I've been reading Olver's Applications of Lie groups to differential equations and did not understand the excerp where the autor explains that "[...] every nonvanishing vector field is locally equivalent to the infinitesimal generator of a group of translations."

In fact, I did not understand what is the relation between this affirmation and the Proposition 1.29.

If anyone there is reading this book or knows how to answer to this question, please I would appreciate very much your help.


There are two points ( and I think this is already in Olver on that page, so I'm not sure how much I'm going to help you here )

  1. if a vector field $X$ has $X(p) \neq 0$ then there exists some system of coordinates for which $X = \frac{\partial}{\partial x^1}$ on some neighborhood of $p$. This is the very unexciting cannonical form for a non-vanishing vector field. I think Olver is nice to read on all this in his other text Equivalence, Invariants, and Symmetry. Chapter 1 is a great overview of manifold theory.
  2. The first coordinate derivative is a vector which generates a translation. As described, the exponential of $X$ which when acting on the coordinate function $x^j$ either does nothing ($j \neq 1$) or translates $x^1 \mapsto x^1+a$. Formally, $$ exp(aX)x^1 = (I+aX+\frac{1}{2}a^2X^2+ \cdots )x^1 = x^1+a $$ as $X(x^1)=1$ so all the higher derivatives vanish.

It's a local equivalence because the result that $X$ can be written as the first coordinate derivative is only possible in some neighborhood. There is much more to say about all this, I hope you continue asking questions...

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, Cook. Now I'm seeing the other Olver's book ( where it is better ). Well, I was wondering if is there any ( or could exist ) condition where we could find that a vector field could generate a rotational flow, for example... I mean, I'm not sure about it; I don't' even know if this question makes any sense. $\endgroup$ – Poli Tolstov Jun 4 '14 at 12:54
  • $\begingroup$ @Poli yes, it is possible, that is hidden in the change of coordinates. I think the example to think about would be $x\partial_y-y\partial_x$ which is up to a scalar multiple $\partial_{\theta}$. In the polar coordinates that vector field generates a translation in the angular coordinate whereas in $x,y$ it is what we would call a rotation. That's the trick, the symmetry becomes a translation whilst the non-linear aspect is tucked away in the coordinate map. $\endgroup$ – James S. Cook Jun 4 '14 at 15:08
  • $\begingroup$ About the Theorem (on the book you mentioned): there he says that you consider a point $x$ and in this point the vector field $\bf{v}$ is nonvanishing. After, he says that in a neighborhood of this point there is another point $y$ that is represented by a local coordinate system where we can write $y=(y^{1},...,y^{m})$, right? This vector field $\bf{v}$ can be written in terms of this new local coordinates $\{{y^{i}}\}$ finding that its "face" is $\bf{v}={\partial}/{\partial}y^{1}$... I've other question: what is the necessity of knowing that the $\bf{v}$ is nonvanishing in a point $x$? $\endgroup$ – Poli Tolstov Jun 4 '14 at 15:11
  • $\begingroup$ Well, I suppose the point $y$ and the coordinate map $y$ ought to be distinguished, there might be a slight abuse of notation. Notational quibbles aside, the point it that if we follow his flow-construction then the $y$ coordinate system reproduced $v$ as $\partial/\partial y^1$ at the point where $v$ is non-vanishing. If $v$ were zero then that wouldn't allow the flow I think. Oh, the example I mentioned in the last comment seems to be on page 29 of the Yellow Olver book. $\endgroup$ – James S. Cook Jun 4 '14 at 15:19
  • $\begingroup$ So the form of this new vector field (in terms of this new coord. system) is $v={\partial}/{\partial}y^1$ in a neighborhood of $y$ that includes the point $x$? I am asking this because in my former question I was not worried about the 'nonvanishing' fact, but that, in first place, we consider the vector field evaluated in a initial point $x$. If we consider that the necessity of the initial evaluation of the $v$ in one point is due to the fact we need to guarantee the new $v$ is the same even in a neighborhood where it is defined, I think the answer for the 1st question (this comment) is yes. $\endgroup$ – Poli Tolstov Jun 4 '14 at 15:43

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.