$\newcommand{\M}{\mathcal{M}}$ $\newcommand{\N}{\mathcal{N}}$ $\newcommand{\deriv}[2]{\frac{d#1}{d#2}}$ $\newcommand{\sAverage}[1]{\langle#1\rangle} $ $\newcommand{\IP}[2]{\sAverage{#1,#2}}$ $\newcommand{\Cof}{\text{Cof}}$ $\newcommand{\Hom}{\operatorname{Hom}}$ $\newcommand{\tr}{\operatorname{tr}}$ $\newcommand{\TM}{\operatorname{T\M}}$ $\newcommand{\TN}{\operatorname{T\N}}$ $\newcommand{\TstarM}{\operatorname{T^*\M}}$
There is a well-known folklore saying that "any linear algebraic construction/statement can be lifted to vector bundles" (e.g tensor products, direct sums, quotients etc).
I am interested in a metric version of this phenomena:
Does every statement about inner-prodcut spaces admit a vector bundle analog?
Specifically, I am interested in "derivations-type" results:
On various occasions, I need to compute derivatives of certain "geometric quantities" associated with bundle maps over a manifold. (examples are given below).
Often, I find it's easier to start with a finite dimensional analogous computation. The computation in the bundle context then becomes a routine adaptation of the original calculation, modulu some extra justifications (revolving around the compatiblity of connections with metrics).
Soft Question: Is there a way to "automate" this transfer? (I want to avoid repeating essentially the same calculation twice). In other words, is there a way to prove a "meta-theorem" which says that the result in the pointwise context carries over to the bundle context?
Main Example: Calculating the derivative of the determinant.
We want to prove the following:
Theorem 1: Let $f:\M \to \N$ be a smooth map between $d$-dimensional oriented Riemannian manifolds. Define $\Cof df= (-1)^{d-1} \star_{f^*TN}^{d-1} (\wedge^{d-1} df) \star_{TM}^1.$ Then for all $V \in \Gamma(\TM)$ $$ d(\det df)(V)= \IP{\Cof df}{\nabla_V df}_{\TM,f^*{\TN}} . $$
We start first with the "pointwise" analogy, where the vector spaces are fixed and only the linear map is changing:
Proposition: (The cofactor is the gradient of the determinant) Let $V,W$ be oriented $d$-dimensional inner product spaces. Then $$d(\det)_A(B)=\tr\left( \Cof A^T B \right)=\IP{\Cof A}{B}_{V,W}.$$
Specific question: Can we deduce the theorem from the proposition? (without using the proof of the proposition, like I am doing below).
One obvious way to achieve this would be to view $p \to \det(df_p)$ as the determinant of a changing map between fixed vector spaces. This can be done by representing $df$ w.r.t orthonormal frames. However, one then needs to track the derivative of this matrix in terms of $V$ which looks cumbersome. (I would say that even if this approach would work, it is less aesthetic - an invariant way would be better).
Edit:
As pointed out by Deane Yang, there is a more general version of theorem $1$ which is the right "bundle-analog" of the finite-dim proposition:
Theorem 2: Let $E$ and $F$ be rank $d$ oriented vector bundles over $\M$ with smooth metrics and compatible connections. Let $A:E \to F$ be a smooth bundle map. Define $\Cof A= (-1)^{d-1} \star_{F}^{d-1} (\wedge^{d-1} A) \star_{E}^1.$ Then for all $V \in \Gamma(\TM)$ $$ d(\det A)(V)= \IP{\Cof A}{\nabla_V A}_{E,F}. $$
The proof of theorem $2$ is exactly the same as the proof of theorem 1 (see below) - we just replace $df \to A$ everywhere (that proof does not use the fact $df$ is the differential of a map, just the bundle-structures).
The question still remains- can we use the statement of the proposition to deduce theorem $2$, without looking at the proof. (This is not a trivial consequence of the proposition, where the two vector spaces, while different, are fixed).
proof of the proposition: Let $A_t$ be a smooth family of mappings in $\Hom(V,W)$: $A(0)=A,A'(0)=B$, and let $e_1,\dots,e_d$ be a positive orthonormal basis of $V$. $$ \det(A_t)= \star^d_W \circ \bigwedge^d A_t \circ \star^0_V(1)= \star^d_W \bigwedge^d A_t \big( e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge e_d \big)= \star^d_W \big( A_t e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge A_te_d \big) $$
Using the Leibniz rule we get: $$ \left. \deriv{\det A_t}{t} \right|_{t=0}= \star^d_W \left. \deriv{}{t} \right|_{t=0}\big( A_t e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge A_te_d \big) =$$ $$ \star^d_W \sum_{i=1}^d \big( A e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge Be_i \wedge \dots \wedge Ae_d \big) = \sum_{i=1}^d \star^d_W (-1)^{i-1} \big( Be_i \wedge A e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge \widehat Ae_i \wedge \dots \wedge Ae_d \big) $$ $$ =\sum_{i=1}^d \star^d_W (-1)^{i-1} \big( Be_i \wedge (-1)^{d-1} \star^1_W \star^{d-1}_W ( A e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge \widehat Ae_i \wedge \dots \wedge Ae_d) \big) = $$ $$(-1)^{i-1} (-1)^{d-1} \sum_{i=1}^d \star^d_W \big( Be_i \wedge \star^1_W \star^{d-1}_W ( A e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge \widehat Ae_i \wedge \dots \wedge Ae_d) \big) = $$ $$(-1)^{i-1} (-1)^{d-1} \sum_{i=1}^d \IP{Be_i}{ \star^{d-1}_W ( A e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge \widehat Ae_i \wedge \dots \wedge Ae_d)}_W = $$ $$ (-1)^{d-1} \sum_{i=1}^d \IP{Be_i}{ \star^{d-1}_W \big( \bigwedge^{d-1} A ( \star_V^1 e_i )\big)}_W=\sum_{i=1}^d \IP{Be_i}{ \big( (-1)^{d-1} \star^{d-1}_W \bigwedge^{d-1} A \star_V^1\big) e_i }_W=$$ $$\sum_{i=1}^d \IP{Be_i}{ \Cof A(e_i) }_W=\sum_{i=1}^d \IP{(\Cof A)^TBe_i}{ e_i }_V=\tr\left( \Cof A^TB \right)= \IP{\Cof A}{B}_{V,W}.$$
proof of Theorem $1$: We want to imitate the proof above:
A positive orthonormal frame $e_1,\dots,e_d$ of $\TM$ will replace the basis for $V$, covariant differentiation will replace the time derivation, so $A \to df,A'(0)=B \to \nabla_Vdf$. There are two obstacles with using this analogy verbatim:
- The $e_i$ cannot be chosen to be parallel w.r.t $\nabla^{\TM}$ if $\M$ is not flat, while in the original setting, the $e_i$ were constant vectors (time-independent).
- The derivative w.r.t time commuted with $\star_W$, since it was a fixed linear operator. This time we need to establish a stronger commutation property between Hodge duals and covariant differentiation.
We shall see that a miracle will happen - metricity shall come to our aid. $$ \det(df)= \star^d_{f^*T\N} \circ \bigwedge^d df \circ \star^0_{\TM}(1)= \star^d_{f^*T\N} \big( df(e_1) \wedge \dots \wedge df(e_d) \big),$$ So $$ V\det df = V \star^d_{f^*T\N}\big( df(e_1) \wedge \dots \wedge df(e_d) \big) \stackrel{(1)}{=} $$ $$ \star^d_{f^*T\N} \nabla_V \big( df(e_1) \wedge \dots \wedge df(e_d) \big)= \star^d_{f^*T\N} \sum_{i=1}^d \big( df(e_1) \wedge \dots \wedge \nabla_V \big(df(e_i)\big) \wedge \dots \wedge df(e_d) \big) = \star^d_{f^*T\N} \sum_{i=1}^d \big( df(e_1) \wedge \dots \wedge (\nabla_V df)e_i \wedge \dots \wedge df(e_d) \big) + $$ $$ \star^d_{f^*T\N} \sum_{i=1}^d \big( df(e_1) \wedge \dots \wedge df(\nabla_{V}e_i) \wedge \dots \wedge df(e_d) \big) \stackrel{(2)}{=} $$ $$ \IP{\Cof df}{\nabla_V df}_{\TM,f^*{\TN}}+ \star^d_{f^*T\N} \bigwedge^d df( \sum_{i=1}^d e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge \nabla_Ve_i \wedge \dots \wedge e_d)= \IP{\Cof df}{\nabla_V df}_{\TM,f^*{\TN}}+ \star^d_{f^*T\N} \bigwedge^d df\big( \nabla_V (e_1 \wedge \dots \wedge e_i \wedge \dots \wedge e_d) \big)=\IP{\Cof df}{\nabla_V df}_{\TM,f^*{\TN}}. $$
Where equality $(1)$ follows since metric connections and Hodge duals commute, and equality $(2)$ is exactly the formal repeatition of the calculation in the pointwise setting (where $A \to df,B \to \nabla_Vdf$).
Admittedly, this repeatition is not huge, but I have other examples on my mind where the computations are much longer, so a general "transfer-principle" would be nice to have.