3
$\begingroup$

Assume that $E$ is a bundle of Lie Algebras. Let $g$ be an invariant metric on $E$, that is for all $p\in M$, $$g_p([x,y],z)+g_p(y,[x,z])=0,$$ where $x,y,z\in E_p$ are arbitrary.

Is there a Riemannian connection $\nabla$ on $E$ such that: $$\nabla_U[X,Y]=[\nabla_U X,Y]+[X,\nabla_U Y]$$ holds for every $U\in \mathcal{X}(M)$ and $X,Y\in\Gamma E?$

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Any linear connection satisfies the property that $\nabla_U[X,Y]=[\nabla_UX,Y]+[X,\nabla_UY]$. Given any torsionless linear connection, we can show that $\nabla_XY-\nabla_YX=[X,Y]$. It can be concluded that any torsionless linear connection $\nabla_U$ satisfying $X(g(Y,Z))=g(\nabla_XY,Z)+g(Y,\nabla_XZ)$ is a Riemannian connection. (Note that if $g$ is smooth and $E$ is smooth, then by a folk theorem it is possible to conclude that there exists a unique Riemannian connection corresponding to $g$.) However, I don't think that this is what you're looking for. $\endgroup$
    – user62675
    Commented May 11, 2014 at 3:45
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you dude, But I'm talking about linear connection on vector bundle of Lie algebras, the notion of "Torsion" is defined only for connections on $TM$ or $E$-connections where $E$ is a Lie Algebroid. When I said Riemannian connection, I just meant $U<X,Y>=<\nabla_U X,Y>+<X,\nabla_U Y>$ $\endgroup$
    – Ramand
    Commented May 11, 2014 at 9:25

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

The answer is 'no, not always'.

Here's an example: Let $E\to M$ be an oriented Riemannian $3$-plane bundle over $M$, with inner product $g$. Then there is a well-defined bilinear cross-product operation on sections $\times :\Gamma E \times \Gamma E \to \Gamma E$ with the property that, if $X$ and $Y$ are unit-length, orthogonal local sections of $E$ over $V\subset M$, then $X\times Y$ is also unit-length and $\bigl(X,Y,X{\times}Y\bigr)$ is an oriented orthonormal basis of sections of $E$ over $V$.

Now let $\lambda$ be any function on $M$ that is not locally constant and define $$ [X,Y] = \lambda\ X{\times}Y. $$ This makes $E$ into an Euclidean bundle of Lie algebras that satisfies your assumptions, but, because $\lambda$ is not locally constant, there is no $g$-compatible connection $\nabla$ on $E$ that makes the Lie algebra structure $[,]$ be $\nabla$-parallel. The reason is that the cross-product will be $\nabla$-parallel as a section $C$ of $E\otimes\Lambda^2(E^\ast)$ (with the connection it inherits from $E$), but the Lie algebra product, which is a section $P$ of $E\otimes\Lambda^2(E^\ast)$, is $\lambda$ times $C$ and so will not be $\nabla$-parallel, which is what your condition requires.

N.B.: Note that the concept of torsion has nothing to do with this problem because $E$ is not assumed to be a subbundle of the tangent bundle, and, in any case, $[X,Y]$ need not be the Lie bracket of vector fields. (I think that this may have misled the (first) commenter above.)

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you Robert Bryant,I'm not smooth in English,and it causes problem in my question. I want an example of bundle of Lie algebras with an Invariant metric in it, admitting Riemannian connection with that property. $\endgroup$
    – Ramand
    Commented May 11, 2014 at 9:33
  • $\begingroup$ Of course examples exist: Just take the above construction with $\lambda=1$ and any Riemannian connection on $E$. However, as the example I gave shows, you won't always have the existence of such a connection, just sometimes. $\endgroup$ Commented May 11, 2014 at 10:08
  • $\begingroup$ thank you Prof. Robert Bryant. Is there example of non-trivial bundle of Lie Algebras? $\endgroup$
    – Ramand
    Commented May 14, 2014 at 15:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, of course. Take any nontrivial, oriented, Euclidean $3$-plane bundle. For example, consider the canonical $3$-plane bundle over the Grassmannian $\mathrm{Gr}_3(\mathbb{R}^{n+3})$ of oriented $3$-planes in $\mathbb{R}^{n+3}$ for $n\ge 2$. Now endow it with the Lie algebra structure that I described above in my answer. $\endgroup$ Commented May 14, 2014 at 18:23
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you, I'm really Thankful. I appreciate your kind and soon respond. $\endgroup$
    – Ramand
    Commented May 14, 2014 at 19:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .