4

The standard contact form on the sphere $S^{2n +1}$ in $\mathbb R^{2n + 2}$ is given by

$$ \omega = \sum_{k=1}^{n+1} x_k dy_k - y_k dx_k$$

(see e.g. here)

Now what I'm confused about is that this form uses all $2n + 2$ coordinates of $\mathbb R^{2n + 2}$ but the sphere is only $2n + 1$-dimensional.

Question 1: Doesn't one have to restrict this to the sphere?

By that I mean compose with the differential of the inclusion map $i:S^{2n +1}\hookrightarrow \mathbb R^{2n +2}$. It's not clear to me though what $i$ should be: a point $x$ in $S^{2n +1}$ only has $2n+1$ coordinates.

Question 2:

So do we map an arbitrary coordinte to $0$? But if so, wouldn't then $i$ be not defined on all of the sphere (but only chartwise)?

When restricted I expect $\omega$ to become an expression of only $2n+1$ coordinates. Am I on the right track of understanding or is my current understanding all complete nonsense?

I also believe that $\omega$ is globally defined on $S^{2n+1}$. But I don't understand how it's possible since the sphere does not admit a global coordinate system.

Question 3:

How is it possible that $\omega$ is nonetheless a globally defined differential form?

self-learner
  • 1,177
  • 8
  • 25
  • 1
    What description of $S^{2n+1}$ are you using? The embedding $i$ depends on that. For example, if you think of the sphere as the set of vectors of unit length, the embedding is nothing else than the identity restricted to it. I'm not familiar with contact geometry at all, but pulling back with $i^*$ seems like a reasonable answer, in fact, the form you wrote doesn't even live in the cotangent bundle of the sphere! – user347489 Jul 04 '16 at 04:41
  • @user347489 But if the inclusion is the identity map the pullback would be $\omega$ itself again. But then the problem remains that a form with $2n+2$ coordinates is defined on a manifold of $2n+1$ coordinates. – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 05:17
  • @user347489 I found this old question and there the inclusion map is not the identity. Or am I missing something? – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 05:28
  • Actually, by Xipan Xiao's answer for this particular form it would be, but this is not the case in general! Why? because the form $\omega$ of $\mathbb{R}^{2n+2}$ vanishes for every normal vector to the sphere, i.e., every vector that would vanish under the $i_$ already vanishes for the form itself, and $i_$ is the identity for the others. Yet this is a quality of $\omega$, for some other differential form of $\mathbb{R}^{2n+2}$ you would have to pull it back to the cotangent space/bundle of the sphere, just as in the link you post. – user347489 Jul 04 '16 at 05:35
  • @user347489 Oh, ok. So I picked a bad example. One in which it conveniently works out without pulling back. Duh > . < that's a bad coincidence. Your comment is extremely helpful, thank you. – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 05:52
  • It would be a good exercise to see why is this the case! Yet, I would recommend you to review the required notions first, John Lee has an amazing book on smooth manifolds or if you want to go into more "concrete" cases you could see Do Carmos differential geometry book on curves and surfaces. – user347489 Jul 04 '16 at 06:19
  • @user347489 I take back my previous comment. If you take a concrete chart and restrict what you get is different form. One with only $2n+1$ coordinates in the expression. So I don't understand your previous comment which says that Xipan Xiao writes that pulling back with $i^\ast$ leaves $\omega$ unchanged that is, $\omega = i^\ast \omega$. – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 06:26
  • 2
    Of course $\omega\neq i^\omega$. If you define the sphere to be a subset of $\mathbb R^{2n+2}$, then the embedding is given by $x\mapsto x$, but the important thing is that it is a map $S^{2n+1}\rightarrow\mathbb R^{2n+2}$, so it is not* the identity! The manifolds on the left and right are different ones! You should omit counting "coordinates" because this is misleading. The $x^k$ maps are also defined on $S^{2n+1}$, so it is fine to write $y^kdx^k$, but this form lives on the tangent bundle of the sphere ... – Markus Heinrich Jul 04 '16 at 07:50
  • @MarkusHeinrich Then it's not clear to me what the inclusion map is. What I do know how to do is how to pull it back using charts on the sphere. At least I think I do. Namely, using planes of the form $x_i = c$ where $c$ is some constant. I guess one could always choose $c=0$. Will pulling back using the inclusion map result in the same expression for $\omega$? – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 07:56
  • 2
    The embedding is subtle - as is the whole subject of differential geometry if it comes to vector spaces. Say we have maps $x^k: \mathbb R^{2n+2}\rightarrow \mathbb R$ and $\tilde x^k: S^{2n+1}\rightarrow \mathbb R$, doing exactly the same. This is ok, since $S^{2n+1}$ is a subset of $\mathbb R^{2n+2}$. Then we have relations of the form $x^k(i(x))=\tilde x^k(x)$ and thus $d\tilde x^k = i^dx^k$ (same holds for the $y$'s), so we could write $i^\omega$ using the same expression as for $\omega$, drawing some tildes over the $x$'s and $y$'s. But the point is the following: (tbc) – Markus Heinrich Jul 04 '16 at 08:06
  • 2
    ... the fact that we use $2n+2$ maps here does not have to do anything with the dimension of the manifold. In principle, we can write down forms using as many differentials as we like ... but normally we want to use a basis for that (which the $d\tilde x^k$ aren't). – Markus Heinrich Jul 04 '16 at 08:11
  • @MarkusHeinrich I'm sorry if you think I'm a bit slow. But I still don't see why $\omega \neq i^\ast \omega$. For if the embedding is $x \mapsto x$ then concretely, in for example $\mathbb R^3$ this would be $(x,y,z) \mapsto (x,y,z)$. Then the differential would be the identity and $\omega = i^\ast \omega$. I'm fully aware that you have already pointed out that this is nonsense but I just don't yet see where I'm making a mistake. – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 08:35
  • @user347489: you write "every vector that would vanish under the i∗ already vanishes for the form itself" Of course, since such a vector is zero! Do you realize that $i_*$ is injective? – Georges Elencwajg Oct 17 '16 at 09:14

3 Answers3

3

Consider the standard embedded sphere defined by $S^{2n+1}=\{x\in\mathbb{R^{2n+2}}:\|x\|=1\}$. $\omega$ is obviously globally defined on $\mathbb{R^{2n+2}}$ thus its restriction on $S^{2n+1}$ is a global form. Note that for a unit normal vector $n=x=\sum x^j\frac\partial {\partial x^j}+y^j\frac\partial {\partial y^j}$, $$\omega(n)=\big(\sum x^kdy^k-y^kdx^k\big) \big(\sum x^j\frac\partial {\partial x^j}+y^j\frac\partial {\partial y^j}\big)=\sum x^ky^k-y^kx^k=0$$ That is, $\omega$ is REALLY a form on the tangent space.

Xipan Xiao
  • 2,607
  • So your answer to question 1 is "No, we don't have to restrict it"? – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 05:15
  • I suspect you omitted the indexes of the summation because they won't match. For example, how do you apply $x^{k+1}dy^{k+1}$ to a point on the sphere which is given by $(x_1, \dots, x_{n+1}, y_1, \dots, y_{\color{red}{n}})$? – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 05:18
  • @self-learner the thing is that that point is not a point of the sphere. Under this post's convention, a point of the sphere is a unit vector $(x_1,\dots,x_{n+1},y_1,\dots,y_{n+1})$. If you want to see the $2n-1$-dimensional coordinates of the sphere you first need to define a coordinate chart, which would be a homeomorphism $\varphi:U\to\mathbb{R}^{2n+1}$, where $U\subseteq S^{2n+2}$ is some open set (for which such a map makes sense). (1/2) – user347489 Jul 04 '16 at 05:43
  • Say that for some $p\in S^{2n+1}$ we have $\varphi(p)=(\varphi_1(p),\dots,\varphi_{2n+1}(p))$, then each of these $\varphi_i(p)$ would be the coordinates of the point $p$ under this particular coordinate chart. (2/2) – user347489 Jul 04 '16 at 05:43
  • I think this is exactly what I am confused about. As I am confused I did not choose any particular convention when I asked the question. – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 05:47
  • Ok, now I almost understand all of your answer. Just one thing that I don't understand: why is the vector $\sum_i x^i {\partial \over \partial x^i} + \sum_i y^i {\partial \over \partial y^i}$ normal to the sphere and unit length? To me it seems to be a tangent vector to the sphere. – self-learner Jul 04 '16 at 06:19
  • @self-learner $\frac{\partial}{\partial r}$ is normal to the sphere, do the change of coordinates and express this vector in terms of the coordinates of $\mathbb{R}^N$. Do the case for $S^1$ and $\mathbb{R}^2$ first and it will be clear. – user347489 Jul 04 '16 at 06:35
  • What you write is essentially correct but doesn't make sense formally: $\omega$ is not a differential form on the sphere but $i^*\omega$ is: this is true independently of whether $\omega$ is or is not zero on vectors orthogonal to the sphere. – Georges Elencwajg Oct 17 '16 at 09:23
2

$\newcommand{\Reals}{\mathbf{R}}$The Cartesian coordinates $x_{1}, \dots, x_{n+1}$, $y_{1}, \dots, y_{n+1}$ are globally-defined smooth functions on the sphere $S^{2n+1}$. As you say, they do not comprise a coordinate system because at each point, one coordinate can be expressed as a smooth function of the others. (Which coordinate is up to you. The only constraint is, if some coordinate is zero at $p$, you cannot solve for that coordinate as a smooth function of the others in a neighborhood of $p$.)

The coordinate differentials $dx_{1}, \dots, dx_{n+1}$, $dy_{1}, \dots, dy_{n+1}$ are therefore smooth $1$-forms. For example, $dx_{k}$ is a smooth $1$-form on $\Reals^{2n+2}$, and by restriction (a.k.a., under pullback by the inclusion map $i$) defines a smooth $1$-form on the sphere $S^{2n+1}$.

Note, incidentally, that while $dx_{k}$ is nowhere vanishing, $i^{*}dx_{k} = 0$ at two points: the standard basis element $e_{k}$ and its negative. That should suffice to convince you that $dx_{k}$ (a $1$-form on $\Reals^{2n+2}$) and $i^{*}dx_{k}$ (a $1$-form on $S^{2n+1}$) are not equal, even though "they're defined by the same formula". The domain matters!

Now, to your questions:

  1. Yes, technically you're letting $i:S^{2n+1} \to \Reals^{2n+2}$ denote the inclusion, and are considering $i^{*}\omega$. The differential of the inclusion satisfies $i_{*}(v) = v$ for every tangent vector to the sphere. That is, if $p \in S^{2n+1}$, then $i_{*}:T_{p}S^{2n+1} \to \Reals_{p}^{2n+2}$ sends each vector $v$ (in the $(2n+1)$-dimensional tangent space $T_{p}S^{2n+1}$) to itself (viewed as an element of $T_{p}\Reals^{2n+2}$).

  2. No, you would not map an arbitrary coordinate to $0$, but instead would express one coordinate as a function of the others and calculate partial derivatives with respect to those coordinates. When you restrict $\omega$, it is locally dependent on only $(2n+1)$ coordinates. Note carefully, however, that doing so forces you to make an inelegant (and unnecessary) choice, only to get the simple answer of the preceding item.

  3. As noted at the top, the Cartesian coordinates define smooth, real-valued functions on the sphere, and their differentials define smooth $1$-forms on the sphere. Consequently, the formula $$ \omega = \sum_{k=1}^{n+1} (x_{k}\, dy_{k} - y_{k}\, dx_{k}) \tag{1} $$ defines a smooth $1$-form on the sphere. It simply happens not to a representation in local coordinates on the sphere.

The important point is, if you are given an arbitrary point $$ p = (p_{1}, \dots, p_{n+1}, q_{1}, \dots, q_{n+1}) \in S^{2n+1} \tag{2a} $$ and an arbitrary tangent vector $$ v = (u_{1}, \dots, u_{n+1}, v_{1}, \dots, v_{n+1}) \in T_{p}S^{2n+1}, \tag{2b} $$ you can compute $$ \omega(p)(v) = \sum_{k=1}^{n+1} (p_{k}\, v_{k} - q_{k}\, u_{k}). $$

The following facts are immaterial:

  • Not every $(2n+2)$-tuple (2a) represents a point of $S^{2n+1}$;

  • The $(2n + 2)$ smooth functions in (2a) are not local coordinates on the sphere;

  • Not every $(2n+2)$-tuple (2b) represents a tangent vector of $S^{2n+1}$.

1

There seems to be some confusions on this thread.
The point is that $\omega \in \Omega^1 (\mathbb R^{2n + 2})$ is a global differential 1-form on $\mathbb R^{2n + 2}$, but in no case a form on $S^{2n +1}$.
Whatever that form $\omega$ is you can restrict it to $S^{2n +1}$ and obtain a form $i^*\omega \in \Omega^1 (S^{2n +1})$.
But you should not ask whether $\omega$ "is" a form on $S^{2n +1}$: it is definitely not because a differential form lives on one and only one manifold, and $\omega$ lives on $\mathbb R^{2n + 2},$ period!
It is indeed true that $\omega$ happens to be zero on vectors normal to the sphere but this is irrelevant to the question.

  • Georges, thanks for clarifying the above point to me. I guess in the end I only contributed to the confusion. – user347489 Nov 20 '16 at 08:14