6

I am studying connections on abstract manifolds. So far, I have read several equivalent definitions but I can't establish the equivalence between them on my own.

The first definition is the Ehresmann connection that defines a connection on a manifold as a distribution of vector spaces completing the vertical space in the tangent space of the total space at each point.

The second definition defines a connection on a manifold as a covariant derivative, i.e. a map $$\nabla: \Gamma(E) \to \Gamma(T^*M\otimes E)$$ where $\pi: E \to M$ is a vector bundle and there is a version of the Leibnitz rule as follows: $$\nabla_X(fs)=df\otimes s + f \cdot\nabla_Xs$$ for any section $s$ and $f\in C^{\infty}(M)$.

I tried to write things in a chart to find out how the covariant derivation is induced from a given connection but I couldn't proceed forward. I think I haven't understood the definitions well. Would someone clarify how a distributional connection give us a connection one-form and how we can recover the horizontal space if we have a connection one-form?

  • 1
    Have you read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehresmann_connection? It explains the relationship reasonably well. The idea is that the horizontal directions specified by the Ehresmann connection are the directions of parallel transport. Note that not all Ehresmann connections are covariant derivatives in the sense you define. – Anthony Carapetis Aug 24 '15 at 11:57
  • @AnthonyCarapetis: I understand the relationship. I mean I can imagine and visualize how things should relate to each other in my mind. I just can't work out the equations in a chart. – user246836 Aug 24 '15 at 12:09

1 Answers1

6

Given a curve $\gamma$ and a section $X$ of $E$ defined at least along $\gamma$, we get a curve $\xi$ in $E$ defined by $\xi(t) = X(\gamma(t))$. We want to conflate the two notions of parallelism - that is, $\dot \xi \in H$ ($H$ our horizontal distribution) and $\nabla_{\dot \gamma} X = 0$.

Well, in one direction, we can just do it! Given a covariant derivative $\nabla$, we can define a corresponding $H$ as the set of all $\dot \xi$ satisfying $\nabla_{\dot \gamma}X=0$. To get a more concrete grasp on this, let's assume we have a chart $x^i$ and a local framing $e_\alpha$ of $E$ so that the covariant derivative takes the form $$\nabla_\dot\gamma X^\alpha = \dot\gamma^i X^\alpha_{,i} + \Gamma^\alpha_{i\beta}\dot\gamma^i X^\beta,$$ and we have coordinates $(x^i, e^\alpha)$ on the total space of $E$. ($e^\alpha$ is just the dual basis of $e_\alpha$.)

Since we can find $\xi$ with arbitrary initial position $\xi(0) = (p,X)$ and velocity $\dot \xi(0) = (v,W)$ in $E$, the horizontal subspace at $X \in E_p$ is (noting that the vertical component of the velocity is $W^\alpha = \dot\gamma^i X^\alpha_{,i}$)

$$ H_{(p,X)} = \left\{ v^i \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} + W^\alpha \frac{\partial}{\partial e^\alpha} \Big|\ v \in T_p M,\ W^\alpha + \Gamma^\alpha_{i \beta} v^i X^\beta = 0 \right\}.$$

Solving this for $W^\alpha$ we see that for each element $(p,X) \in E$ and each direction $(p,v)$ in the base space we get a corresponding horizontal direction $v - \Gamma^\alpha_{i \beta}v^i X^\beta \partial/\partial e^\alpha$ in the total space. In particular, our coordinate system and framing gives us a basis

$$\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} - \Gamma^\alpha_{i\beta}(p) X^\beta \frac{\partial}{\partial e^\alpha}$$

for $H_{(p,X)}$.

Note that we cannot reverse this process in general - locally we can choose arbitrary functions $\Gamma^\alpha_i$ on $E$ and get an Ehresmann connection with basis

$$\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i} - \Gamma^\alpha_i(p,X) \frac{\partial}{\partial e^\alpha}$$

which can only reduce to a covariant derivative/linear connection if $\Gamma^\alpha_i(p,X)$ is linear in $X$.

  • Thank you for your answer. I couldn't login to stackexchange because I had forgotten my password. I'm a bit confused about your notation $\xi(0)=(p,X)$. Isn't $X$ a section? i.e. a function from $M$ to $E$ and $X^{\alpha}$ are its component functions? Then what do you mean by $(p,X) \in E$? If $X$ is already in $E$ then $(p,X)$ isn't in $E$. I'm sorry for being confused. – user246836 Aug 31 '15 at 10:53
  • @H.Z. no worries! My notation is pretty sloppy here, you're right. In the latter part of my answer $X$ is the "vertical component" of $\xi(0)$ - perhaps it'd be better to write $\xi(0) = X_p$. I was just trying to emphasize the fact that $\xi(0) \in E_p$ and the connection to the coordinate system/local trivialization $(x,e)$. – Anthony Carapetis Aug 31 '15 at 11:12
  • I'm still confused. So, we got a curve on a manifold and we lift it to a curve in the total space. We want to show that the horizontal space of the total space is the set of all lifted curves that the covariant derivative of X with respect to the velocity field of the original curve is zero. We write the covariant derivative of X in coordinates and then we use the Frobenius theorem (or existence and uniqueness of solutions to a linear ODE's) to find $\xi(0)=X_p$ and $\dot\xi(0)=W_v$. Right? What is $W_v$? How is it obtained? – user246836 Sep 02 '15 at 04:11
  • Should $v$ be in $M$, not in $T_p(M)$? – user246836 Oct 25 '15 at 18:27