Difference between revisions of "Talk:Aufgaben:Problem 9"

From Ferienserie MMP2
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 35: Line 35:
 
\end{align}
 
\end{align}
  
As \(\dot{TT^{-1}}=\dot{T}T^{-1}+T\dot{T^{-1}}=0\) and \(A\) is diagonal and therefore commutes with everything.
+
As \(\dot{TT^{-1}}=\dot{T}T^{-1}+T\dot{T^{-1}}=0\) and \(A\) and \(g\) are symmetric and therefore \(T\) is orthogonal.
  
 
Since the trace is invariant under conjugacy, the fact is prooven.
 
Since the trace is invariant under conjugacy, the fact is prooven.
  
 
--[[User:Brynerm|Brynerm]] ([[User talk:Brynerm|talk]]) 09:53, 1 July 2015 (CEST)
 
--[[User:Brynerm|Brynerm]] ([[User talk:Brynerm|talk]]) 09:53, 1 July 2015 (CEST)

Revision as of 08:01, 1 July 2015

My idea is to transform \( g^{ij} \nabla_i(\partial_j f) \) into \(\Delta f \). From there we have to show \( L_g(f) = \Delta(f) \) as in notes_new at pg 82.

The first part should be:

$$ g^{ij} \nabla_i \partial_j + \underbrace{ \nabla_i g_{ij}}_\text{= 0, from a)} = g^{ij} \nabla_i \partial_j + \underbrace{( \nabla_i g_{ij}) \partial_j}_\text{= 0} = g^{ij} \nabla_i \partial_j + \underbrace{( \nabla_i g^{ij})\partial_j}_\text{= 0} = \nabla_i (g^{ij} \partial_j) = \nabla_i \partial^i = \Delta$$

f is not compactly supported so I don't think you can use this, although maybe they just forgot to write that. It does makes sense that we should use this identity, considering exercise (a) Carl (talk) 15:57, 20 June 2015 (CEST)

There is a simple proof for the derivative of the determinant:

We know that \(g\) is symmetric and therefore diagonalisable. \(\det g = \det (T^{-1}AT) = \det A\) where \(A\) is diagonal:

(Note that \(A_{jj}(t) > 0\) since \(g\) is also positive definite \(\Leftrightarrow\) the eigenavalues of \(g\) are strictly positiv)

\begin{align} \frac{d}{dt} \det g(t) &= \frac{d}{dt}\det A(t) = \frac{d}{dt} \prod_{i=1}^n A_{ii}(t) = \sum_{j = 1}^n \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{A_{ii}(t)}{A_{jj}(t)} \dot{A}_{jj}(t) = \prod_{i=1}^n A_{ii}(t) \sum_{j = 1}^n \frac{\dot{A}_{jj}(t)}{A_{jj}(t)}\\ &= \det A(t) \sum_{j = 1}^n \frac{\dot{A}_{jj}(t)}{A_{jj}(t)} = \det A(t) \sum_{j = 1}^n (A(t)^{-1}\dot A(t))_{jj} = \det A(t) tr( A(t)^{-1} \dot{A}(t)) \end{align}

Carl (talk) 11:51, 28 June 2015 (CEST)

There was some stuff I forgot at the end. I added the full proof to the solution. I used dots in instead of derivatives in most places, this is probably bad style but it looks less confusing this way.

Carl (talk) 15:50, 28 June 2015 (CEST)


you forgot to change the indicies in b) of solution (so you use j for the derivative and also for to sum over, which is confusing)

I've also got an alternative proof for \(tr(g^{-1}\dot{g})=tr(A^{-1}\dot{A})\):

\begin{align} g^{-1}\dot{g}&=(T^{-1}AT)^{-1}\dot{(T^{-1}AT)} \\ &=T^{-1}A^{-1}T(\dot{T^{-1}}AT+T^{-1}\dot{A}T+T^{-1}A\dot{T}) \\ &=T^{-1}A^{-1}(-\dot{T}T^{-1}A+\dot{A}+A\dot{T}T^{-1})T \\ &=T^{-1}(A^{-1}\dot{A})T \end{align}

As \(\dot{TT^{-1}}=\dot{T}T^{-1}+T\dot{T^{-1}}=0\) and \(A\) and \(g\) are symmetric and therefore \(T\) is orthogonal.

Since the trace is invariant under conjugacy, the fact is prooven.

--Brynerm (talk) 09:53, 1 July 2015 (CEST)