Monday, 16 February 2015

general relativity - Matrix derivative of a matrix with constraints


I am looking for a general method to obtain derivative rules of a constrained matrix with respect to its matrix elements.


In the case of a symmetric matrix Sij (with Sij=Sji), one way to do that is the following (see Variation of the metric with respect to the metric). We say that a variation of a matrix element δSij is the same than that of δSji, and thus δSij=δSij+δSji2=δikδjl+δilδjk2δSkl=Sij;klδSkl.

The tensor Sij;kl has the nice property that Sij;klSkl;mn=Sij;mn. One then says that δSijδSkl=Sij;kl.


I must admit that why this is the correct procedure is not quite clear to me (that seems to be quite arbitrary, although obviously it works to compute derivatives of a function of a symmetric matrix). This means that it is not clear to me how to generalize that when the constraint is different.


For example, let's take the set of matrices O belonging to the group SO(N). Is there a way to write δOijδOkl in terms of a tensor Bij;kl, with all the same nice properties ?


In the case of SO(2), this seems quite easy, since then Oji=(1)i+jOij, and one finds in that case δOijδOkl=δikδjl+(1)i+jδilδjk2,

which indeed does the job. Note however that I haven't use the defining property of SO(N), that is OOT=1, and I am not sure if this is relevant...


Already in the case of SO(3), it does not seem to be easy to find the equivalent tensor...





Side note : using the defining property of SO(2), one can massage the formulas to obtain δOijδOkl=OilOkj.

First of all, it depends explicitly on O, which seems bad. Furthermore, if we tentatively define Bij;kl[O]=OilOkj (which already is different from what we found for SO(2)), then we have Bij;kl[O]Bkl;mn[O]=δimδjn, which seems pretty weird...




If anyone knows the standard procedure (if any exists) or a good reference, that would be greatly appreciated. In any case, a nice explanation (maybe a bit formal) in the case of symmetric matrix might also help me to get my head around the problem.



Answer





  1. Setup. Let there be given an m-dimensional manifold M with coordinates (x1,,xm). Let there be given an n-dimensional physical submanifold N with physical coordinates (y1,,yn). Let there be given mn independent constraints χ1(x)  0,,χmn(x)  0,

    which defines the physical submanifold N. [Here the symbol means weak equality, i.e. equality modulo the constraints.] Assume that (y1,,yn,χ1,,χmn)
    constitutes a coordinate system for the extended manifold M.




  2. Dirac derivative. In analogy with the Dirac bracket, let us introduce a Dirac derivative (xi)D := ximna=1χaxi(χa)y = nα=1yαxi(yα)χ,i  {1,,m},

    that projects onto the physical submanifold (xi)Dyα = yαxi,(xi)Dχa = 0,
    i  {1,,m},α  {1,,n},a  {1,,mn}.





  3. Remark. In many important cases it is possible to choose the physical coordinates (y1,,yn) such that the Dirac derivative (4) can be written as linear combinations of unconstrained partial x-derivatives only, without referring to the (y,χ)-coordinate system (2), cf. eqs. (10) & (14) below.




  4. Does Dirac derivatives commute? Does the commutator [(xi)D,(xj)D] = nα,β=1yαxi[(yα)χ,yβxj](yβ)χ(ij) ? 0

    vanishes weakly? Not necessarily. But if the coordinate transformation xi(yα,χa) is linear, then the Dirac derivatives commute.




  5. Example. Let the physical subspace be the hyperplane N={χ(x)=0} with the constraint χ = mi=1xi.

    Define physical coordinates yα = xα1mmi=1xi,α  {1,,n=m1}.
    Conversely, xα = yα+1mχ,α  {1,,n},xm = nβ=1yβ+1mχ.
    The derivatives are related as xα = (yα)χ1mnβ=1(yβ)χ+(χ)y,α  {1,,n},
    xm = 1mnβ=1(yβ)χ+(χ)y.
    The Dirac derivative becomes after some algebra (xi)D = xi(χ)y = xi1mmj=1xj,i  {1,,m}.





  6. Example. Differentiation wrt. a symmetric matrix can be viewed as a Dirac differentiation (3), where the constraints (1) are given by antisymmetric matrices. Define s(ij) := Mij+Mji2anda(ij) := MijMji2fori > j;andd(i) := Mii.

    Conversely, Mij = θij(s(ij)+a(ij))+θji(s(ji)a(ji))+δijd(i),
    where the discrete Heaviside step function θij here is assumed to obey θii=0 (no implicit sum). The derivatives are related as Mij = θij2(s(ij)+a(ij))+θji2(s(ji)a(ji))+δijd(i).
    The Dirac derivative becomes after some algebra (Mij)D = θij2s(ij)+θji2s(ji)+δijd(i) = 12(Mij+Mji).




  7. Remark. Additional complications arise if the coordinates and/or constraints are not globally defined. For starters, it is actually enough if (2) is a coordinate system in a tubular neighborhood of N.




  8. Reparametrizations of the constraints. Assume that there exists a second coordinate system (˜y1,,˜yn,˜χ1,,˜χmn)

    (which we adorn with tildes), such that ˜yα = fα(y),˜χa = ga(y,χ)  0.
    This implies that (χa)y = (˜χbχa)y(˜χb)˜y,(yα)χ  (˜yβyα)χ(˜yβ)˜χ,
    i.e Δχ := span{(χ1)y,,(χnm)y}  TM
    is an involutive distribution, while Δy := span{(y1)χ,,(yn)χ}  TM
    is a weak distribution.


    One may show that the Dirac derivative and its commutators (xi)D  (xi)D,[(xi)D,(xj)D]  [(xi)D,(xj)D],

    [wrt. the tilde and the untilde coordinate systems (15) and (2), respectively] agree weakly. This shows that the Dirac derivative (3) is a geometric construction.





  9. Subsubmanifold. Given a p-dimensional physical subsubmanifold P with physical coordinates (z1,,zp). Let there be given np independent constraints ϕ1(y)  0,,ϕnp(y)  0,

    which defines the physical submanifold P. Assume that (z1,,zp,ϕ1,,ϕnp)
    constitutes a coordinate system for the submanifold N. One may show that (xi)(P)D = (xi)(N)Dnpa=1(ϕaxi)(N)D(ϕa)z,i  {1,,m}.
    This shows that the Dirac derivative construction behaves naturally wrt. further constraints.




No comments:

Post a Comment

Understanding Stagnation point in pitot fluid

What is stagnation point in fluid mechanics. At the open end of the pitot tube the velocity of the fluid becomes zero.But that should result...