Last update: 17.03.2005, 12:30 CET
Notations added in (3.1-4), Remark added in Sect. 4.
While tensors determine their components relative to a given basis uniquely the converse is not true. The reason is that one can fix one or several indices the result being components of a tensor of lower order. Therefore tensor components require additional information about the meaning of the indices: blocked or free. Neglecting this ambiguity is the reason of some confounding in literature.
Example
S.M. Carroll [1; p.89] introduces "vielbein" coefficients eμa
with the following words:
The vielbeins
eμa
thus serve double duty
as the components of the coordinate basis vectors in terms of the orthonormal
basis vectors, and as components of the orthonormal basis one-forms in terms
of the coordinate basis one-forms; while the inverse vielbeins . . .
Thus, we have to distinguish several cases for eνa :
(I)
the case of single coefficients: The indices ν and a are fixed ,
(II)
the case of components of the coordinate basis vectors: Here the index a is deblocked, and
(III)
the case of components of the orthonormal basis one-forms where the index ν is deblocked.
Additionally to the cases (II) and (III) enumerated by S.M. Carroll one could consider
(IV)
the case where both indices ν and a are deblocked.
Generally spoken: The meaning of given tensor components is context sensitive. In order to come to a unique assignment of a tensor we have to distinguish the different cases by additional marks at the tensor components. For that purpose we introduce a "Deblocking Dot" (DD) "." to be placed after all deblocked indices. (That DD can be understood as a short for "..." or for "something must be appended here")
Under that convention the notation in case (I) remains unchanged while the other cases yield
the notations:
(II)
eνa .
for "a is deblocked",
(III)
eν .a
for "ν is deblocked",
(IV)
eν .a .
for "ν and a are deblocked".
The deblocked indices determine what must be appended:
Latin indices as "a" refer to the tetrad basis:
An upper latin index requires a supplement of the basis vectors
{ea, . . . } with index of the same name, by analogy a lower index
refers to a supplementation from the cotetrad basis {θa}.
Greek indices as "α" refer to the coordinate basis:
An upper Greek index requires a supplement of the basis vectors
{∂α, . . . } with index of the same name, by analogy a lower index
refers to a supplementation from the covector basis {dxα, . . . }.
To be correct all supplements have to be combined in the order of the appearance of the corresponding
indices with the tensor product
Ä
between them. However, as can be seen later on, that order has no influence on the resulting
covariant derivatives.
Let's continue with our example:
(I)
eνa yields the same (0,0) tensor since containing no DD's.
(II)
eνa .
yields the (1,0) tensor (vector)
eνa
ea
where the DD was removed since being dispensable.
(III)
eν .a
yields the (0,1) tensor (covector)
eνa
dx ν
where the DD was removed since being dispensable.
(IV)
eν .a
yields the (1,1) tensor
eνa
dx ν
Ä
ea
where the DD's were removed since being dispensable.
Basically for the calculation of covariant derivatives is the concept of directional derivative Dh in direction of a given vector h. Since the directional derivative depends linearly on the directional vector h we have for h = hμ ∂μ
(2.1) Dh = hμ D∂μ .
Therefore it's sufficient to consider the special directional derivation operators D∂μ .
Further important rules for directional derivation are the Leibniz rules for tensor products SÄT :
(2.2) Dh (SÄT) = (DhS) Ä T + S Ä (DhT)
and for products f T ( f function, T tensor)
(2.3) Dh ( f T) = (Dh f ) T + f (DhT) ,
where for h = ∂μ
(2.4)
D∂μf
=
∂μ f .
For evaluation of general directional derivatives we need the directional derivatives of the basis vectors and covectors, the so-called structure relations
(2.5) D∂μ(∂ν) = Γσμν ∂σ ,
(2.6) D∂μ(dxν) = − Γσμν dxν ,
(2.7) D∂μ(ea) = ωbμa eb ,
(2.8) D∂μ(θa) = − ωaμb θb ,
Covariant derivatives of tensor components cannot be calculated without knowing the intrinsic complete tensor belonging to the given components. We shall see that by continuing the example of Section 1.
Let T be a tensor to be subject to the directional derivative
D∂μ.
T is a linear combination of tensor products of the same index type. The combination coefficients
are certain functions.
The Leibniz rules (2.2-3) transform
D∂μT
into a sum of tensor products where each summand contains at most one basis factor derived by
D∂μ.
The occuring derivatives of basis elements can be eliminated by means of the structure relations
(2.5-8). Therefore the result is again a linear combination of summands of the same index type
as before.
These resulting coefficients are called the covariant derivatives Dμ
of the coefficients of T.
We shall demonstrate this with help of our examples:
(I) The tensor belonging to
eνa
is T(I) = eνa
itself, a (0,0) tensor, a function, since (due to our convention) all indices are blocked.
Hence we obtain due to (2.4)
(3.1)
D(I)μ
eνa
=
Dμ
eνa
=
D∂μ
eνa
=
∂μ
eνa .
(II) The tensor belonging to
eνa .
is
T(II)
=
eνa
ea ,
a (1,0) tensor or vector.
The Leibniz rule (2.3) yields
D∂μT(II)
=
(D∂μeνa)
ea
+
eνa
(D∂μea) ,
and from (2.4) and (2.7) we obtain
D∂μT(II)
=
(∂μeνa)
ea
+
eνa
(ωbμa
eb)
=
(∂μeνa
+
eνb
ωaμb)
ea
=:
(Dμeνa .)
ea ,
hence
(3.2)
D(II)μ
eνa
=
Dμeνa .
=
∂μeνa
+
eνb
ωaμb .
(III) The tensor belonging to
eν .a
is
T(III)
=
eνa
dxν , a (0,1) tensor or covector or 1-form.
The Leibniz rule (2.3) yields
D∂μT(III)
=
(D∂μeνa)
dxν
+
eνa
(D∂μdxν) ,
and from (2.4) and (2.6) we obtain
D∂μT(III)
=
(∂μeνa)
dxν
−
eσa
(Γσμν
dxν)
=
(∂μeνa
−
eσa
Γσμν)
dxν
=:
(Dμeν .a)
dxν ,
hence
(3.3)
D(III)μ
eνa
=
Dμeν .a
=
∂μeνa
−
eσa
Γσμν
(IV) The tensor belonging to
eν .a .
is
T(IV)
=
eνa
dxνÄea
, a (1,1) tensor.
The Leibniz rules (2.2-3) yield
D∂μT(IV)
=
(D∂μeνa)
dxνÄea
+
eνa
(D∂μdxν)
Ä
ea
+
eνa
dxν
Ä
(D∂μea) ,
and from (2.4) and (2.6-7) we obtain
D∂μT(IV)
=
(∂μeνa)
dxνÄea
−
eσa
(Γμσν
dxν)Äea
+
eνa
dxνÄ
(ωμba
eb)
=
(∂μeνa
+
eνb
ωμab
−
eσa
Γμσν)
dxνÄea
=:
(Dμeν .a .)
dxνÄea
,
hence
(3.4)
D(IV)μ
eνa
=
Dμeν .a .
=
∂μeνa
−
eσa
Γμσν
+
eνb
ωμab .
D∂μT(IV)
=
D∂μ(dxνÄeν)
=
(D∂μdxν)
Ä
eν
+
dxν
Ä
(D∂μeν)
=
ΓμνρdxρÄ
eν
−
dxν
Ä
Γμρν
eρ
= 0 .
Hence we obtain in addition to (3.4)
(3.5)
D(IV)μ
eνa
=
Dμeν .a .
=
∂μeνa
−
eσa
Γμσν
+
eνb
ωμab
= 0 .
The representation of tensors by their components is context sensitive and gives rise to confoundings and confusion. If one ignores that context then the calculation of covariant derivatives of tensor components will lead to confusion, because in general several different covariant derivatives exist. In the example of the tetrad coefficients eνa four different covariant derivatives (3.1-4) exist. So, using one of them, the user must give a precise reasoning of his choice, see e.g. S.M. Carroll's remarks [1; p.89] quoted in Section 1, which give rise to the two different covariant derivatives (3.2) and (3.3). Another application of one of the different covariant derivatives occurs in the context of Cartan's first equation, which can be written in the form
Ta = D(II)Ùqa ,
i.e. in detail
Taμν = D(II)μ qνa − D(II)ν qμa .
[1]
S.M. Carroll: Lecture Notes on General Relativity
http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9712019
[2]
W. A. Rodrigues Jr. and Q. A. G. de Souza:
An Ambiguous Statement Called ‘Tetrad Postulate’
and the Correct Field
Equations Satisfied by
the Tetrad Fields. 58 pages,
http://arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0411085
[3]
G.W. Bruhn: Covariant Differentiation and the Tetrad Postulate
http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/covar_deriv.htm
[4]
G.W. Bruhn and W.A. Rodrigues: Commentary to Evans' Proof of Cartan's First
Structure Equation,
http://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/1stCartan_equ.html
[5]
Y. Choquet-Bruhat, C. DeWitt-Morette and M. Dillard-Bleick:
Analysis, Manifolds and Physics
(revised edition) North-Holland, Amsterdam (1982)
[6]
S. Kobayashi and K. Nomizu: Foundations of Differential Geometry, vol.1,
Interscience Publishers, New York, 1963