4
$\begingroup$

I'm having the same problem as it was questioned here.

I can't get throught the step where I need to show that $\nabla_{E_i}E_j (p)=0$. It only leads to $$ \nabla_{E_i}E_j(p)=\sum_{lk}^n a_{il}(0)\dfrac{\partial b_jk}{\partial x_l}(0)\partial x_k(p) $$ which I can't show that equals zero.

On the linked question, there is also the indication that $\nabla_{E_i}E_j (E_k)=\Gamma^k_{ij}$. This could lead that $\nabla_{E_i}E_j (E_k)(p)=\Gamma^k_{ij}(p)=0$, but $\nabla_{E_i}E_j (E_k)(p)$ is not equal to $\nabla_{E_i}E_j (p)$ which is the one I need.

Can someone help me?

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

That more or less follows from definition. Note that $E_i(q)$ is given by parallel transport along the geodesic $\gamma$ with $\gamma(0) = p$ and $\gamma(1)=q$. Let $\gamma$ be a geodesic such that $\gamma(0) = p$ and $\gamma'(0) = E_i(p)$. Then we have $\gamma'(t) = E_i(\gamma(t))$ and so

$$\nabla_{E_i} E_j (\gamma(t)) = \nabla_{\gamma'} E_j (\gamma(t)) = 0$$

for all $t$, since $E_j$ is by definition the parallel transport along $\gamma$. In particular if you set $t=0$, we have $\nabla_{E_i} E_j (p) = 0$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I'll check this later, I'm really sleepy right now. Thanks! :) $\endgroup$
    – Marra
    May 16, 2014 at 3:01
0
$\begingroup$

Let $v=\sum_iv_iE_i(p)\in T_pM$. Then, by the linearity of $g$, $$ g(\nabla_{E_i}E_j(p),v)=\sum_kv_kg(\nabla_{E_i}E_j(p),E_k(p))=\sum_kv_k\Gamma_{ij}^k(p)=0,$$ which implies that $\nabla_{E_i}E_j(p)=0$ by the arbitrary of $v$.

$\endgroup$

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.