1
$\begingroup$

I am following Carroll's book on general relativity [1]. In Eq. D.35, he states that the components of the induced volume element $\hat \epsilon_{\mu_1...\mu_{n-1}}$ on a $(d-1)$-dimensional hypersurface $\Sigma$ of a $d$-dimensional manifold $M$ are given by $$ \hat \epsilon_{\mu_1...\mu_{n-1}} = n^\lambda \epsilon_{\lambda \mu_1....\mu_{n-1}}, $$ $\epsilon$ is the volume element of $M$ and $n^\lambda$ are the components of a vector that is normal to $\Sigma$.

I am wondering about a $n$ dimensional submanifold $\mathcal M$ of the $d$-dimensional manifold $\mathbb R^d$. Were I to guess, I would say that at every point on $\mathcal M$, you could create an orthonormal (right-handed) basis $n_{(1)}^{\lambda_1}$,...,$n_{(d-n)}^{\lambda_{d-n}}$ and that the (an?) induced volume element on $\mathcal M$ should be $$ \hat \epsilon_{\mu_1...\mu_n} = n_{(1)}^{\lambda_1}...n_{(d-n)}^{\lambda_{d-n}} \epsilon_{\lambda_1...\lambda_{d-n}\mu_1...\mu_n}. $$ Is this correct?

In principle there does not seem to be a unique way to choose the unit vectors, but on the other hand, I do think that this outer product of vectors ($n_{(1)}^{\lambda_1}...n_{(d-n)}^{\lambda_{d-n}}$) is invariant under rotations in the space orthonormal to $\mathcal M$.

[1] Carroll, S. (2014). Spacetime and Geometry: Pearson New International Edition. Pearson Education Limited.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

Although what Carroll says is correct, I somewhat disagree with this approach so let's look at it from another way.

Let $M$ be an $m$ dimensional manifold and $N\subseteq M$ an $n$ ($n<m$) dimensional (embedded) submanifold with inclusion $\phi:N\rightarrow M$. Suppose that $M$ is orientable and oriented and $N$ to be orientable. Note that $N$ does not inherit an orientation from $M$ in general (usually neither does a hypersurface (codimension $1$ submanifold) unless it is a boundary). Suppose furthermore that a pseudo-Riemannian metric $g$ in $M$ pulls back to $h=\phi^\ast g$ and $h$ is itself pseudo-Riemannian (so $N$ has no null points).

Recall that to define the volume form $\mu(g)$ associated to $g$ in $M$ we also need an orientation on $M$ since we need to set in each chart $(U,x)$ $$ \mu(g)=\left\{\begin{matrix} \sqrt{\mathfrak g}dx^1\wedge\dots\wedge dx^m & x\text{ is positive} \\ -\sqrt{\mathfrak{g}}dx^1\wedge\dots\wedge dx^m & x\text{ is negative}\end{matrix}\right. $$Here $\mathfrak{g}=|\det{g_{\mu\nu}}|$

Then in the submanifold $N$ if we fix an orientation we can likewise set $\mu(h)=\pm\sqrt{\mathfrak h}dy^1\wedge\dots\wedge dy^{n}$ with the $+$ sign chosen for a positive coordinate system $y$ and the negative sign for a negative coordinate system $y$.

Note that $\mu(h)$ is an $n$-form on $N$ and not on $M$, so eg. we cannot write in index notation in a coordinate system of $M$. Not by default. But because of the metric tensor, we have a reasonably unique extension of $\mu(h)$ into $M$ (by that I mean that $\mu(h)$ is extended into an $M$-tensor but is still only defined at points of $N$).

Namely, by the assumptions on the metric and the causal type of $N$ for any $p\in N$ we have $$ T_pM=(T_pN)^\perp\oplus T_pN, $$i.e. each tangent spaces decomposes into a direct sum. Let $\Pi:TM|_N\rightarrow TN$ denote the corresponding projection operator which projects tangentially.

Then define the extension $\tilde{\mu}(h)$ such that for any $p\in N$ and $n$-tuple $u_1,\dots,u_n\in T_pM$ we have $$ \tilde{\mu}(p)(u_1,\dots,u_n)=\mu(p)(\Pi u_1,\dots,\Pi u_n). $$

We'd then like to relate $\tilde \mu(h)$ to $\mu(g)$. An equivalent definition of the Riemannian volume form $\mu(g)$ is that for any point $p\in M$ and any $m$-tuple $e_1,\dots,e_m\in T_pM$ such that this ordered list forms a positively oriented orthonormal basis of $T_pM$, we have $$ \mu(g)(e_1,\dots,e_m)=1. $$This actually determines $\mu(g)$ uniquely.

If $N$ has been given an orientation, then the orthogonal complement bundle $(TN)^\perp\le TM|_N$ is also oriented as follows. Let $(n_1,\dots,n_{m-n},e_1,\dots,e_n)$ be a positively oriented orthonormal basis for $T_pM$ ($p\in N$) such that $e_1,\dots,e_n$ is a positively oriented orthonormal basis for $T_pN$, then $n_1,\dots,n_{m-n}$ is declared to be a positively oriented orthonormal basis of $(T_pN)^\perp$.

By the defining property of the volume we have $$ 1=\mu(g)(n_1,\dots,n_{m-n},e_1,\dots,e_{n})=(n_{m-n}\rfloor\dots n_1\rfloor\mu(g))(e_1,\dots,e_n). $$ This shows that $n_{m-n}\rfloor\dots n_{1}\rfloor \mu(g)$ is an $n$-form along $N$ (i.e. an $n$-form in $M$ defined only on points of $N$) which takes the value $1$ on any positively oriented orthonormal basis of $T_pN$, therefore the pullback of $n_{m-n}\rfloor\dots n_1\rfloor \mu(g)$ is $\mu(h)$.

However we then have $$ n_{m-n}\rfloor\dots n_{1}\rfloor\mu(g)=\tilde{\mu}(h), $$ since both the LHS and the RHS vanishes when contracted with any normal-directed vector (i.e. those which belong to $(T_pN)^\perp$).

It also follows from this derivation that if $n_1,\dots,n_{m-n}$ and $m_1,\dots,m_{m-n}$ are both positively oriented orthonormal bases of $(T_pN)^\perp$, then $n_{m-n}\rfloor\dots n_1\rfloor \mu(g)=m_{m-n}\rfloor\dots m_1\rfloor \mu(g)$.

Now, in OP's notation if $\mu(g)$ has components $\varepsilon_{\mu_1...\mu_m}$ and $\tilde{\mu}(h)$ has components $\varepsilon_{\mu_1...\mu_n}$, then the interior product is expressed as $$ \varepsilon_{\mu_1...\mu_n}=n^{\lambda_1}_1\dots n^{\lambda_{m-n}}_{m-n}\varepsilon_{\lambda_1...\lambda_{m-n}\mu_1...\mu_n}, $$which is of course the formula given in OP.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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