Let $(\mathcal{M},g)$ be a torsion free compact Riemannian manifold of dimension $n$. Hence from the metric we know there is an associated horizontal sub-bundle $H_u F \mathcal{M}$ of the orthonormal frame bundle $F \mathcal{M}$ at a frame $u:\mathbb{R}^n\to T_p\mathcal{M}$. Furthermore there are theorems that state that for each curve $\gamma:[0,1]\to\mathcal{M}$ and initial frame $u_0$ there is a unique horizontal lift $\tilde{\gamma}:[0,1]\to F \mathcal{M}$.

Question 1

What is the expression for the integrand of the energy functional of a curve $\gamma:[0,1]\to\mathcal{M}$, $$ g_{\gamma}(\dot{\gamma},\dot{\gamma}) $$ in terms of its unique horizontal lift $\tilde{\gamma}:[0,1]\to F \mathcal{M}$? Does the answer depend on $u_0$? Since there is also then a uniquely defined curve in $w:[0,1]\to\mathbb{R}^n$ (which I guess is chart independent), what is the value of $g_{\gamma}(\dot{\gamma},\dot{\gamma})$ via $w$? Could it be just simply $$ g_{\gamma}(\dot{\gamma},\dot{\gamma}) = \langle\dot{w},\dot{w}\rangle_{\mathbb{R}^n} $$?

What is an expression for $\gamma$ in terms of $w$? (I know that $ \dot{\gamma} = \tilde{\gamma}\dot{w}$, but how to solve this for $\gamma$ since there is the lift on the RHS?).

Question 2

It seems like in construction stochastic processes on $\mathcal{M}$ the orthonormal frame bundle is heavily used because one can solve stochastic equations in $\mathbb{R}^n$, move them to $F \mathcal{M}$ in a straight forward manner, and then project them down to $\mathcal{M}$. This is, if I understand correctly, the essence of the Eells–Elworthy–Malliavin construction. My question is then, why not define Brownian motion in $\mathcal{M}$ via charts, first down at the Euclidean space and then pulling back to the manifold using the chart? I guess there would be a way to glue the curve back together.

Is the frame bundle really just a chart-free way to talk about the manifold's Euclidean structure in a way that is compatible with the metric?


On the orthonormal frame bundle we have soldering forms $\omega_i$ and connection forms $\omega_{ij}$. A lift is horizontal just when $\omega_{ij}=0$ on it. So the velocity can be described by its $\omega_i$ components: $v_i(t)=i_{\tilde\gamma'(t)}\omega_i$. The energy is $\sum_i v_i^2$. You don't define $w$, but I guess it is the development, which is coordinate independent but depends on a choice of initial point and frame on Euclidean space. Its energy has the same expression, also equal to $\left<\dot w,\dot w\right>$. To solve for $\gamma$ in terms of $w$, first find the components $v_i=i_{\tilde w'}\omega_i$ on the frame bundle of Euclidean space. Then solve $i_{\tilde\gamma'(t)}\omega_i=v_i(t)$ and $i_{\tilde\gamma'(t)}\omega_{ij}=0$. Then project to find $\gamma(t)$. The frame bundle avoids charts, and allows simpler algebraic expressions for curvature.

Here the map $i_v \xi$ is application of a tangent vector $v$ into a $1$-form $\xi$.

Note that since the frame bundle of Euclidean space is a product of Euclidean space with the rotation group, every lift of a curve $w(t)$ in Euclidean space is a curve $\tilde w(t)=(w(t),E)$ where $E$ is any constant rotation matrix. If the matrix $E$ has columns $E_1,\dots,E_n$, then $v_i(t)=\left<E_i,\dot w(t)\right>$.

Question 2: Brownian motion does not stay inside a single chart for any positive time; it has some chance of escaping. You can see this already in Euclidean space, as the scale invariance of Brownian motion.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your answer. I hesitate to mark it as accepted because it doesn't really address Question 2, but if you think I should accept it anyway I will. Can you say more about the map $i$ which you refer to? What is a good reference for this? $\endgroup$ – PPR May 4 at 21:44

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.