Is there an intuitive/geometric picture for the interchange symmetry of the Riemann tensor? I have seen plenty of algebraic derivations, but would like to understand if the symmetry expresses something intuitive or obvious (in hindsight at least).
Here is what I have worked out so far (please let me know if I've gotten it wrong!)
I don't know if this notation is standard (I can't quite keep track of the variety of conventions) so I apologize if it's off. Work with a torsion free, metric connection, namely the Levi-Civita Connection.
Define the Reimann Curvature Tensor as the infinitesimal rotation matrix resulting from parallel transport of a vector $Z$ around a parallelogram-shaped loop defined by $X$ and $Y$. $$R(X,Y)Z = R_{\mu\nu\lambda}^\sigma X^\mu Y^\nu Z^\lambda$$ (1) Anti-symmetry in the first two indices. Reversing the direction of the loop makes the effect opposite. Therefore $(R_{\mu\nu})^\sigma_\lambda = -(R_{\nu\mu})^\sigma_\lambda$. (These parentheses makes the matrix explicit). In other words $R(X,Y) = - R(Y,X)$. $$R_{\mu\nu\lambda}^\sigma = -R_{\nu\mu\lambda}^\sigma$$
(2) Anti-symmetry in the second two indices. An infinitesimal rotation matrix (like a Lorentz transform) is anti-symmetric when its indices are lowered. Putting the upper index in the last position, $$g_{\sigma\tau} R^\tau_{\mu\nu\lambda} = R_{\mu\nu\lambda\sigma} = -R_{\nu\mu\sigma\lambda}$$
(3) First Bianchi Identity (via this question on Math Stack Exchange). The fact that the connection is Torsion-free forces the lateral faces of a cube to close. The Bianchi identity expresses that they form a triangle. $$R_{[\mu\nu\lambda]}^\sigma = 0$$
(4) Interchange symmetry. From these three properties, we can derive the interchange symmetry. For example in these notes. You can also get it, I have seen, by expanding out the Levi-Civita connection in terms of the metric.
I am looking for something other than pure index juggling! For example, some sort of picture similar to that in the top answer on that Math Stack Exchange post.
(5) Bonus: After this I'm going to get to the Second Bianchi identity, I imagine. Is there any good intuition for that? Wikipedia gives it as the following, though I'm willing to bet that the indices are in a different order than I put them. $$R_{ab[cd;e]}^{}= R_{abcd;e}^{}+R_{abde;c}^{}+R_{abec;d}^{}=0$$