5
$\begingroup$

Let $M$ be a compact manifold with boundary. If we have two vector bundles $E, F \to M$ with inner products and a differential operator $D: C^{\infty}(E) \to C^{\infty}(F)$ then $D$ admits a formal adjoint $D^*: C^{\infty}(F) \to C^{\infty}(E)$.

This satisfies, for smooth sections with compact support in the interior $\phi \in C^{\infty}_c(E)$, $\psi \in C^{\infty}_c(F)$ the identity $$\int_M \langle D\phi, \psi \rangle_F \text{dvol} = \int_M \langle \phi, D^*\psi \rangle_E \text{dvol}.$$

My question is, when can we understand the value of $$\int_M (\langle D\phi, \psi \rangle_F - \langle \phi, D^*\psi \rangle_E)\text{dvol}$$ when $\phi, \psi$ are not compactly supported in the interior? There should be some boundary term, but I can't figure out exactly what it should be.

My motivating example is the following "integration by parts" for the spin Dirac operator on the positive spinor bundle over a spin$^c$ manifold with boundary: $$\int_M \langle D_A^+\phi, \psi \rangle = \int_M \langle \phi, D_A^-\psi \rangle - \int_{\partial M}\langle \phi, \rho(\nu)\psi \rangle.$$

Here $\rho(\nu)$ is Clifford multiplication by the unit normal vector to the boundary.

There is a similar identity for the Levi-Civita connection, etc.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This question is really more suitable for math.stackexchange.com. My suggestion is to write everything out carefully in local coordinates on a neighborhood of a boundary point. $\endgroup$ – Deane Yang Dec 22 '17 at 16:34
  • $\begingroup$ Hi Deane, my apologies. I googled around for a while and couldn't find anything so I thought it may be "MathOverflow-esque" in the sense that there are some nontrivial conditions on D that I wasn't seeing. I guess it does just boil down to being careful with local coordinates, however. $\endgroup$ – Rohil Prasad Dec 22 '17 at 17:40
12
$\begingroup$

Yes, there is a generalization of such a "boundary term" for an arbitrary linear differential operator (smooth coefficients assumed, of course). My favorite way to define the formal adjoint $D^*$ of a differential operator $D$ doesn't involve any integrals. Given $D$, $D^*$ is defined by the requirement to satisfy an identity of the form $$ \langle D[\phi], \psi \rangle \mathrm{dvol} - \langle \phi, D^*[\psi] \rangle \mathrm{dvol} = dW[\phi,\psi] , $$ where $d$ is the exterior derivative, for some differential operator $W[\phi,\psi]$ that is bilinear in its arguments and is valued in $(\dim M - 1)$-forms. Such an identity is sometimes called of Green or Liouville type. If such a $D^*$ exists, then it automatically unique and (by Stokes' theorem) satisfies the adjoint formula involving integration over $M$, which you gave in the question. It is possible to go in the other direction (start from the adjoint formula with the integral and end up with the identity that I wrote), but that requires some slightly sophisticated machinery from the calculus of variations on jet bundles.

The point of the above definition is that the $W$ form is what gives you the "boundary term" that you are looking for. Namely, without the restriction of compact support (but still assuming that $M$ is compact as a manifold with boundary), you get $$ \int (\langle D[\phi], \psi \rangle - \langle \phi, D^*[\psi] \rangle)\mathrm{dvol} = \int_{\partial M} W[\phi,\psi] . $$ Note that, by itself, $W$ is not unique, since it can equally well be replaced by $W[\phi,\psi] + dU[\phi,\psi]$. But the $dU$ term will cancel from the boundary integral, since $\partial M$ now itself has no boundary.

To actually find $W$, it is easiest to work in local coordinates, as suggested by Deane Yang. In local coordinates $(x^1,\ldots, x^n)$, $$ dW = d (W^a dx^1 \cdots dx^{a-1} \wedge dx^{a+1} \cdots dx^n) = \partial_a W^a d^nx $$ and the key identity that you need is of course $$ (\partial_b f) g d^nx - f (-\partial_b g) d^nx = \partial_a (\delta^a_b f g) d^nx . $$ Heuristically, as you use integration by parts to get $D^*$ from $D$, instead of throwing away all the boundary terms, you progressively collect them in $W$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.