Prove that $Xcdot (nabla times X)=0$, where $X perp T_x$

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Consider a $C^1$ map $f:R^2to R^3$ such that $df_x:R^2to R^3$ has rank $2$ everywhere. Define the tangent plane $T_x$ as $df_x(R^2)subset R^3$. Suppose a vector field $X$ in $R^3$ is orthogonal to $T_x$ for all $x$, i.e., $X(f(x))cdot Y=0$ for all $xin R^2$ and $Yin T_x$. Show that $Xcdot (nabla times X)=0$ at all points $f(x)$.
My thoughts: any vector field on $R^3$ can be written as $a(p,q,r)partial_p+b(p,q,r)partial q+c(p,q,r)partial _r$ where $p,q,r$ are coordinates in $R^3$. So $$nablatimes X=(partial_qcpartial_r-partial_rbpartial_q,partial_rapartial_p-partial_pcpartial_r,partial_pbpartial_q-partial_qapartial_p)$$ and
$$Xcdot (nabla times X)=apartial_ppartial_qcpartial_r-apartial_ppartial_rbpartial_q+bpartial_qpartial_rapartial_p-bpartial_qpartial_pcpartial_r+cpartial_rpartial_pbpartial_q-cpartial_rpartial_qapartial _p$$
I need to show that the above expression applied to $f(x)$ is zero for all $xin R^2$. Further, $$X(f(x))=(apartial_pf(x),bpartial_qf(x),cpartial_rf(x))\Y=(partial_xf_1u+partial_yf_1 v,partial_xf_2u+partial_yf_2 v,partial_xf_3u+partial_yf_3 v)$$ where $f=(f_1,f_2,f_3), u,v,in R$. And we are given that $X(f(x))cdot Y=0$. Even if I expand this, I don't know what to do next...
calculus real-analysis multivariable-calculus differential-geometry differential-topology
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Consider a $C^1$ map $f:R^2to R^3$ such that $df_x:R^2to R^3$ has rank $2$ everywhere. Define the tangent plane $T_x$ as $df_x(R^2)subset R^3$. Suppose a vector field $X$ in $R^3$ is orthogonal to $T_x$ for all $x$, i.e., $X(f(x))cdot Y=0$ for all $xin R^2$ and $Yin T_x$. Show that $Xcdot (nabla times X)=0$ at all points $f(x)$.
My thoughts: any vector field on $R^3$ can be written as $a(p,q,r)partial_p+b(p,q,r)partial q+c(p,q,r)partial _r$ where $p,q,r$ are coordinates in $R^3$. So $$nablatimes X=(partial_qcpartial_r-partial_rbpartial_q,partial_rapartial_p-partial_pcpartial_r,partial_pbpartial_q-partial_qapartial_p)$$ and
$$Xcdot (nabla times X)=apartial_ppartial_qcpartial_r-apartial_ppartial_rbpartial_q+bpartial_qpartial_rapartial_p-bpartial_qpartial_pcpartial_r+cpartial_rpartial_pbpartial_q-cpartial_rpartial_qapartial _p$$
I need to show that the above expression applied to $f(x)$ is zero for all $xin R^2$. Further, $$X(f(x))=(apartial_pf(x),bpartial_qf(x),cpartial_rf(x))\Y=(partial_xf_1u+partial_yf_1 v,partial_xf_2u+partial_yf_2 v,partial_xf_3u+partial_yf_3 v)$$ where $f=(f_1,f_2,f_3), u,v,in R$. And we are given that $X(f(x))cdot Y=0$. Even if I expand this, I don't know what to do next...
calculus real-analysis multivariable-calculus differential-geometry differential-topology
Haven't you forgotten the coefficients $a$, $b$, $c$ when you take the dot product so that the expression for $X cdot (nabla times X)$ should be $a partial_p partial_q c partial_r - a partial_p partial_r b partial_q + cdots$
â md2perpe
Aug 9 at 18:06
@md2perpe I have, thanks; fixed. But still no idea how to proceed.
â user557902851
Aug 9 at 18:16
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Consider a $C^1$ map $f:R^2to R^3$ such that $df_x:R^2to R^3$ has rank $2$ everywhere. Define the tangent plane $T_x$ as $df_x(R^2)subset R^3$. Suppose a vector field $X$ in $R^3$ is orthogonal to $T_x$ for all $x$, i.e., $X(f(x))cdot Y=0$ for all $xin R^2$ and $Yin T_x$. Show that $Xcdot (nabla times X)=0$ at all points $f(x)$.
My thoughts: any vector field on $R^3$ can be written as $a(p,q,r)partial_p+b(p,q,r)partial q+c(p,q,r)partial _r$ where $p,q,r$ are coordinates in $R^3$. So $$nablatimes X=(partial_qcpartial_r-partial_rbpartial_q,partial_rapartial_p-partial_pcpartial_r,partial_pbpartial_q-partial_qapartial_p)$$ and
$$Xcdot (nabla times X)=apartial_ppartial_qcpartial_r-apartial_ppartial_rbpartial_q+bpartial_qpartial_rapartial_p-bpartial_qpartial_pcpartial_r+cpartial_rpartial_pbpartial_q-cpartial_rpartial_qapartial _p$$
I need to show that the above expression applied to $f(x)$ is zero for all $xin R^2$. Further, $$X(f(x))=(apartial_pf(x),bpartial_qf(x),cpartial_rf(x))\Y=(partial_xf_1u+partial_yf_1 v,partial_xf_2u+partial_yf_2 v,partial_xf_3u+partial_yf_3 v)$$ where $f=(f_1,f_2,f_3), u,v,in R$. And we are given that $X(f(x))cdot Y=0$. Even if I expand this, I don't know what to do next...
calculus real-analysis multivariable-calculus differential-geometry differential-topology
Consider a $C^1$ map $f:R^2to R^3$ such that $df_x:R^2to R^3$ has rank $2$ everywhere. Define the tangent plane $T_x$ as $df_x(R^2)subset R^3$. Suppose a vector field $X$ in $R^3$ is orthogonal to $T_x$ for all $x$, i.e., $X(f(x))cdot Y=0$ for all $xin R^2$ and $Yin T_x$. Show that $Xcdot (nabla times X)=0$ at all points $f(x)$.
My thoughts: any vector field on $R^3$ can be written as $a(p,q,r)partial_p+b(p,q,r)partial q+c(p,q,r)partial _r$ where $p,q,r$ are coordinates in $R^3$. So $$nablatimes X=(partial_qcpartial_r-partial_rbpartial_q,partial_rapartial_p-partial_pcpartial_r,partial_pbpartial_q-partial_qapartial_p)$$ and
$$Xcdot (nabla times X)=apartial_ppartial_qcpartial_r-apartial_ppartial_rbpartial_q+bpartial_qpartial_rapartial_p-bpartial_qpartial_pcpartial_r+cpartial_rpartial_pbpartial_q-cpartial_rpartial_qapartial _p$$
I need to show that the above expression applied to $f(x)$ is zero for all $xin R^2$. Further, $$X(f(x))=(apartial_pf(x),bpartial_qf(x),cpartial_rf(x))\Y=(partial_xf_1u+partial_yf_1 v,partial_xf_2u+partial_yf_2 v,partial_xf_3u+partial_yf_3 v)$$ where $f=(f_1,f_2,f_3), u,v,in R$. And we are given that $X(f(x))cdot Y=0$. Even if I expand this, I don't know what to do next...
calculus real-analysis multivariable-calculus differential-geometry differential-topology
edited Aug 9 at 18:15
asked Aug 9 at 16:55
user557902851
407117
407117
Haven't you forgotten the coefficients $a$, $b$, $c$ when you take the dot product so that the expression for $X cdot (nabla times X)$ should be $a partial_p partial_q c partial_r - a partial_p partial_r b partial_q + cdots$
â md2perpe
Aug 9 at 18:06
@md2perpe I have, thanks; fixed. But still no idea how to proceed.
â user557902851
Aug 9 at 18:16
add a comment |Â
Haven't you forgotten the coefficients $a$, $b$, $c$ when you take the dot product so that the expression for $X cdot (nabla times X)$ should be $a partial_p partial_q c partial_r - a partial_p partial_r b partial_q + cdots$
â md2perpe
Aug 9 at 18:06
@md2perpe I have, thanks; fixed. But still no idea how to proceed.
â user557902851
Aug 9 at 18:16
Haven't you forgotten the coefficients $a$, $b$, $c$ when you take the dot product so that the expression for $X cdot (nabla times X)$ should be $a partial_p partial_q c partial_r - a partial_p partial_r b partial_q + cdots$
â md2perpe
Aug 9 at 18:06
Haven't you forgotten the coefficients $a$, $b$, $c$ when you take the dot product so that the expression for $X cdot (nabla times X)$ should be $a partial_p partial_q c partial_r - a partial_p partial_r b partial_q + cdots$
â md2perpe
Aug 9 at 18:06
@md2perpe I have, thanks; fixed. But still no idea how to proceed.
â user557902851
Aug 9 at 18:16
@md2perpe I have, thanks; fixed. But still no idea how to proceed.
â user557902851
Aug 9 at 18:16
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
Differential forms for the win.
Think of the image of $f$ locally as an (embedded) surface $M$. Take a nonzero $1$-form $omega$ on an open subset of $Bbb R^3$ so that $M$ is an integral manifold of $omega=0$. [For example, express $M$ as a level set of a smooth function $g$ and take $omega = dg$.] The fact that $omega=0$ is integrable tells you that $domega wedgeomega = 0$.
Under the usual dictionary between $1$-forms and vector fields in $Bbb R^3$, if $X$ corresponds to $omega$, $textcurl, X = nablatimes X$ corresponds to the $2$-form $domega$, and the dot product $Xcdot(nablatimes X)$ corresponds to the $3$-form $omegawedge domega$. (It is easy to check, in coordinates, that if you have vector fields $X,Y$ corresponding to $1$-forms $omega,psi$, then $Xcdot Y = star(omegawedgestarpsi)$.)
By the way, note that if we replace $X$ by any functional multiple $phi X$, $(phi X)cdot(nablatimes phi X) = phi^2 Xcdot(nablatimes X) + phi Xcdot (nablaphitimes X) = 0$, as well. From the differential forms viewpoint, we're looking at $(phiomega)wedge d(phiomega) = phi^2 omegawedge domega + phiomegawedge dphiwedgeomega$, and $omegawedge dphiwedgeomega = dphiwedgeomegawedgeomega = 0$, since $omega$ is a $1$-form.
EDIT: More interesting, if we replace $X$ by $X+Z$ for any vector field $Z$ vanishing on $M$, why does $(X+Z)cdotnablatimes(X+Z)$ still vanish on $M$? This boils down to seeing that $Xcdotnablatimes Z = 0$ on $M$. This is true the component of the curl orthogonal to $M$ comes only from partial derivatives of components of $Z$ in directions tangent to $M$, and these vanish because $Z=0$ on $M$. [This, too, is easier to see using differential forms, since we don't need to worry about a particular coordinate system. Choose local coordinates $(x,y,z)$ so that $M = z=0$. Taking $omega = dz + eta$, where $eta = P,dx+Q,dy+R,dz$ vanishes identically on $M$, we want to see that $domegawedgeomega$ still vanishes on $M$. Well, $detawedge dz = left(fracpartial Qpartial x-fracpartial Ppartial yright) dxwedge dywedge dz$, and these partials vanish along $z=0$ since the functions are identically $0$ on $z=0$.]
If you are not familiar with differential forms and integrability, I would recommend proceeding as follows. Write $M$ as $g=0$ and take $X = nabla g$. (Recall that gradients are orthogonal to level sets.) Then $nablatimes X = 0$ and we're done. From my earlier comment, rescaling $X$ won't change the result of the computation.
If you want to justify the assertion that $M$ is (locally) a level set of a smooth function, you need something like the implicit function theorem. It is locally a graph over one of the coordinate planes, say $z=psi(x,y)$. Then take $g(x,y,z) = z-psi(x,y)$.
I am not very used to differential forms but I would like to understand this reasoning. "The fact that ÃÂ=0 is integrable tells you that dÃÂâ§ÃÂ=0". What do you mean when you say that " ÃÂ=0 is integrable ? " and how do you deduce that?. Maybe I am lost in the terminology can you give some link ?
â Thomas
Aug 10 at 9:19
This is the simplest case of the Frobenius Theorem. You can find this in any first-year graduate text on differentiable manifolds. ... But do note the last two paragraphs of my post give an elementary argument with no reference to differential forms.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 14:05
Regarding your second last paragraph, doesn't the reasoning there require that $X = phi , nabla g$ in a neighborhood of $M$? We only know that it's valid on $M,$ don't we?
â md2perpe
Aug 10 at 17:24
@md2perpe: My apologies. Great call. I will edit.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 18:27
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
Differential forms for the win.
Think of the image of $f$ locally as an (embedded) surface $M$. Take a nonzero $1$-form $omega$ on an open subset of $Bbb R^3$ so that $M$ is an integral manifold of $omega=0$. [For example, express $M$ as a level set of a smooth function $g$ and take $omega = dg$.] The fact that $omega=0$ is integrable tells you that $domega wedgeomega = 0$.
Under the usual dictionary between $1$-forms and vector fields in $Bbb R^3$, if $X$ corresponds to $omega$, $textcurl, X = nablatimes X$ corresponds to the $2$-form $domega$, and the dot product $Xcdot(nablatimes X)$ corresponds to the $3$-form $omegawedge domega$. (It is easy to check, in coordinates, that if you have vector fields $X,Y$ corresponding to $1$-forms $omega,psi$, then $Xcdot Y = star(omegawedgestarpsi)$.)
By the way, note that if we replace $X$ by any functional multiple $phi X$, $(phi X)cdot(nablatimes phi X) = phi^2 Xcdot(nablatimes X) + phi Xcdot (nablaphitimes X) = 0$, as well. From the differential forms viewpoint, we're looking at $(phiomega)wedge d(phiomega) = phi^2 omegawedge domega + phiomegawedge dphiwedgeomega$, and $omegawedge dphiwedgeomega = dphiwedgeomegawedgeomega = 0$, since $omega$ is a $1$-form.
EDIT: More interesting, if we replace $X$ by $X+Z$ for any vector field $Z$ vanishing on $M$, why does $(X+Z)cdotnablatimes(X+Z)$ still vanish on $M$? This boils down to seeing that $Xcdotnablatimes Z = 0$ on $M$. This is true the component of the curl orthogonal to $M$ comes only from partial derivatives of components of $Z$ in directions tangent to $M$, and these vanish because $Z=0$ on $M$. [This, too, is easier to see using differential forms, since we don't need to worry about a particular coordinate system. Choose local coordinates $(x,y,z)$ so that $M = z=0$. Taking $omega = dz + eta$, where $eta = P,dx+Q,dy+R,dz$ vanishes identically on $M$, we want to see that $domegawedgeomega$ still vanishes on $M$. Well, $detawedge dz = left(fracpartial Qpartial x-fracpartial Ppartial yright) dxwedge dywedge dz$, and these partials vanish along $z=0$ since the functions are identically $0$ on $z=0$.]
If you are not familiar with differential forms and integrability, I would recommend proceeding as follows. Write $M$ as $g=0$ and take $X = nabla g$. (Recall that gradients are orthogonal to level sets.) Then $nablatimes X = 0$ and we're done. From my earlier comment, rescaling $X$ won't change the result of the computation.
If you want to justify the assertion that $M$ is (locally) a level set of a smooth function, you need something like the implicit function theorem. It is locally a graph over one of the coordinate planes, say $z=psi(x,y)$. Then take $g(x,y,z) = z-psi(x,y)$.
I am not very used to differential forms but I would like to understand this reasoning. "The fact that ÃÂ=0 is integrable tells you that dÃÂâ§ÃÂ=0". What do you mean when you say that " ÃÂ=0 is integrable ? " and how do you deduce that?. Maybe I am lost in the terminology can you give some link ?
â Thomas
Aug 10 at 9:19
This is the simplest case of the Frobenius Theorem. You can find this in any first-year graduate text on differentiable manifolds. ... But do note the last two paragraphs of my post give an elementary argument with no reference to differential forms.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 14:05
Regarding your second last paragraph, doesn't the reasoning there require that $X = phi , nabla g$ in a neighborhood of $M$? We only know that it's valid on $M,$ don't we?
â md2perpe
Aug 10 at 17:24
@md2perpe: My apologies. Great call. I will edit.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 18:27
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Differential forms for the win.
Think of the image of $f$ locally as an (embedded) surface $M$. Take a nonzero $1$-form $omega$ on an open subset of $Bbb R^3$ so that $M$ is an integral manifold of $omega=0$. [For example, express $M$ as a level set of a smooth function $g$ and take $omega = dg$.] The fact that $omega=0$ is integrable tells you that $domega wedgeomega = 0$.
Under the usual dictionary between $1$-forms and vector fields in $Bbb R^3$, if $X$ corresponds to $omega$, $textcurl, X = nablatimes X$ corresponds to the $2$-form $domega$, and the dot product $Xcdot(nablatimes X)$ corresponds to the $3$-form $omegawedge domega$. (It is easy to check, in coordinates, that if you have vector fields $X,Y$ corresponding to $1$-forms $omega,psi$, then $Xcdot Y = star(omegawedgestarpsi)$.)
By the way, note that if we replace $X$ by any functional multiple $phi X$, $(phi X)cdot(nablatimes phi X) = phi^2 Xcdot(nablatimes X) + phi Xcdot (nablaphitimes X) = 0$, as well. From the differential forms viewpoint, we're looking at $(phiomega)wedge d(phiomega) = phi^2 omegawedge domega + phiomegawedge dphiwedgeomega$, and $omegawedge dphiwedgeomega = dphiwedgeomegawedgeomega = 0$, since $omega$ is a $1$-form.
EDIT: More interesting, if we replace $X$ by $X+Z$ for any vector field $Z$ vanishing on $M$, why does $(X+Z)cdotnablatimes(X+Z)$ still vanish on $M$? This boils down to seeing that $Xcdotnablatimes Z = 0$ on $M$. This is true the component of the curl orthogonal to $M$ comes only from partial derivatives of components of $Z$ in directions tangent to $M$, and these vanish because $Z=0$ on $M$. [This, too, is easier to see using differential forms, since we don't need to worry about a particular coordinate system. Choose local coordinates $(x,y,z)$ so that $M = z=0$. Taking $omega = dz + eta$, where $eta = P,dx+Q,dy+R,dz$ vanishes identically on $M$, we want to see that $domegawedgeomega$ still vanishes on $M$. Well, $detawedge dz = left(fracpartial Qpartial x-fracpartial Ppartial yright) dxwedge dywedge dz$, and these partials vanish along $z=0$ since the functions are identically $0$ on $z=0$.]
If you are not familiar with differential forms and integrability, I would recommend proceeding as follows. Write $M$ as $g=0$ and take $X = nabla g$. (Recall that gradients are orthogonal to level sets.) Then $nablatimes X = 0$ and we're done. From my earlier comment, rescaling $X$ won't change the result of the computation.
If you want to justify the assertion that $M$ is (locally) a level set of a smooth function, you need something like the implicit function theorem. It is locally a graph over one of the coordinate planes, say $z=psi(x,y)$. Then take $g(x,y,z) = z-psi(x,y)$.
I am not very used to differential forms but I would like to understand this reasoning. "The fact that ÃÂ=0 is integrable tells you that dÃÂâ§ÃÂ=0". What do you mean when you say that " ÃÂ=0 is integrable ? " and how do you deduce that?. Maybe I am lost in the terminology can you give some link ?
â Thomas
Aug 10 at 9:19
This is the simplest case of the Frobenius Theorem. You can find this in any first-year graduate text on differentiable manifolds. ... But do note the last two paragraphs of my post give an elementary argument with no reference to differential forms.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 14:05
Regarding your second last paragraph, doesn't the reasoning there require that $X = phi , nabla g$ in a neighborhood of $M$? We only know that it's valid on $M,$ don't we?
â md2perpe
Aug 10 at 17:24
@md2perpe: My apologies. Great call. I will edit.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 18:27
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Differential forms for the win.
Think of the image of $f$ locally as an (embedded) surface $M$. Take a nonzero $1$-form $omega$ on an open subset of $Bbb R^3$ so that $M$ is an integral manifold of $omega=0$. [For example, express $M$ as a level set of a smooth function $g$ and take $omega = dg$.] The fact that $omega=0$ is integrable tells you that $domega wedgeomega = 0$.
Under the usual dictionary between $1$-forms and vector fields in $Bbb R^3$, if $X$ corresponds to $omega$, $textcurl, X = nablatimes X$ corresponds to the $2$-form $domega$, and the dot product $Xcdot(nablatimes X)$ corresponds to the $3$-form $omegawedge domega$. (It is easy to check, in coordinates, that if you have vector fields $X,Y$ corresponding to $1$-forms $omega,psi$, then $Xcdot Y = star(omegawedgestarpsi)$.)
By the way, note that if we replace $X$ by any functional multiple $phi X$, $(phi X)cdot(nablatimes phi X) = phi^2 Xcdot(nablatimes X) + phi Xcdot (nablaphitimes X) = 0$, as well. From the differential forms viewpoint, we're looking at $(phiomega)wedge d(phiomega) = phi^2 omegawedge domega + phiomegawedge dphiwedgeomega$, and $omegawedge dphiwedgeomega = dphiwedgeomegawedgeomega = 0$, since $omega$ is a $1$-form.
EDIT: More interesting, if we replace $X$ by $X+Z$ for any vector field $Z$ vanishing on $M$, why does $(X+Z)cdotnablatimes(X+Z)$ still vanish on $M$? This boils down to seeing that $Xcdotnablatimes Z = 0$ on $M$. This is true the component of the curl orthogonal to $M$ comes only from partial derivatives of components of $Z$ in directions tangent to $M$, and these vanish because $Z=0$ on $M$. [This, too, is easier to see using differential forms, since we don't need to worry about a particular coordinate system. Choose local coordinates $(x,y,z)$ so that $M = z=0$. Taking $omega = dz + eta$, where $eta = P,dx+Q,dy+R,dz$ vanishes identically on $M$, we want to see that $domegawedgeomega$ still vanishes on $M$. Well, $detawedge dz = left(fracpartial Qpartial x-fracpartial Ppartial yright) dxwedge dywedge dz$, and these partials vanish along $z=0$ since the functions are identically $0$ on $z=0$.]
If you are not familiar with differential forms and integrability, I would recommend proceeding as follows. Write $M$ as $g=0$ and take $X = nabla g$. (Recall that gradients are orthogonal to level sets.) Then $nablatimes X = 0$ and we're done. From my earlier comment, rescaling $X$ won't change the result of the computation.
If you want to justify the assertion that $M$ is (locally) a level set of a smooth function, you need something like the implicit function theorem. It is locally a graph over one of the coordinate planes, say $z=psi(x,y)$. Then take $g(x,y,z) = z-psi(x,y)$.
Differential forms for the win.
Think of the image of $f$ locally as an (embedded) surface $M$. Take a nonzero $1$-form $omega$ on an open subset of $Bbb R^3$ so that $M$ is an integral manifold of $omega=0$. [For example, express $M$ as a level set of a smooth function $g$ and take $omega = dg$.] The fact that $omega=0$ is integrable tells you that $domega wedgeomega = 0$.
Under the usual dictionary between $1$-forms and vector fields in $Bbb R^3$, if $X$ corresponds to $omega$, $textcurl, X = nablatimes X$ corresponds to the $2$-form $domega$, and the dot product $Xcdot(nablatimes X)$ corresponds to the $3$-form $omegawedge domega$. (It is easy to check, in coordinates, that if you have vector fields $X,Y$ corresponding to $1$-forms $omega,psi$, then $Xcdot Y = star(omegawedgestarpsi)$.)
By the way, note that if we replace $X$ by any functional multiple $phi X$, $(phi X)cdot(nablatimes phi X) = phi^2 Xcdot(nablatimes X) + phi Xcdot (nablaphitimes X) = 0$, as well. From the differential forms viewpoint, we're looking at $(phiomega)wedge d(phiomega) = phi^2 omegawedge domega + phiomegawedge dphiwedgeomega$, and $omegawedge dphiwedgeomega = dphiwedgeomegawedgeomega = 0$, since $omega$ is a $1$-form.
EDIT: More interesting, if we replace $X$ by $X+Z$ for any vector field $Z$ vanishing on $M$, why does $(X+Z)cdotnablatimes(X+Z)$ still vanish on $M$? This boils down to seeing that $Xcdotnablatimes Z = 0$ on $M$. This is true the component of the curl orthogonal to $M$ comes only from partial derivatives of components of $Z$ in directions tangent to $M$, and these vanish because $Z=0$ on $M$. [This, too, is easier to see using differential forms, since we don't need to worry about a particular coordinate system. Choose local coordinates $(x,y,z)$ so that $M = z=0$. Taking $omega = dz + eta$, where $eta = P,dx+Q,dy+R,dz$ vanishes identically on $M$, we want to see that $domegawedgeomega$ still vanishes on $M$. Well, $detawedge dz = left(fracpartial Qpartial x-fracpartial Ppartial yright) dxwedge dywedge dz$, and these partials vanish along $z=0$ since the functions are identically $0$ on $z=0$.]
If you are not familiar with differential forms and integrability, I would recommend proceeding as follows. Write $M$ as $g=0$ and take $X = nabla g$. (Recall that gradients are orthogonal to level sets.) Then $nablatimes X = 0$ and we're done. From my earlier comment, rescaling $X$ won't change the result of the computation.
If you want to justify the assertion that $M$ is (locally) a level set of a smooth function, you need something like the implicit function theorem. It is locally a graph over one of the coordinate planes, say $z=psi(x,y)$. Then take $g(x,y,z) = z-psi(x,y)$.
edited Aug 10 at 18:42
answered Aug 10 at 0:17
Ted Shifrin
59.8k44387
59.8k44387
I am not very used to differential forms but I would like to understand this reasoning. "The fact that ÃÂ=0 is integrable tells you that dÃÂâ§ÃÂ=0". What do you mean when you say that " ÃÂ=0 is integrable ? " and how do you deduce that?. Maybe I am lost in the terminology can you give some link ?
â Thomas
Aug 10 at 9:19
This is the simplest case of the Frobenius Theorem. You can find this in any first-year graduate text on differentiable manifolds. ... But do note the last two paragraphs of my post give an elementary argument with no reference to differential forms.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 14:05
Regarding your second last paragraph, doesn't the reasoning there require that $X = phi , nabla g$ in a neighborhood of $M$? We only know that it's valid on $M,$ don't we?
â md2perpe
Aug 10 at 17:24
@md2perpe: My apologies. Great call. I will edit.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 18:27
add a comment |Â
I am not very used to differential forms but I would like to understand this reasoning. "The fact that ÃÂ=0 is integrable tells you that dÃÂâ§ÃÂ=0". What do you mean when you say that " ÃÂ=0 is integrable ? " and how do you deduce that?. Maybe I am lost in the terminology can you give some link ?
â Thomas
Aug 10 at 9:19
This is the simplest case of the Frobenius Theorem. You can find this in any first-year graduate text on differentiable manifolds. ... But do note the last two paragraphs of my post give an elementary argument with no reference to differential forms.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 14:05
Regarding your second last paragraph, doesn't the reasoning there require that $X = phi , nabla g$ in a neighborhood of $M$? We only know that it's valid on $M,$ don't we?
â md2perpe
Aug 10 at 17:24
@md2perpe: My apologies. Great call. I will edit.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 18:27
I am not very used to differential forms but I would like to understand this reasoning. "The fact that ÃÂ=0 is integrable tells you that dÃÂâ§ÃÂ=0". What do you mean when you say that " ÃÂ=0 is integrable ? " and how do you deduce that?. Maybe I am lost in the terminology can you give some link ?
â Thomas
Aug 10 at 9:19
I am not very used to differential forms but I would like to understand this reasoning. "The fact that ÃÂ=0 is integrable tells you that dÃÂâ§ÃÂ=0". What do you mean when you say that " ÃÂ=0 is integrable ? " and how do you deduce that?. Maybe I am lost in the terminology can you give some link ?
â Thomas
Aug 10 at 9:19
This is the simplest case of the Frobenius Theorem. You can find this in any first-year graduate text on differentiable manifolds. ... But do note the last two paragraphs of my post give an elementary argument with no reference to differential forms.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 14:05
This is the simplest case of the Frobenius Theorem. You can find this in any first-year graduate text on differentiable manifolds. ... But do note the last two paragraphs of my post give an elementary argument with no reference to differential forms.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 14:05
Regarding your second last paragraph, doesn't the reasoning there require that $X = phi , nabla g$ in a neighborhood of $M$? We only know that it's valid on $M,$ don't we?
â md2perpe
Aug 10 at 17:24
Regarding your second last paragraph, doesn't the reasoning there require that $X = phi , nabla g$ in a neighborhood of $M$? We only know that it's valid on $M,$ don't we?
â md2perpe
Aug 10 at 17:24
@md2perpe: My apologies. Great call. I will edit.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 18:27
@md2perpe: My apologies. Great call. I will edit.
â Ted Shifrin
Aug 10 at 18:27
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2877446%2fprove-that-x-cdot-nabla-times-x-0-where-x-perp-t-x%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Haven't you forgotten the coefficients $a$, $b$, $c$ when you take the dot product so that the expression for $X cdot (nabla times X)$ should be $a partial_p partial_q c partial_r - a partial_p partial_r b partial_q + cdots$
â md2perpe
Aug 9 at 18:06
@md2perpe I have, thanks; fixed. But still no idea how to proceed.
â user557902851
Aug 9 at 18:16