed by levap, equality $(1)$ is false. Here is a proof of equality $(2)$, based on a few lemmas in my answer:

First note that $\tr (\nabla^{T\M}Y)=\div Y,\tr (\nabla^{T\M}X)=\div X$, so equality $(2)$ is nothing but

$$\int_{\M} \Ric(Y,X)= \int_{\M} \div Y\cdot\div X -\tr ( \nabla^{T\M}Y \circ \nabla^{T\M}X) . \tag{3}$$

We now turn to analyse both summands of the RHS, up to divergence terms: (since the integral of a divergence is zero, this does not matter for the integral):

The first observation (by Anthony Carapetis) is that $$ (\mathrm{tr}_{13} \nabla^2 Y)(X) = \mathrm{div}(\nabla_X Y) - \mathrm{tr}(\nabla Y \circ \nabla X). \tag{4}$$

(For a proof, see lemma 2 in my answer).

For the other term, we use the identity $\div(fX)=f\div X+\tr(df \otimes X)$, for $f=\div Y$:

$$\div(\div Y X)=\div Y\div X+\tr\big(d\div Y \otimes X\big). \tag{5}$$ Combining equations $(4),(5)$ we obtain that equality $(3)$ is equivalent to

$$\int_{\M} \Ric(Y,X)= \int_{\M} -\tr\big(d\div Y \otimes X\big) +(\mathrm{tr}_{13} \nabla^2 Y)(X). \tag{6}$$

Now, we use $$ \tr\big(d\div Y \otimes X\big) = (\tr_{23} \nabla^2 Y)(X), \tag{7}$$ (See lemma 3 in my answer)

which implies $(6)$ is equivalent to

$$\int_{\M} \Ric(Y,X)= \int_{\M} (\mathrm{tr}_{13} \nabla^2 Y-\tr_{23} \nabla^2 Y)(X). \tag{8}$$

But, lemma 1 in my answer implies that now the integrands are equal: $$ \Ric(Y,X)= (\mathrm{tr}_{13} \nabla^2 Y-\tr_{23} \nabla^2 Y)(X).$$

To summarize, we showed the original integrands are the same up to divergence terms so their integrals are equal.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The integral version is what you get by writing out the Ricci curvature in terms of second covariant derivatives and then integrating by parts in the most obvious way. $\endgroup$ – Anthony Carapetis Dec 10 '17 at 14:09
  • $\begingroup$ In abstract indices it's simply $\mathrm {Rc}(X,Y) = X^j (\nabla_i \nabla_j Y^i - \nabla_j \nabla_i Y^i).$ Integrating by parts moves the outer derivatives on to $X$. It can be cumbersome to handle this kind of thing with index-free notation: the first term is something like like $$(\mathrm{tr}_{13} \nabla^2 Y)(X) = \mathrm{div}((\nabla Y)(X)) - \mathrm{tr}(\nabla Y \circ \nabla X),$$ and the integral of a divergence is zero. $\endgroup$ – Anthony Carapetis Dec 11 '17 at 12:35
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, I agree with your last formula, but I don't see how to handle similarly the first term $\tr (\nabla^{T\M}Y) \cdot \tr(\nabla^{T\M}X)=\div X \div Y$ in a useful way (as you can see in my edit, I tried something, but I am not sure it's helpful). Are you convinced that using the abstract indices gives a quick way to see this? (I really should learn how to use them properly). $\endgroup$ – Asaf Shachar Dec 11 '17 at 17:32
  • $\begingroup$ You're basically there, though I think you've dropped a sign somewhere. The integrands on both sides of $(6)$ are equal (after correcting the sign). Just check that $ \tr\big(d\div Y \otimes X\big) = (\tr_{23} \nabla^2 Y)(X),$ and then that $\Ric(Y,X) = (\tr_{23} \nabla^2 Y - \tr_{13} \nabla^2 Y)(X),$ which follows from the fact that $X,Z\mapsto R(X,Z)Y$ is twice the antisymmetric part of $\nabla^2 Y.$ $\endgroup$ – Anthony Carapetis Dec 12 '17 at 2:05
  • $\begingroup$ And yes, it's sometimes very helpful to do calculations in abstract index notation. In my experience the hardest part about it is convincing yourself it's not cheating - here the whole calculation is simply $$\int \Ric(X,Y) = \int X^j \nabla_i \nabla_j Y^i - X^j \nabla_j \nabla_i Y^i = \int - \nabla_i X^j \nabla_j Y^i + \nabla_j X^j \nabla_i Y^i,$$ which seems far too easy when compared to your writeup. $\endgroup$ – Anthony Carapetis Dec 12 '17 at 10:06
3
$\begingroup$

The right hand side is not tensorial in $X,Y$ so you definitely don't have a trivial equality. Consider for example the case $M = \mathbb{R}^n$ with the flat metric. The left hand side is zero but the right hand side is

$$ \operatorname{tr}(dX) \operatorname{tr}(dY) - \operatorname{tr}(dX \circ dY) $$

where we identify the vector fields $X,Y$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$ with smooth maps $X,Y \colon \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n$ and then the full covariant derivatives $\nabla X, \nabla Y$ are identified with the differentials $dX, dY$. When $n > 1$, the identity

$$ 0 = \operatorname{tr}(dX) \operatorname{tr}(dY) - \operatorname{tr}(dX \circ dY) $$

is false already for linear vector fields $X,Y$.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

I prove a few lemmas, required to establish the integral equality: $\newcommand{\tr}{\operatorname{tr}}$ $\newcommand{\M}{\mathcal{M}}$ $\newcommand{\Ric}{\operatorname{Ric}} $ $\newcommand{\div}{\operatorname{div}} $

Lemma 1:

$$\Ric(X,Y) = (\tr_{13} \nabla^2 Y - \tr_{23} \nabla^2 Y)(X)$$

Proof:

We first note that $$\nabla^2 Y(X,Z)-\nabla^2 Y(Z,X)=(\nabla_X \nabla_Z Y-\nabla_{\nabla_X Z}Y)-(\nabla_Z \nabla_X Y-\nabla_{\nabla_Z X}Y)=$$

$$\nabla_X \nabla_Z Y-\nabla_Z \nabla_X Y-\nabla_{(\nabla_X Z-\nabla_Z X)}Y=\nabla_X \nabla_Z Y-\nabla_Z \nabla_X Y-\nabla_{[X,Z]}Y=R(X,Z)Y.$$

Now,

$$ (\tr_{23} \nabla^2 Y - \tr_{13} \nabla^2 Y)(X)=\sum_i \langle \nabla^2 Y(X,e_i)-\nabla^2 Y(e_i,X),e_i \rangle=\sum_i \langle R(X,e_i)Y,e_i \rangle=$$

$$ -\sum_i \langle R(e_i,X)Y,e_i \rangle=-\Ric (X,Y).$$


Comment: Here is why $$\nabla^2 Y(X,Z)=\nabla_X \nabla_Z Y-\nabla_{\nabla_X Z}Y :\tag{1}$$

By definition, we have $\nabla^2 Y(X,Z):=(\nabla^{T^*M \otimes TM}_X \nabla Y)(Z).$

$$ \nabla^{TM}_X \big((\nabla^{TM} Y)(Z))=(\nabla^{T^*M \otimes TM}_X \nabla Y)(Z)+(\nabla^{TM} Y)(\nabla_X^{TM} Z),$$

which is equivalent to

$$ \nabla^{TM}_X \nabla_Z^{TM} Y= \nabla^2 Y(X,Z)+\nabla_{\nabla_X^{TM} Z}^{TM}Y.$$


Lemma 2: $$(\mathrm{tr}_{13} \nabla^2 Y)(X) = \mathrm{div}(\nabla_X Y) - \mathrm{tr}(\nabla Y \circ \nabla X). $$

Proof:

Using equation $(1)$, we get

$$(\mathrm{tr}_{13} \nabla^2 Y)(X)=\sum_i \langle \nabla^2 Y(e_i,X),e_i \rangle=\sum_i \langle \nabla_{e_i} \nabla_X Y-\nabla_{\nabla_{e_i} X}Y,e_i \rangle=$$

$$ \sum_i \langle \nabla_{e_i} (\nabla_X Y),e_i \rangle-\sum_i \langle \nabla_{\nabla_{e_i} X}Y,e_i \rangle=$$

$$ \mathrm{div}(\nabla_X Y)-\sum_i \langle \nabla Y(\nabla_{e_i} X),e_i \rangle=$$

$$ \mathrm{div}(\nabla_X Y)-\sum_i \langle \nabla Y(\nabla X(e_i)),e_i \rangle=$$

$$ \mathrm{div}(\nabla_X Y)-\sum_i \langle (\nabla Y \circ \nabla X)(e_i),e_i \rangle=\mathrm{div}(\nabla_X Y) - \mathrm{tr}(\nabla Y \circ \nabla X).$$


$\newcommand{\tr}{\operatorname{tr}}$ $\newcommand{\M}{\mathcal{M}}$ $\newcommand{\Ric}{\operatorname{Ric}} $ $\newcommand{\div}{\operatorname{div}} $

Lemma 3:

$$ \tr\big(d\div Y \otimes X\big) = (\tr_{23} \nabla^2 Y)(X).$$

Proof:

Let $p \in M$. Let $e_i$ be a frame induced by normal coordinates centered at $p$. In particular, $e_i(p)$ is an orthonormal basis for $T_pM$, and $\nabla_{e_j} {e_i}=0$.

On the one hand

$$A:=(\tr_{23} \nabla^2 Y)(X)= \sum_i \langle \nabla^2 Y(X,e_i),e_i \rangle=\sum_i \langle \nabla_X \nabla_{e_i} Y-\nabla_{\nabla_X {e_i}}Y,e_i \rangle= \tag{1*}$$

$$ \sum_{ij} X_j \langle \nabla_{e_j} \nabla_{e_i} Y-\nabla_{\nabla_{e_j} {e_i}}Y,e_i \rangle=\sum_{ij} X_j \langle \nabla_{e_j} \nabla_{e_i} Y,e_i \rangle=\sum_j X_ja_j,$$

where

$$ a_j=\sum_i \langle \nabla_{e_j} \nabla_{e_i} Y,e_i \rangle \tag{2*}$$

On the other hand,

$$B:=\tr\big(d\div Y \otimes X\big)=\sum_j \langle (d\div Y)(e_j)X,e_j \rangle=\sum_j \langle b_jX,e_j \rangle=\sum_j b_jX_j, \tag{3*}$$

where

$$ b_j:=(d\div Y)(e_j)=e_j \cdot \div Y=e_j \cdot \sum_i \langle \nabla_{e_i}Y,e_i \rangle=\sum_i e_j \cdot \langle \nabla_{e_i}Y,e_i \rangle \tag{4*}=$$

$$ \sum_i \big( \langle \nabla_{e_j}\nabla_{e_i}Y,e_i \rangle+ \langle \nabla_{e_i}Y,\nabla_{e_j} e_i \rangle \big)=\sum_i \langle \nabla_{e_j}\nabla_{e_i}Y,e_i \rangle=a_j.$$

$\endgroup$

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.