1
$\begingroup$

Let $A=(a_{ij})$ be an invertible matrix with real entries $a_{ij}$.

We associate to $A$ the $1$-form $\alpha=\sum_i (\sum_j a_{ij}x_j)dx_i$.

The distribution $\ker \alpha$ is integrable if and only if the matrix $A$ is a symmetric matrix.

But what would happen in the non-symmetric case? For a non-symmetric matrix A, is the corresponding distribution completely non-integrable? If the answer is yes, is there a reference which investigates the sub Riemannian structure associated to an invertible but non-symmetric matrix?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The answer depends on what you mean by 'completely non-integrable'. Do you just mean that the kernel of the 1-form $\alpha$ is not Frobenius or do you mean that the kernel of the 1-form is bracket-generating (or something in between)? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 7, 2017 at 13:49
  • $\begingroup$ @RobertBryant Sorry for my delay in response. Yes I mean the Lie algebra generated by vector fields tangent to $\ker \alpha$ would be the whole space of vector fields.(According to definition of Sub Riemannian manifolds) $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 7, 2017 at 18:11
  • $\begingroup$ @RobertBryant In the case of Lie bracket generating, is the answer obvious?Is the primary decomposition of linear algebra usefull here?(To give a decomposition of the bundle $\ker \alpha $ and a possible obstruction to complete non integrability?) Thanks for your attention to my question. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 8, 2017 at 10:25

1 Answer 1

4
$\begingroup$

First, the condition that the kernel of $\alpha$ be integrable is not just that the matrix $A$ be symmetric although, of course, that is sufficient. For example, when the dimension $n$ is equal to $2$, the $1$-form is always integrable, even if $A$ is skew-symmetric.

Second, the condition that the kernel of $\alpha$ be bracket-generating is just that $\alpha\wedge\mathrm{d}\alpha$ should be nonvanishing. This will always be true (except where $\alpha$ vanishes) if $(\mathrm{d}\alpha)^2$ is nonzero. Writing $A = B + C$ where $B$ is symmetric and $C$ is skew-symmetric, and correspondingly, writing $\alpha = \beta + \gamma$, then $\beta = \mathrm{d}b$ for some quadratic function $b$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$ and $\mathrm{d}\alpha = \mathrm{d}\gamma$.

Thus, if the rank of $C$ is greater than $2$, then $\alpha\wedge\mathrm{d}\alpha$ will be nonzero on the open dense set (the complement of a linear subspace, the kernel of $A$) where $\alpha$ is nonvanishing, and hence the kernel of $\alpha$ will be bracket-generating on this open set in this case.

If $C=0$, then $\mathrm{d}\alpha = 0$, and the kernel of $\alpha$ is integrable.

If the rank of $C$ is equal to $2$, then one can choose linear coordinates $y^1,\ldots,y^n$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$ such that $\gamma = \tfrac12(y^1\,\mathrm{d}y^2-y^2\,\mathrm{d}y^1)$, and then $\gamma\wedge\mathrm{d}\gamma=0$, so that $$\alpha\wedge\mathrm{d}\alpha = \beta\wedge\mathrm{d}\gamma = \mathrm{d}b\wedge\mathrm{d}\gamma = \mathrm{d}b\wedge \mathrm{d}y^1\wedge\mathrm{d}y^2. $$
This latter expression vanishes if and only if $b$ is a quadratic form in the variables $y^1$ and $y^2$. In particular, $\alpha$ is then a $1$-form expressed in terms of $y^1$ and $y^2$ alone. Thus, we see that $\alpha\wedge\mathrm{d}\alpha = 0$ with $\mathrm{d}\alpha\not=0$ if and only if there is a linear map $f:\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^2$ such that $\alpha=f^*\bar\alpha$, where $\bar\alpha$ is a non-closed $1$-form on $\mathbb{R}^2$ with linear coefficients.

One might be interested in the case in which the kernel of $\alpha$ is a contact plane field, which is a stronger condition.

Now, in order for the kernel of $\alpha$ to be contact (away from the origin, where, of course, the kernel of $\alpha$ is everything), we must have that the dimension $n$ be odd, say, $n=2m+1$ and that $\alpha\wedge(\mathrm{d}\alpha)^m$ be nonzero (away from the origin). Again, writing $A = B + C$ where $B$ is symmetric and $C$ is skew-symmetric, and, correspondingly, $\alpha = \beta + \gamma$, then $\beta = \mathrm{d}b$ for some quadratic function $b$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$ and $\mathrm{d}\alpha = \mathrm{d}\gamma$.

Now, it is not hard to show that $\gamma\wedge(\mathrm{d}\gamma)^m$ vanishes identically, so that $$ \alpha\wedge(\mathrm{d}\alpha)^m = \beta\wedge(\mathrm{d}\gamma)^m. $$ Thus, the contact condition implies that $(\mathrm{d}\gamma)^m$ be nowhere vanishing. It follows that, by a linear change of coordinates, we can find coordinates $y^0,y^1,y^2,\ldots,y^{2m}$ such that $$ \gamma =\tfrac12\bigl( y^1\,\mathrm{d}y^2-y^2\,\mathrm{d}y^1+y^3\,\mathrm{d}y^4-y^4\,\mathrm{d}y^3 + \cdots + y^{2m-1}\,\mathrm{d}y^{2m}-y^{2m}\,\mathrm{d}y^{2m-1}\bigr). $$ When we write $b$ in these coordinates, it has the form $$ b = \tfrac12\bigl(b_{0}(y^0)^2 + 2b_{i}y^0y^i + b_{ij}\,y^iy^j\bigr), $$ and so $$ \alpha \wedge (\mathrm{d}\alpha)^m = m!\, (b_0y^0+b_iy^i) \,\mathrm{d}y^0\wedge\mathrm{d}y^1\wedge\cdots\wedge\mathrm{d}y^{2m}. $$

Thus, we see that, in order to have the kernel be contact (at least away from a hyperplane), we need that $C$ have rank $2m = n-1$ (the maximum that it could possibly have) and that null space of the quadratic form defined by $B$ should not contain the ($1$-dimensional) kernel of $C$. This is necessary and sufficient for contact (away from the obvious hyperplane).

Finally, let me remark that, in order to get a sub-Riemannian structure, you also need a positive definite quadratic form defined on the kernel of $\alpha$. Now, it's not immediately clear which one you want to take. In the generic case, you could simply use $B$ to define a quadratic form $g_B = b_{ij}\,\mathrm{d}x^i\mathrm{d}x^j$ and restrict it to the kernel of $\alpha$. Assuming that this is positive definite on the kernel of $\alpha$ (which, of course, it would be if $B$ were positive definite), this would work. Is this the sub-Riemannian structure you have in mind?

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Your interesting answer help me to realize that there are matrix $A$ which are not symmetric but the corresponding 1- form is not closed but produce a foliation. The subRiemannian structure I was thinking about was the restriction of the standard metric of $\mathbb{R}^n$ . But just another question: When the linear 1 form $\alpha$ is not closed but it produce a foliation, is it possible we have a compact leaf with non trivial holonomy?this can not be happen for closed 1 form associated to a symmetric matrix.Thanks again for your attention to my question. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 9, 2017 at 5:49

You must log in to answer this question.

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