2
$\begingroup$

For functions on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, applying chain rule and taking partial derivatives is straight forward. I am a bit confused about how this concept can be extended to functions defined on manifolds. To better explain my question, first I'll give a, rather well known, example of a real valued function on $\mathbb{R}^2$, and then an example of a function on a mainfold, which I need to understand precisely.

Let $f:\mathbb{R}^2\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$, its derivative can be written as, \begin{equation*} \label{eq:1} \begin{aligned} \frac{d}{dt}f(x_{1},x_{2}) &= \frac{d}{dx_{1}}f(x_{1},x_{2}) \frac{d}{dt} x_{1} + \frac{d}{dx_{2}}f(x_{1},x_{2}) \frac{d}{dt} x_{2}\\ &= \left( d_{x_{1}}f \right) \dot{x}_{1} + \left( d_{x_{2}}f \right) \dot{x}_{2} \end{aligned} \end{equation*} One way to interpret $d_{x_{1}}f$ is that it represents how $f$ changes in the direction of the coordinate axis $x_{1}$, also known as Lie derivative.

Now here is the actual question I want to ask. For a function on a manifold, in my case, I have a Lie algebra valued function $f: SO(3)\times SO(3) \rightarrow \mathfrak{so(3)}$, is this precisely correct to write the derivative in the following way? Let $R,R_d\in SO(3)$, \begin{equation*} \label{eq:2} \begin{aligned} \frac{d}{dt}f(R,R_d) &= \frac{d}{d_R}f(R,R_d) \dot R + \frac{d}{dR_{d}}f(R,R_d) \dot R_d\\ &= \left( d_{R}f \right) \dot{R} + \left( d_{R_{d}}f \right) \dot{R}_{d}\\ &= \left( T_{R}f \right) \dot{R} + \left( T_{R_{d}}f \right) \dot{R}_{d}, \end{aligned} \end{equation*} where $T_{R}f$ is the tangent space of $f$ at point $R$. This does not seem correct, or not mathematically precise because of the following two reasons,

  1. $d_R f$, strictly speaking, is not the change of $f$ in the direction of the "coordinate" $R$, as this function is geometric, and defined in a coordinate free way. This means the second line of the above equation does not make sense?
  2. $T_{R}f$ is the tangent space of $f$ at point $R$, and $T_{R_d}f$ is the tangent space of $f$ at point $R_d$, and we can't simply add vectors belonging to different tangent spaces. This means the third line of the equation does not make sense either?

How can I write this derivative in a mathematically (geometrically) correct way? For some reason I don't want to merge $\dot R$, $\dot R_d$ with the term preceding it. In other words, I want to keep the term appearing because of chain rule separate with the rest of the terms.

The reason I have introduced the notion of tangent spaces is because I think this is the right way to define derivatives of mainfolds. For example let $\mathcal{M}$, and $\mathcal{N}$, be manifolds, and let $f:\mathcal{M}\rightarrow \mathcal{N}$, the derivative, also called the push forward map, is defined as $D_f: T\mathcal{M}\rightarrow T\mathcal{N}$, where $T\mathcal{M}$, and $T\mathcal{N}$ are the tanget bundle of the manifolds $\mathcal{M}$, and $\mathcal{N}$, respectively. Even under this abstract definition of derivative, how can we defined derivative of a function on a manifold, while keeping the terms appearing because of chain rule separate?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Are you familiar with the following definition: Let $f:M\to N$ be a smooth map between manifolds $M$ and $N$ and $p$ be a point in $M$. The differential of $f$ at $p$ is defined as a linear map $df_p:T_pM\to T_{f(p)}N$ which takes a velocity $[\gamma]$ in $M$ to $[f\circ\gamma]$? $\endgroup$ – caffeinemachine Jul 11 '18 at 8:05
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your reply. I have a very basic knowledge of differential geometry, and I'm trying to learn more. I have seen this definition, but I think my understanding of this definition is not precise yet. In other words, under this definition how can I write (and compute) the following $\frac{d}{dt}(R,R_d) = (?) \dot R + (?) \dot R_d$, where each (?) needs to be replaced by some term. I want to keep $\dot R$, and $\dot R_d$ separate with rest of the term. Again, thanks for your reply, and I'd be very grateful if you give some more insight into it! $\endgroup$ – a-deel Jul 16 '18 at 17:56
  • $\begingroup$ I have added the basics to cover the notion of the tangent space and differential as an answer. Once you have read and understood these concepts, I can further assist with the question that you have asked in the OP. When reading my answer try to understand everything in terms of pictures. $\endgroup$ – caffeinemachine Jul 16 '18 at 19:39
  • $\begingroup$ There might be some minor mistakes here and there including typos. I hope it doesn't cause much hindrance in reading. $\endgroup$ – caffeinemachine Jul 16 '18 at 19:40
1
$\begingroup$

$\newcommand{\id}{\text{id}}$ $\newcommand{\vp}{\varphi}$ $\newcommand{\at}{\big|}$ $\newcommand{\wh}{\widehat}$ $\newcommand{\kin}{\text{kin}}$ $\newcommand{\lrat}[1]{\left.#1\right|}$ $\newcommand{\pd}[2]{\partial{#1}/\partial{#2}}$ $\newcommand{\R}{\mathbf R}$ $\newcommand{\C}{\mathbf C}$ $\newcommand{\Q}{\mathbb Q}$ $\newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb Z}$ $\newcommand{\mc}{\mathcal}$ $\newcommand{\set}[1]{\{#1\}}$ $\newcommand{\lrp}[1]{\left(#1\right)}$ $\newcommand{\lrset}[1]{\left\{#1\right\}}$

Notation

For a smooth map $f:\R^n\to \R^m$, we write $Df_a$ to denote the derivative of $f$ at a point $a\in \R^n$.

(Kinematic) Tangent Space

Definition. Let $p$ be a point on a smooth $n$-manifold $M$. Define $\Gamma_p$ as $$ \Gamma_p=\set{\gamma:I\to M~|~I\text{ is open in } \R, 0\in I, \gamma(0)=p, \gamma \text{ is smooth}} $$ We define a relation $\sim_p$ on $\Gamma_p$ as follows: For two elements $\gamma_1,\gamma_2\in \Gamma_p$, write $\gamma_1\sim_p\gamma_2$ if there exists a chart $(U,\vp)$ containing $p$ such that $$ D(\vp\circ \gamma_1)_{0}=D(\vp\circ \gamma_2)_{0} $$ This is an equivalence relation on $\Gamma_p$. The kinematic tangent space $(T_pM)_{\kin}$ at $p$ is the set of all the equivalence classes of $\Gamma_p$ under $\sim_p$. The elements of the kinematic tangent space are called as the kinematic tangent vectors.

Note. There are many ways to define the notion of the tangent space at a point on a smooth manifold. Here we are using one particular way and hence the qualification "kinematic".

Definition. Let $p$ be a point in a smooth $n$-manifold $M$ and let $(U,\vp)$ be a chart on $M$ with $p\in U$. Let $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ be in $\Gamma_p$. The addition $[\gamma_1]+[\gamma_2]$ in $(T_pM)_{\kin}$ is defined as $[\gamma]$, where $\gamma\in\Gamma_p$ is such that $$ D(\vp\circ\gamma_1)_0+D(\vp\circ\gamma_2)_0=D(\vp\circ\gamma)_0 $$ Given $\lambda\in\R$ and an element $\gamma_0\in\Gamma_p$, the scalar multiplication $\lambda[\gamma']$ in $(T_pM)_{\kin}$ is defined as $[\gamma]$, where $\gamma\in\Gamma_p$ is such that $$ \lambda D(\vp\circ \gamma')_0=D(\vp\circ\gamma)_0 $$

By the following two lemmas, the definition of $[\gamma]$ does not depend on the choice of the chart $(U,\vp)$, and such a $\gamma$ exists. This makes $(T_pM)_{\kin}$ into an $n$-dimensional real vector space.

Lemma 1. Let $p$ be a point in a smooth $n$-manifold $M$ and $(U,\vp)$ and $(V,\psi)$ are two charts on $M$ containing the point $p$. Let $\gamma_1,\gamma_2,\gamma,\gamma'\in \Gamma_p$ and $\lambda$ be any real number. Then $$ D(\vp\circ \gamma_1)_{0}+D(\vp\circ \gamma_2)_{0}=D(\vp\circ \gamma)_{0} \iff D(\psi\circ\gamma_1)_{0}+D(\psi\circ\gamma_2)_{0}=D(\psi\circ\gamma)_{0} $$ and $$ \lambda D(\vp\circ\gamma)_{0}=D(\vp\circ\gamma')_{0} \iff \lambda D(\psi\circ\gamma)_{0}=D(\psi\circ\gamma')_{0} $$

Proof. Trivial by the chain rule. $\blacksquare$

Lemma 2. Let $p$ be a point in a smooth $n$-manifold $M$ and $(U,\vp)$ be a chart on $M$ with $p\in U$. Then $$ \set{D(\vp\circ\gamma)_{0}(1):\gamma\in\Gamma_p}=\R^n $$ Therefore, the map $[\gamma]\mapsto D(\vp\circ \gamma)_0$, where $[\gamma]\in T_pM$ and $(\vp,U)$ is a fixed chart about the point $p$, is a vector space isomorphism,

Proof. Let $ v\in\R^n$. Define $\gamma_{ v}:\R\to M$ as $$ \gamma_{ v}(t)=\vp^{-1}(\vp(p)+t v), \quad \forall t\in\R $$ Note that $\gamma_{ v}$ is a smooth map and thus $\gamma_{ v}\in\Gamma_p$. It is also clear that $D(\vp\circ\gamma_{ v})_{0}= v$, whence the desired result is immediate. $\blacksquare$

Theorem. Let $p$ be a point on a smooth $n$-manifold $M$ and $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ be two elements of $\Gamma_p$. Then $\gamma_1\sim_p\gamma_2$ if and only if $(f\circ \gamma_1)'(0)=(f\circ\gamma_2)'(0)$ for all smooth functions $f:M\to \R$.

Proof. First assume that $\gamma_1\sim_p \gamma_2$. So there is a chart $(U,\vp)$ with $p\in U$ such that $D(\vp\circ \gamma_1)_{0}=D(\vp\circ \gamma_2)_{0}$. Say $\vp(p)= a\in\R^n$. Let $f:M\to \R$ be any smooth function. We need to show that $(f\circ \gamma_1)'(0)=(f\circ \gamma_2)'(0)$. Note that $$ D(f\circ \gamma_i)_{0} = D((f\circ \vp^{-1})\circ(\vp\circ \gamma_i))_{0} = D(f\circ \vp^{-1})_{ a}D(\vp\circ \gamma_i)_{0}, \quad i=1,2 $$ immediately leading to the desired result. For the other direction let $(U,\vp)$ be any chart about $p$ on $M$. By hypothesis we have $D(\pi_i\circ\vp\circ \gamma_1)_{0}=D(\pi_i\circ\vp\circ\gamma_2)_{0}$ for all $1\leq i\leq n$, whence we have $D(\vp\circ \gamma_1)_{0}=D(\vp\circ \gamma_2)_{0}$ and we are done. Thus $(f\circ \gamma_i)'(0)=(g\circ \gamma_i)'(0)$ for $i=1,2$. $\blacksquare$

Basis of the Tangent Space

Let $M$ be a smooth $n$-manifold and $(U,\vp)$ be a smooth chart on $M$ about a point $p\in M$. Let $( e_1,\ldots, e_n)$ be the standard basis of $\R^n$. For each $1\leq i\leq n$, we define $$ \lrat{\pd{}{\vp_i}}_{p}=[\gamma_i] $$ where $\gamma_i:(-\varepsilon, \varepsilon)\to M$ is a curve with $\gamma_i(0)=p$ such that the composite $\vp\circ \gamma_i:(-\varepsilon, \varepsilon)\to \R^n$ is the curve $t\mapsto te_i$.

Since the usual coordinates $x_1 , \ldots, x_n:\R^n\to \R$ together constitute a smooth chart on $M$, we can now talk about the expression $\lrat{\pd{}{x_i}}_{a}$ for any point $a\in \R^n$.

Definition. Let $M$ be a smooth manifold. Then we can make $TM$ ``act" on $C^\infty(M)$ by defining $$ [\gamma]f=\lrat{\frac{d(f\circ \gamma)}{dt}}_{t=0}$$ It can be easily seen that this is well-defined.

It should be clear from Lemma 2 that $\lrat{\pd{}{\vp_1}}_{p},\ldots, \lrat{\pd{}{\vp_n}}_{p}$ forms a basis for $(T_pM)_\kin$.

The Differential Of a Smooth Map

Definition. Let $F:M\to N$ be a smooth map and $p$ be a point on $M$. The differential of $F$ at $p$ is the map $dF_p:(T_pM)_{\kin}\to (T_{F(p)}N)_{\kin}$ defined as $$dF_p([\gamma])=[F\circ \gamma]$$ for all $[\gamma]\in (T_pM)_{\kin}$.

It should be noted that is $(U, \vp)$ is a chart on $M$ about a point $p\in M$, and $\vp(p)=a$, then. $$ \lrat{\pd{}{\vp_i}}_p= d\vp^{-1}\at_{ a}\lrp{\lrat{\pd{}{x_i}}_{ a}} $$ Further, given any $f\in C^\infty(U)$, we have the following definition $$ \lrat{\pd{}{\vp_i}}_p f= \lrat{\pd{}{x_i}}_{ a}(f\circ\vp^{-1}) = \pd{\wh f}{x_i}(\wh p) $$ where, again, $ a=\vp(p)$.

Exercise. Let $M$ and $N$ be smooth manifolds and $F:M\to N$ be a diffeomorphism. Then $dF_p:T_pM\to T_{F(p)}N$ is an isomorphism.

Exercise. Chain Rule. Let $M$, $N$ and $P$ be smooth manifolds and $F:M\to N$ and $G:N\to P$ be a smooth maps. For each $p\in M$, we have $$d(G\circ F)_p=dG_{F(p)}\circ dF_p$$

$\endgroup$

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.