Aubram Daniel 44

VERFFENTLICHUNGEN
des Grundbauinstitutes
der Technischen Universitt Berlin

Herausgegeben von S.A. Savidis

HEFT 44

Differential Geometry Applied to Continuum
Mechanics

M
x X
1
X(U)
N
P
(P)
V
U
x(V)
x((P))
X
x
1
(V)
(U)
X(P)

Daniel Aubram

Berlin 2009
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche
Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at
http://dnb.d-nb.de.
Copyright Shaker Verlag 2009
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission
of the publishers.
Printed in Germany.
ISBN 978-3-8322-8154-0
ISSN 0342-3905
Shaker Verlag GmbH P.O. BOX 101818 D-52018 Aachen
Phone: 0049/2407/9596-0 Telefax: 0049/2407/9596-9
Internet: www.shaker.de e-mail: info@shaker.de
Adresse des Instituts:
Fachgebiet Grundbau und Bodenmechanik - Degebo
Technische Universitt Berlin
Sekr. TIB1-B7
Gustav-Meyer-Allee 25
13355 Berlin
Telefon: (030) 314-72341
Telefax: (030) 314-72343
E-Mail: info@grundbau.tu-berlin.de
Internet: http://www.grundbau.tu-berlin.de
Preface by the Editor
The astonishing pace in the development of the nite element method (FEM) in engi-
neering sciences and its broad application in the industry and in engineering practice
have entered the areas of soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering long ago. Al-
though the perception of a soil continuum is a controversial issue, it is generally ac-
cepted that numerical simulations based on FEM can considerably improve the under-
standing of the physical processes involved in situ and the interpretation of measuring
data of experimental tests.
Systematically, the notion of a continuum is part of the mathematic branch of dier-
ential geometry. Therefore, it is advantageous to analyze and to discuss the topics of
continuum mechanics, in particular soil mechanics, by applying the geometric terminol-
ogy. Accordingly, the soil continuum shall be understood as a dierentiable manifold
that does not need to have a Euclidian structure, and its stress and density states are
be described by coordinate-independent tensor elds. Engineers not acquainted with
tensor calculus and the geometric method are at a disadvantage, because they do not
have full command of the scientic fundamentals of their discipline and thus can hardly
benet from new developments. They will moreover run the risk of blindly trusting
the results of numerical simulations instead of questioning them.
The presented work is a fundamental introduction into dierential geometry and its
application to continuum mechanics. It is addressed at scientic engineers, but also at
engineers in practice and graduate students interested in the eld. Another objective of
the work is to revise the theoretical fundamentals of the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian
(ALE) formulation of continuum mechanics by placing emphasis on the geometric back-
ground. The ALE formulation can be seen as a unication of the Lagrangian and
Eulerian formulations in order to combine the advantages of both viewpoints. It is
currently a topic of research at the Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering Di-
vision, in which the penetration of piles into sand is being simulated numerically by
using a nite element model. A publication in the institute series is being prepared.
The author currently is a research associate at the Technical University of Berlin.
He was able to investigate the topic during his research activity, which is gratefully
acknowledged here. Parts of the work on the ALE formulation have been carried out
with the nancial support of the DFG (German Research Foundation), which is also
gratefully acknowledged.
Stavros A. Savidis
Berlin, February 2009
i
Preface by the Author
In the year 2004/2005, after my studies of civil engineering and becoming a research
associate at the Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering Division, I attended
a lecture by Prof. Dr.-Ing. Gerd Brunk at the Technical University of Berlin. The
lecture was about tensor analysis and continuum physics, but it made me wonder
since geometry was predominant, and index gymnastics and mechanics were solely
treated in applications. Inspired by this lecture and the famous book by Marsden
and Hughes, I began my research work on an Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE)
approach to the nite element simulation of penetration processes in sand. Because the
continuum mechanical background is massive and essentially based on the geometry
of point spaces, I have written down this paper with the initial objective to compile
important formulae and basic results. However, the reader will notice that the nal
version goes beyond to some extend.
I would like to thank Prof. Dr.-Ing. Stavros A. Savidis who gave me the opportu-
nity to investigate as a geotechnical engineer such a theoretic topic, and my colleague
Dr.-Ing. Frank Rackwitz for discussion and helpful suggestions. Last but not least I
would like to thank the developers of the L
A
T
E
X program for enabling everyone to do
beautiful typeset of complex mathematics.
Disclaimer
This paper is not intended to serve as a monograph for specialists
about dierential geometry and continuum mechanics. Many inter-
esting topics have been omitted and many of the presented key facts
and basic results are stated without proofs; they may be found in
the standard textbooks, e.g. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]. Comprehensive
treatises on linear geometry and linear algebra are, for example, [9]
and [10].
Daniel Aubram
Berlin, November 2008
Abstract
Dierential geometry provides the suitable background to present and discuss con-
tinuum mechanics with an integrative and mathematically precise terminology. By
starting with a review of linear geometry in ane point spaces, the paper introduces
modern dierential geometry on manifolds including the following topics: topology,
tensor algebra, bundles and tensor elds, exterior algebra, dierential and integral
calculi. The tools worked out are applied subsequently to basic topics of continuum
mechanics. In particular, kinematics of a material body and balance of mass are formu-
lated by applying the geometric terminology, the principles of objectivity and material
frame indierence of constitutive equations are examined, and a clear distinction of the
Lagrangian formulation from the Eulerian formulation is drawn. Moreover, the paper
outlines a generalized Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) formulation of continuum
mechanics on dierentiable manifolds. As an essential part, the grid manifold intro-
duced therein facilitates a consistent description of the relations between the material
body, the ambient space and the arbitrary reference domain of the ALE formulation.
Not least, the objective of the paper is to provide a compilation of important formulae
and basic results some of them with a full proof frequently used by the community.
If practical, point arguments and changes in points within equations will be clearly in-
dicated, and component and direct (or absolute) tensor notation will be applied as
needed, avoiding a single-track approach to the subject.
Keywords: dierential geometry; continuum mechanics; large deformations; Arbi-
trary Lagrangian-Eulerian; manifold; tensor analysis
Zusammenfassung
Die Dierentialgeometrie bietet den geeigneten Hintergrund, um die Kontinuumsme-
chanik mit einer einheitlichen und mathematisch prazisen Terminologie darzulegen und
zu diskutieren. Ausgehend von einem R uckblick auf die lineare Geometrie in anen
Punktraumen f uhrt die Arbeit in die moderne Dierentialgeometrie auf Mannigfaltig-
keiten unter Ber ucksichtigung der folgenden Themen ein: Topologie, Tensoralgebra,
B undel und Tensorfelder,

Auere Algebra sowie Dierential- und Integralkalk ule. Die
erarbeiteten Werkzeuge werden anschlieend auf grundlegende Themen der Kontinu-
umsmechanik angewendet. Insbesondere wird die Kinematik eines materiellen Korpers
und die Massenbilanz vom geometrischen Standpunkt heraus formuliert, das Prinzip
der Objektivitat von Tensoren und von Materialgleichungen wird untersucht, und es
wird der Unterschied zwischen der Lagrangeschen und der Eulerschen Formulierung
auf klarende Weise dargestellt. Desweiteren skizziert die Arbeit eine verallgemeiner-
te Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) Formulierung der Kontinuumsmechanik auf
dierenzierbaren Mannigfaltigkeiten. Als wesentlicher Bestandteil ermoglicht dabei die
eingef uhrte Gittermannigfaltigkeit eine konsistente Beschreibung der Beziehungen zwi-
schen dem materiellen Korper, dem umgebenden Raum und dem beliebigen Referenz-
gebiet der ALE Formulierung. Nicht zuletzt besteht die Zielsetzung der Arbeit darin,
wichtige Formeln und grundlegende Ergebnisse auf den behandelten Gebieten teilweise
auch mit vollstandigem Beweis zusammenzustellen. Sofern es zweckmaig erscheint,
werden Punktargumente und der Wechsel der Bezugspunkte in den Gleichungen her-
vorgehoben. Auerdem wird je nach Bedarf sowohl die Komponentenschreibweise, als
auch die direkte oder absolute Schreibweise von Tensoren angewendet und dadurch ein
eingleisiges Vorgehen vermieden.
Schlagworte: Dierentialgeometrie; Kontinuumsmechanik; groe Verformungen; Ar-
bitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian; Mannigfaltigkeit; Tensoranalysis
God is a geometer.
Plato
Contents
Preface by the Editor i
Preface by the Author iii
Abstract v
Zusammenfassung vii
Contents xi
List of Figures xiii
Notation xv
1 Introduction 1
2 Review of Linear Geometry 5
2.1 Vectors and Linear Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 Ane Point Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Dierential Geometry 15
3.1 Topology and Manifolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.2 The Tangent Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.3 Tensor Algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.4 Bundles and Tensor Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.4.1 Sections of Fibre Bundles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.4.2 Action of Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.5 Exterior Algebra of Dierential Forms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3.6 Dierentiation on Manifolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.6.1 Covariant Derivative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
3.6.2 Lie Derivative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.6.3 Exterior Derivative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
3.7 Integration on Manifolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
3.7.1 Orientation and Determinants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
3.7.2 Stokes Theorem and Volume Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
4 Application: Continuum Mechanics 65
xi
xii CONTENTS
4.1 Material Body and Ambient Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4.2 Deformation Gradient and Strain Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4.3 Lagrangian and Eulerian Formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4.4 Conservation of Mass and Piola Transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
4.5 Objectivity and Covariance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
4.5.1 Motions, Framings, and the Gauge Freedom . . . . . . . . . . . 79
4.5.2 Material Frame-Indierence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
4.6 Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
4.6.1 Grid Manifold and Velocity Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
4.6.2 The General ALE Operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
5 Summary and Conclusions 95
Bibliography 97
List of Figures
2.1 Position vectors of a point P with respect to dierent frames (O, g
i
) and
(O
, g
i
). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2 Active objectivity of the vector x =

OP in the Euclidian point space o
with respect to a superposed rigid motion of a subset B o (left), and
with respect to a change of framing (right). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.1 Localization of a continuous map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2 Active dieomorphism and passive dieomorphism

. . . . . . . . . . 19
3.3 Projection and local trivialization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.4 Tilt and pushforward of a vector eld V (T/). . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.5 Lie derivative of a time-independent vector eld v along a time-depen-
dent vector eld u. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
3.6 Denition of the outward normal on the boundary /. . . . . . . . . . 60
4.1 Material body B, reference conguration B, current conguration
t
(B)
and related mappings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
4.2 Material, Lagrangian and Eulerian velocity elds. . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.3 Changed coordinates of 1 o can either result from a relabelling

of
1, or a warping of o. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
4.4 General Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian formulation: reference grid, con-
gurations and related mappings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
4.5 Flows associated with the motion
t
of the body B and the motion
t
of its model / in the ambient space. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
xiv LIST OF FIGURES
Notation
General Conventions
Calligraphic (/, ^, . . .) sets, vector spaces and manifolds
Italic lightface (a, b, A, B, . . .) points, chart mappings, scalars, scalar functions,
coordinate indices, and labels
Greek lightface (, , , . . .) point mappings, and coordinate indices
Boldface (v, , A, T, . . .) linear maps, vectors, tensors, linear forms,
dierential forms, and constitutive functions
Italics is also used for theorems, propositions, corollaries, and terminology just dened.
The Halmos symbol indicates the end of a proof, and indicates the end of a
denition.
Symbols and Notations
R, N real numbers, natural numbers
empty set
cartesian product; direct product of sets
direct sum
tensor product; dyadic product
exterior product; wedge product
, ) inner product
f g = f(g) composition of maps f, g
| / | is a subset (or subspace) of /
dim(/
n
dim
) n
dim
dimension of /
n
dim
A(v) Av linear map applied to a vector v
v =

PQ vector pointing from P to Q
d(P, Q) distance of the points P, Q
g
1
, . . . , g
n
dim
g
i
vector basis
(O, g
i
) frame of reference with origin O
xvi NOTATION
pullback, pushforward by a map

SE(/) special or proper Euclidian group of a point space /
SO(1) special or proper orthogonal group of a vector space 1
(o, T ) topological space; set o with topology T
int(o), cl(o), o interior, closure, and boundary of o
(|, x), x(|) R
n
dim
coordinate system on |; chart of |
x
i
P
= x(P) coordinates of the point P | in a chart (|, x)
A(/) = (|
i
, x
i
)
iI
atlas of the manifold / =
iI
|
i
c : R / curve on /
f : / R real function or scalar eld on /
T
P
/ = P 1
n
n-dimensional tangent space at P /
T
P
/ cotangent space; dual space
T/ =
PM
T
P
/ tangent bundle
T : T/ TB tangent map; dierential of a map : / B
x
i
, dx
i
basis vectors, dual basis vectors in a tangent space
T S, T : S single contraction, double contraction of tensors
a
(v) a
v linear form applied to a vector v

w[f] = df w directional derivative of a function f along w
T
, T
T
adjoint, transpose of a tensor
,

index lowering operator, index raising operator
: c /, (c, , /) bre bundle over /
: / T/ tangent bundle section; vector eld on the manifold /
(T/) set of all vector elds (bundle sections) on /
(T
p
q
(/)) = T
p
q
(/) set of all
_
p
q
_
-tensor elds on /
(
_
k
T
/) =
k
(/) set of all k-forms on /
Alt : T
0
k
(/)
_
k
T
/ alternation mapping
i
u
:
k
(/)
k1
(/) interior product
v
covariant derivative along v
L
u
T =
T
t
+
u
T Lie derivative of a tensor eld T along u
d exterior derivative of a k-form
1
,...,n
Levi-Civita symbol; permutation symbol
dv
n
(/) Riemannian volume form on /; g-volume
J
Jacobian of a map
I, J, K, . . . coordinate indices (Lagrangian formulation)
i, j, k, . . . coordinate indices (Eulerian formulation)
, , , . . . coordinate indices (ALE formulation)
Chapter 1
Introduction
It is unquestioned for a long time that natural sciences can benet from dierential
geometry, since it makes a comprehensive theory of gravitation possible in general
relativity. The so-called geometric mechanics [1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16], however, has
been implemented more recently and thus it is applied to a lesser extend, especially
in engineering sciences. Important examples are found in the theories of rods and
shells, in the Lagrange-Hamilton formalism, and relativistic elasticity. In the theory of
materials, the Lie derivative serves to obtain objective rates of stress measures, but it
is often used detached from the overall geometric context.
Dierential geometry [1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] provides the suitable background to present
and discuss the subjects of mechanics, and especially continuum mechanics, with an
integrative and mathematically precise terminology. It claries basic concepts and
opens up deep examination even of complex issues. For example, geometry reveals
that the determinant of the Jacobian matrix is not an invariant scalar, and that the
question, whether the rst Piola-Kirchho stress tensor is symmetric or not, does not
make sense. However, dierential geometry demands a large investment of eort and
persistency from its students.
Continuum mechanics [2, 8] is typically prepared for the Euclidian point space. This is
motivated by applications in engineering sciences, which prefer as simple spaces as pos-
sible. In some cases, e.g. for shells, it is reasonable to use local curvilinear coordinates
instead of the global cartesian coordinates. The former are not ane, that is, they do
not transform linearly as cartesian coordinates, and additional terminology metric,
covariant and contravariant basis vectors etc. enters. If the shell is understood as
embedded in the Euclidian space, the terms mentioned can refer to the ambient struc-
ture, namely if the position vectors of points are identied with those points. As a
result, the covariant vector basis, for example, arises from the partial derivatives of
the position vector with respect to the curvilinear coordinates of the related point on
the shell. The existence of a global position vector, however, already requires a global
linear structure of space. Without embedding the shell in the Euclidian space, a ter-
minology built on position vectors, and hence the description of the shells geometry
and kinematics will collapse.
1
2 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
The introduction of manifolds [17] facilitates a consistently local description of the
geometry of structures without the need to embed them in a linear point space. The
denition of position vectors is not possible, because no global origin exists. The
creation of a vector basis at every point of the manifold rather succeeds by a one-
to-one mapping between a neighborhood of the point and a local coordinate system,
which necessarily is curvilinear. Instead of dening additional terms (metric, covariant
and contravariant basis vectors etc.) as for curvilinear coordinates in Euclidian spaces,
elementary operations are established of which the structure of space results in a natural
way.
Tensor analysis on manifolds delivers the standard tools to develop observer-invariant
or covariant theories. Covariance is an essential requirement for physical equations
[2, 6, 7, 13, 18, 19]. In its passive interpretation, covariance asks for the form-invariance
of the equation structure; clearly, under coordinate transformations, terms must not be
dropped or added. However, a diculty of tensor analysis on manifolds rests on the fact
that vectors and tensors are dened locally, and equations have to be formulated such
that point mappings are included. This means that equations of the kind v(P) = v
(Q),
as known from ane point spaces, are not permitted, because the vectors v, v
are given
at dierent points P and Q and, therefore, they cannot be compared. In the literature
one often nds the analogous statement: In a manifold there are no vectors. Thus,
although formulae become more complicated, point arguments and changes in points
will be clearly indicated in the paper.
Some remarks on tensor notation should be made here. In the literature, vectors and
tensors are often reduced to their components by adopting the component notation,
because the split-up of tensors into single components will be necessary anyway if
concrete calculations and implementations into computer programmes are intended. A
tensor, originally proposed as a coordinate-invariant object, is then understood as a
quantity with indices that transforms by a certain rule. The invariance of the tensor,
however, does not result from the transformation of its components alone, since one
needs the background knowledge that its basis transforms inversely. On the other hand,
by applying the so-called direct or absolute notation, tensor equations have the same
form in any coordinate system, as desired, but the computation of such an abstract
tensor equation can be cumbersome in non-cartesian coordinate systems. The third
choice is the local notation of tensors, where the associated tensor basis accompanies
the components. The relation between the absolute tensor and its components is always
available, and the referential coordinate frame is set by the basis. Local notation is also
useful to proof several expressions which are given in absolute resp. direct notation.
However, the notational preference should depend on the problem under consideration,
and the paper thus avoids a single-track approach to the subject.
Continuum mechanics on manifolds from the classic or traditional Lagrangian and Eu-
lerian viewpoints is presented, for example, in [2]. For the solution of initial boundary
value problems involving large material deformations or complex uid structure in-
teraction, the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) formulation [20, 21, 22] has been
approved as an ecient framework. ALE frameworks implemented in the nite ele-
ment method [23] have become an important numerical simulation tool, e.g. for metal
3
forming, free surface ow and impact processes. The Lagrangian and Eulerian for-
mulations are generalized within the ALE formulation, as a time-dependent reference
domain uncoupled from the material body and its congurations in the ambient space
is used to describe the physical quantities under consideration. Due to the general-
ization, however, the governing equations become more complicated, especially when
compared to the Lagrangian formulation in solid mechanics.
In the references cited, the ALE formulation for Euclidian spaces is discussed in detail,
but to the knowledge of the author, no reference is available in which the framework
is extended to manifolds or Riemannian spaces, or which respond closer to the geom-
etry of the ALE formulation. Therefore, another objective of the paper is to extend
the geometric methods of continuum mechanics by the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian
formulation on manifolds. It will be restricted to the geometry and kinematics of a
body and to the conservation of mass. Other balance equations as well as dynamical
and material theoretical aspects will not be considered.
The structure of the paper is as follows. Chapter 2 reviews some basic results of linear
geometry. In chapter 3, an introduction into the terminology of modern dierential
geometry will be given: topology, tensor algebra, bundles and tensor elds, exterior
algebra, dierential and integral calculi. After applying the terminology to contin-
uum mechanics in the classic Lagrangian and Eulerian formulations in chapter 4, the
ALE formulation will be geometrically introduced and implemented into the overall
continuum mechanical context. The paper closes with some concluding remarks in
chapter 5.
4 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Chapter 2
Review of Linear Geometry
The following chapter should motivate the construction of vector spaces and mappings
on general manifolds. It is devoted to the important topics of vector algebra and ane
point spaces used in continuum mechanics and the theory of materials, including the
concept of objectivity.
2.1 Vectors and Linear Maps
Denition 2.1.1. A set 1 together with an addition
1 1 1
(a, b) a +b = b +a
and a scalar multiplication
R 1 1
(, a) a = a , R,
with existent unique neutral and inverse elements for both addition and scalar multi-
plication, is called vector space or linear space over the body R. The elements of 1 are
called vectors.

Denition 2.1.2. Let 1 be a vector space. If there exists a positive bilinear mapping
respectively an inner product
, ) : 1 1 R
(a, b) a, b) = b, a) ,
then 1 is said to have a metric or to be metrizable, and it is called Euclidian vector
space.

Denition 2.1.3. If the equivalence
a
1
g
1
+a
2
g
2
+. . . +a
n
g
n
= 0 a
i
= 0, i = 1, 2, . . . , n
6 CHAPTER 2. REVIEW OF LINEAR GEOMETRY
holds, where 0 is the zero vector, then the vectors g
1
, g
2
, . . . , g
n
are called linearly
independent, otherwise linearly dependent. If n vectors g
i
are linearly independent, but
(n + 1) vectors g
i
are always linearly dependent, then n n
dim
is the dimension of
1
n
dim
and g
1
, g
2
, . . . , g
n
dim
g
i
1
n
dim
is called basis of 1
n
dim
. The latter can
then be expressed by
1
n
dim
= |
1
|
2
. . . |
n
dim
,
where denotes the direct sum (see denition below) of the subspaces |
i
1
n
dim
, and
g
i
|
i
for all i 1, . . . , n
dim
.

Denition 2.1.4. Let |
1
, |
2
1 be subspaces of a vector space 1. The sum |
1
+|
2
is the subspace of 1 spanned by the elements of |
1
|
2
. The direct sum |
1
|
2
is
the sum |
1
+|
2
together with the property |
1
|
2
= 0.

Proposition 2.1.5. In a vector space 1
n
, every vector v can be represented by
v = v
1
g
1
+v
2
g
2
+. . . +v
n
g
n
=
n
i=1
v
i
g
i
v
i
g
i
.
where v
1
, v
2
, . . . , v
n
R and g
i
1
n
is a basis.
Proof. Since g
1
, g
2
, . . . , g
n
is linearly independent and g
1
, g
2
, . . . , g
n
, v is linearly
dependent, v can be expressed as a linear combination of the g
i
according to 2.1.3.
The identity on the right hand side of the proposition is due to the Einstein summation
convention.

Denition 2.1.6. One refers to 2.1.5 as the local notation and to v = v
i
g
i
as the local
representative of v. The v
i
are the coordinates or components of v with respect to the
basis g
i
.

By 2.1.3 and 2.1.5, the basis vectors can be arbitrarily chosen. They are, in general,
neither orthogonal nor normalized. Moreover, no origin has been used to dene the v
i
or g
i
, that is, points do not exist in vector spaces.
Example 2.1.7. Every row resp. n-tuple v
1
, v
2
, . . . , v
n
R
n
, as known from linear
algebra, is a vector, and if e
1
, e
2
, . . . , e
n
is the canonical basis in R
n
, then v
1
, v
2
,
. . . , v
n
= v
i
e
i
is the local representative.
Denition 2.1.8. Let 1, J be vector spaces. A map A : 1 J, with
1. A(v
1
+v
2
) = Av
1
+Av
2
J, v
1
, v
2
1 and
2. A(v) = (Av) J, R,
where Av A(v), is called linear transformation, linear map or homomorphism. If
A : 1 J is bijective such that A
1
is its inverse and both 1 and J have the
same dimension, then A is called isomorphism. Linear transformations A : 1 1 are
called endomorphisms, and isomorphisms with 1 =J are called automorphisms.

Denition 2.1.9. The linear transformation I : 1 1 dened through Iv = v,
v 1, is called the identity map on 1. If A is an automorphism on 1, then I =
A
1
A = AA
1
.

2.1. VECTORS AND LINEAR MAPS 7
Denition 2.1.10. Let A : 1
n
dim
J
m
dim
be a linear transformation and let g
i
and h
be bases of 1
n
dim
and J
m
dim
, respectively. The images Ag
i
can be expanded
in the basis h
by
Ag
i
= A
i
h
through (m
dim
n
dim
) numbers A
i
. The matrix arrangement (A
i
) of these numbers is
referred to as the matrix of the linear transformation A with respect to h
, in which
(the left index) denotes the row index and i is the column index, respectively this
is because a matrix of a linear transformation A : 1
n
dim
J
m
dim
is understood as a
map (A
i
) : R
n
dim
R
m
dim
, where R
n
dim
denotes the columns having n
dim
elements.

Corollary 2.1.11. By 2.1.5, the basis vectors h
in 2.1.10 have an expression in the

basis g
i
, say h
= C
j
g
j
, yielding Ag
i
= D
j
i
g
j
, where D
j
i
= C
j
i
are the
components of A with respect to g
i
.
It can be shown that every linear transformation A : 1
n
dim
J
m
dim
has a component
matrix (A
i
), and that this matrix is unique.
Denition 2.1.12. Consider the special situation A = I in 2.1.10, where the base
vectors g
i
1 are expanded in another basis g
i
of the same vector space:
g
i
= B
i
i
g
i
.
In the previous equation, the sum is over primed indices only. The matrix of I, written
(B
i
i
), is called the inverse matrix of the change of basis, that is, (B
i
i
)
1
= (B
i
i
)
arranges the components of the direct change of basis, g
i
= B
i
i
g
i
. Thus, g
j
=
B
i
j
B
i
i
g
i
= B
i
i
B
i
j
g
i
=
i
j
g
i
and Ig
j
=
i
j
g
i
, where
i
j
is called the Kronecker
delta.

Corollary 2.1.13. As a (xed) vector v = v
i
g
i
= v
i
g
i
= Iv is coordinate-invariant,
under a change of basis g
i
= B
i
i
g
i
, the components of v transform with the inverse
matrix of the change of basis, that is, v
i
= v
i
B
i
i
.
Denition 2.1.14. Given a matrix (B
i
i
) and a vector v = v
i
g
i
, then a transformation
rule
v v
i
B
i
i
g
i
has two interpretations. The active transformation changes the vector by a linear map
B dened through Bg
i
= B
i
i
g
i
, so (B
i
i
) is the matrix of that transformation. From
the second viewpoint, the prescribed rule denes a passive transformation Ig
i
= B
i
i
g
i
that keeps the vector xed. In this case, (B

i
i
) is the inverse matrix of the change
of basis and v
i
= v
i
B
i
i
are the components of the same vector with respect to the
changed basis.

As studied later in the text, the passive transformation rule identies the vector with
a rank-one tensor. However, both interpretations are of fundamental importance in
physics, especially in continuum mechanics.
Denition 2.1.15. A map A : 1 J of Euclidian vector spaces 1 and J is called
isometry, if
Aa, Ab)
W
= a, b)
V
for all a, b 1. An isometry A : 1 1 is called an orthogonal map, having the
properties det A = 1 and A
1
= A
T
, where A
T
is the transpose or adjoint of A. A
more general denition of an orthogonal map includes the isometries A : 1 J and
then stipulates A
T
A = I
V
and AA
T
= I
W
.

Proposition 2.1.16. (Without proof.) A linear map A : 1 1 is orthogonal, if and
only if its matrix with respect to an orthonormal basis is orthogonal.
2.2 Ane Point Spaces
Denition 2.2.1. Let o = A, B, C, . . . be a set of points and 1 a vector space. The
pair (o, 1) or simply o if the meaning is clear from the context together with the
map
o o 1
(A, B)

AB
is called an ane point space, if the following axioms are satised:
1. For every A o and every v 1 there is a unique A + v = B o, so that
v =

AB.
2. If

AB =

CD, then

AC =

BD also holds (parallelogram axiom).
If 1 moreover has a metric according to 2.1.2, then (o, 1) is called a Euclidian point
space.

Denition 2.2.2. Let o be an ane point space, and A, B, C points, then

AC =
AB +
BC,

BA =
AB and

AA = 0 denes the vector sum, the inverse element and
the neutral element, respectively.

Example 2.2.3. (R
n
, R
n
) is the simplest ane point space. A point A R
n
is
identied with its coordinates, and, because of A+v = B R
n
by denition, v is also
an element of R
n
.
The ane structure imposes a global parallelism on the standard Euclidian point space.
It is notable that parallelism as well as terminology like distance and angle does
not make sense in abstract vector spaces, but only in ane spaces.
Corollary 2.2.4. If v(A) =

AB is a vector with base point A, and

AB =

CD, then
v(A) = v(C) .
Conclude that the parallelogram axiom of denition 2.2.1 renders ane point spaces
at this is the fundamental dierence between at spaces and manifolds.
2.2. AFFINE POINT SPACES 9
Denition 2.2.5. Let o be an Euclidian point space and v =

PQ 1, then
d(P, Q) =
_
v, v) = [v[ ,
is the distance of the points P, Q o.

Denition 2.2.6. Let o be an ane point space, O, P o, and g
i
1
n
dim
a
basis a basis can be obtained from a set of (n
dim
+ 1) points. The (n
dim
+ 1)-tuple
(O, g
1
, g
2
, . . . , g
n
dim
) (O, g
i
) is called frame of reference, shortly: frame, in which the
g
i
are descriptively attached to the origin O (gure 2.1). o then becomes the frame
space, and

OP = x 1
n
dim
is called position vector of P with respect to O. The local
representative x = x
i
g
i
includes the ane coordinates x
1
, x
2
, . . . , x
n
dim
x
i
of P
with respect to the frame (O, g
i
).

Note that in Euclidian point spaces, frame is used as a synonym for Euclidian
observer.
Denition 2.2.7. Given a frame (O, g
i
) in the space o, one may construct coordinate
lines by varying one ane coordinate and keeping the other coordinate values xed,
i.e. by changing one coordinate (component) x
i
of the position vector. The family of
lines obtained is called ane coordinate system on o and is denoted by the pair (o, x).
If every coordinate line is orthogonal to each of the other coordinate lines, the ane
coordinate system is called cartesian.

Although ane coordinates are uniquely determined by the chosen frame, one should
be careful with the dierence between the frame and the coordinate system. Without
a frame it does not make sense to talk about coordinate systems!
One should also be careful with the terminology position vector, because it depends
on the frame, i.e.

OP ,=
P. It becomes clear that

OP is an honest vector when
viewed from a dierent frame. The following two important results may help:
Theorem 2.2.8 (Transformation of Ane Coordinates). The coordinate func-
tions of every two ane coordinate systems transform linearly with x
i
=
i
(x
1
, . . .
, x
n
dim
) = B
i
i
x
i
+c
i
, where B
i
i
are the components of the inverse matrix of the change
of basis and c
i
are constants.
Proof. Clearly, the coordinates of the same P o under a change of framing
(O, g
i
) (O
, g
i
) have to be calculated. To this end, let

OP = x = x
i
g
i
and
P = x = x
i
g
i
denote the position vectors of P in the two dierent frames, that is,
P = O +x = O
+ x (gure 2.1).
Expanded in the primed basis, x becomes

OP
{g
i
}
= Ix = B
i
i
x
i
g
i
, where 2.1.12 has
been applied. Setting c = c
i
g
i
=
O, then in the primed frame the coordinates of
P =
O +
OP resp. x = x +c are
x
i
= B
i
i
x
i
+c
i
=
i
(x
1
, . . . , x
n
dim
)
as desired.

P
O
x =

OP
O
Ix = x
P
x =
P
g
i
g
i
Figure 2.1: Position vectors of a point P with respect to dierent frames (O, g
i
) and
(O
, g
i
).
Proposition 2.2.9. A vector of an ane point space (, = position vector!) is coordi-
nate-invariant (or frame-indierent) and it ts 2.1.13, whereas a position vector does
not.
Proof. Additional to the previously described situation, let Q o be another point
and let

OQ = y
i
g
i
and
Q = y
i
g
i
denote its position vectors in the two frames.
Then by 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, v = QP =

OQ
OP =
P. Apply 2.2.8 to get

v = (y
i
x
i
)g
i
=
_
(B
i
i
y
i
+c
i
) (B
i
i
x
i
+c
i
)
_
g
i
= (y
i
x
i
)B
i
i
g
i
= (y
i
x
i
)g
i
in local notation. This is already 2.1.13. On the other hand, B
i
i
x
i
g
i
= x
i
B
i
i
B
j
i
g
j
=
x
i
g
i
=

OP is also a vector, but B
i
i
x
i
,= x
i
if O ,= O
by 2.2.8, i.e. the position of P

with respect to (O, g
i
) and (O
, g
i
) does not transform in terms of 2.1.13.

Corollary 2.2.10. Let
OO
= a
i
g
i
,
O = c
i
g
i
and g
i
= B
i
i
g
i
be the translation
vectors and the change of basis of two frames (O, g
i
) and (O
, g
i
), respectively. Since
OO
O, one has
a
i
= c
i
B
i
i
and c
i
= a
i
B
i
i
.
Corollary 2.2.11. The Jacobian matrix of the transformation of ane coordinates
2.2.8 is given by the inverse matrix of the change of basis, i.e.
x
j
= B
i
i
.
Denition 2.2.12. Let (o, 1) and (T , J) be two ane point spaces, O, P, Q o, and
A : 1 J a linear map. A map : o T is referred to as an ane transformation,
if for every P = O +
OP,
(P) = (O) +A(
OP) T .
(O)(P) = A(
OP) =
OP) is called the pushforward of

OP by . For Euclidian 1
and J, the ane transformation is called ane isometry, if
d
T
((P), (Q)) = d
S
(P, Q) ,
where d
S
, d
T
are the distance functions on o and T , respectively.

Denition 2.2.13. Let : o o, P (P) = (O) + Q(
OP), where Q : 1
1 is an automorphism, be bijective, then a group of ane transformations can be
established, which should not be presented here. If : o o is an ane isometry,
then Q is an isometry and orthogonal. Moreover, if preserves orientation, i.e. the
determinant is det Q = +1, then it is called a (superposed) rigid motion and Q now
proper orthogonal is called rotation. Rigid motions belong to the so-called special
Euclidian group, denoted as SE(o), and rotations belong to the special orthogonal group
SO(1).

Proposition 2.2.14. Under ane isometries : o o, every vector v transforms
according to
v
= Qv ,
where Q is the orthogonal map of .
Proof. Let O, P, Q o be points, then v = Q P is a vector. Applying 2.2.12,
v
= (Q) (P) =
_
(O) +Q(
OQ)
_
_
(O) +Q(
OP)
_
= Q(
OQ) Q(
OP). Since
Q is linear, Q(
OQ
OP) = Q(QP) and the assertion follows.

Proposition 2.2.15. Let : o o, P (P) = (O) + Q(
OP) be a superposed
rigid motion, (O, g
i
) a frame and g
i
a basis dened through Qg
i
= Q
i
i
g
i
. The
components of the position vector
O(P) = x
with respect to the g

i
are then given by
x
i
= Q
i
i
x
i
+c
i
,
where c
i
are the components of the translation vector
O(O) = c, and x
i
are the
components of

OP = x with respect to the basis g
i
.
Proof. Since Qx =
x by 2.2.12,
O(P) =
O(O)+
(O)(P) becomes x
= Qx+c.
The result then is obtained by substituting the local representatives x = x
i
g
i
, x
=
x
i
g
i
and c = c
i
g
i
, and using the denition of the primed basis g
i
.

Instead of understanding the ane isometry : o o as a superposed rigid motion
relative to a xed Euclidian frame (O, g
i
), it may also be interpreted as a change of
Euclidian framing resp. a change of Euclidian observers (O, g
i
) (O, g
i
) = (O
, Qg
i
),
i.e. a relative motion between Euclidian frames (also called a quasi-motion [see 7]). This
can be justied as follows: if (O, g
i
) is a rigid frame that moves with a rigid motion
, then (O
, Qg
i
) is the dragged-along frame at O
= (O) (gure 3.5).

However, an ane isometry only requires both frames to measure the same distance
between points, so Q from the change of a Euclidian framing needs to be orthogonal,
B
(B)
(P)
P
O
(O)
OP
Q(
OP)
o
P
P
O
O
Qg
i
o
g
i
x
Qx
Figure 2.2: Active objectivity of the vector x =

OP in the Euclidian point space o
with respect to a superposed rigid motion of a subset B o (left), and with respect
to a change of framing (right).
but not proper orthogonal as for superposed rigid motions. By keeping this dierence
in mind, proposition 2.2.15 is equivalent to the following:
Proposition 2.2.16. Let Q be orthogonal resp. an isometry, (O, g
i
) (O, g
i
) =
(O
, Qg
i
) a change of framing in the Euclidian point space o and g
i
a basis dened
through Qg
i
= Q
i
i
g
i
. The components of the position vector
OP
= x
with respect to
the g
i
are then given by
x
i
= Q
i
i
x
i
+c
i
,
where c
i
are the components of the translation vector
OO
= c, and x
i
are the compo-
nents of

OP = x with respect to the basis g
i
.
Proof. Isometric Qs imply that P
has the same coordinates with respect to the

frame (O
, Qg
i
) as P has with respect to (O, g
i
) except for reordering of indices if
det Q = 1. Therefore,
= Q(
OP) = Qx = x
i
Qg
i
= Q
i
i
x
i
g
i
,
and
OP
OO
resp. x
= Qx + c as before. Substitution of x
= x
i
g
i
and
c = c
i
g
i
then gives the result.

The connection between the formula 2.2.15 resp. 2.2.16 and the formula 2.2.8 is similar
to that of a map A : 1 1 and the identity map I in a vector space. Hence, it seems
likely to rewrite denition 2.1.14 for Euclidian point spaces.
Denition 2.2.17. Let (o, 1) be an Euclidian point space. A vector v 1 which
transforms according to the rule
v
v ,
is called objective under the transformation
, shortly: objective. The transforma-

tion rule, which depends on the map that belongs to the transformation, has two
interpretations.
By applying the active interpretation of objectivity, the map : o o is understood
as a superposed rigid motion, transforming every point P = (O +

OP) into (P) =
(O) + Q(
OP) and keeping the Euclidian frame xed. In this case,
v = Qv as in
2.2.14, where Q SO(1), and x
i
= Q
i
i
x
i
+ c
i
are the ane coordinates of (P) in

terms of the coordinates of P and (O) with respect to O. (Q
i
i
) is the matrix of Qwith
respect to a suitable basis, and c
i
are the components of
O. Another way to dene

active objectivity is to interpret as a change of Euclidian framing (O, g
i
) (O
, Qg
i
)
(cf. proposition 2.2.16 and gure 3.5).
On the other hand, if the passive interpretation of objectivity is applied, : (O, g
i
)
(O
, g
i
) is a change of framing on the xed Euclidian point space and which keeps
the vector xed, that is,
v = Iv as in 2.2.9. In this case, x

i
= B
i
i
x
i
+ c
i
are the
ane coordinates of the same (xed) point in dierent frames, where (B
i
i
) is the inverse
matrix of the change of basis. Therefore, passive objectivity phrases the transformation
properties of v under a change of ane coordinates.

In general, it is the active interpretation of objectivity that is applied to continuum
mechanics and the theory of materials in Euclidian point spaces; this will be inves-
tigated in section 4.5. The passive interpretation of objectivity, however, relates to
the standard transformation rule for vectors and tensors under a change of basis (or
coordinates).
It is again emphasized that the active and passive interpretations of objectivity in
Euclidian point spaces correspond to the active and passive transformations of vectors
dened in 2.1.14, respectively. The reader should keep track of the active-passive
concepts in the remainder of the paper.
Chapter 3
Dierential Geometry
3.1 Topology and Manifolds
Manifolds are more general ane point spaces. Engineers nowadays accept the term
manifold as the mathematical expression for a continuum that has a dierentiable
structure, but the rich theory behind is often ignored. However, dierentiability as it
stands means that there is some continuity. Topology is the basic eld for the study of
continuity and for the creation of a general terminology of space a manifold is also
a topological space. Descriptively, a topology carries the relations or interconnections
between elements of a point set.
To non-mathematicians, managing books on topology and tensor analysis on manifolds
may become a dicult challenge. The following chapter should assemble the topics
needed by applying a notation consistent with the rest of the text.
Denition 3.1.1. Let o be a set. A topology T is a collection of subsets /, B o,
called open sets, which satisfy the following axioms:
1. T and o T . ( is the empty set.)
2. If /, B T , then / B T also holds.
3. Let 1 N be a set of indices. If /
i
T , i 1, then
iI
/
i
T also holds.
The pair (o, T ) is referred to as the topological space, but write o instead of (o, T )
if the meaning is clear. A subset / o is called closed, if o/ T is open,
i.e. closed sets are the complements of open sets. From the denition, the trivial
topology T = , o of o is obvious. The elements of a topological space are called
points; these can be geometric points, material particles, thermodynamic states etc.

Corollary 3.1.2. Since oo = and o = o, the sets o and are both open and
closed.
Denition 3.1.3. The interior or open cover int(/) of a topological space / o is
the union of all open sets | which completely lie in /, i.e. int(/) =
U
| [ | T
and | / . The closure cl(/) is the smallest closed set which completely includes
16 CHAPTER 3. DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY
/, i.e. cl(/) = o

U
| [ | T and | (o/) . The dierence cl(/)
int(/) = / is called boundary of /.

Denition 3.1.4. A topological space o is called discrete, if it has a discrete topology
T =/[ /o, that is, if all subsets are open. However, since o/ is also a subset,
all subsets in discrete topological spaces are both open and closed.

Denition 3.1.5. Let o be a topological space with topology T . An (open) neigh-
borhood of a point P o is an open set | T such that P |. A point P is called
isolated, if P is open. A basis for the topology of o is a sequence or collection B of
open sets such that every open set of o is a union of elements of B.

Corollary 3.1.6. In a discrete topology every point is isolated.
Example 3.1.7. The set of integers as well as the set of nodes in a nite element
mesh are discrete topological spaces.
Denition 3.1.8. Let 1 N be a set of indices, then a topological space o is called
rst countable, if for each P o there is a countable collection |
i
iI
of neighborhoods
|(P) o such that for any |(P), there is a k N so |
k
(P) |(P). o is called
second countable, if it has a countable basis, i.e. the topology of o has a nite number
of open sets.

Intuitively, second countable means that there is at least one way of covering the space
with a nite number of sets. Note that every second countable space is also rst
countable, but not conversely.
Denition 3.1.9. A topological space o is referred to as a Hausdor space, if every
two points P, Q o, P ,= Q, can be separated by neighborhoods |(P) o and
1(Q) o such that
| 1 = .

Proposition 3.1.10. In a Hausdor space the singleton sets are closed.
Proof. Let (o, T ) be a Hausdor space, P o, then for each Q oP there is
an (open) neighborhood |(Q) o of Q such that P / |, so | oP. Hence, by
the rst countability condition oP is open, and so P = o(oP) is closed.

Denition 3.1.11. A homeomorphism is a bijective map h : o T , where both h
and h
1
are continuous. A homeomorphism preserves the topology of a topological
space. If two topological spaces o, T are homeomorphic, then dim(o) = dim(T ).

Example 3.1.12. Every r-adaption or regularization of a nite element mesh at xed
mesh topology represents a homeomorphism. By contrast, the map R Z is no
homeomorphism.
Denition 3.1.13. An n-dimensional topological manifold / is a second countable
Hausdor space together with a homeomorphism
x : | / A R
n
P x(P) = x
1
, x
2
, . . . , x
n
P
x
i
P
, x
1
,
3.1. TOPOLOGY AND MANIFOLDS 17
for any neighborhood | / of P. The functions x
i
P
are called coordinates of P.
The pair (|, x) including the chart map x(|) = A R
n
of the neighborhood |(P) is
called chart or local coordinate system.

Denition 3.1.14. If for a certain system of local coordinates x
i
U
= x(|) on |
/ the inverse of the chart function x
1
does not exist, the coordinate system is called
singular, otherwise it is called regular. The inverse x
1
leads to the point P |
expressed by coordinates:
P = x
1
(x
1
, x
2
, . . . , x
n
) .

The quintessence of manifolds is found in the homeomorphism 3.1.13. Charts enable
measurement on manifolds, because every point is assigned to a tuple of real numbers.
Example 3.1.15. The simplest example of a manifold is R
n
itself, that has the global
chart (R
n
, Id). Any n-dimensional vector space is also a manifold with a global chart:
choose a basis g
i
, then 1
n
R
n
, v v
1
, v
2
, . . . , v
n
is the corresponding chart
map, in which v = v
i
g
i
.
Example 3.1.16. The thermodynamic state space is a two-dimensional manifold,
because in the chart the state is labelled by two independent quantities, namely pressure
and temperature.
Denition 3.1.17. Let |, |
/, | |
,= an overlap and (|, x), (|
, x
) regular
charts. Then the continuous map
x
x
1
x(UU
)
: x(| |
) x
(| |
)
is called chart transition or change of coordinates. is the composition operator. A
chart transition x
x
1
[
x(UU
)
is also called the relabelling of the subset | |
.

Denition 3.1.18. A collection A(/) = (|
i
, x
i
)
iI
of charts of the manifold / =
iI
|
i
, where 1 N, is called atlas of /.

Denition 3.1.19. A manifold / is called a dierentiable manifold, if for every two
charts (|, x), (|
, x
) A(/) the chart transition x
x
1
[
x(UU
)
is continuous dier-
entiable. If the chart transition is k-fold continuous dierentiable, where k N, then
the manifold is called a C
k
-manifold. For k = 0, / is a topological manifold and for
k it is called smooth or C
-manifold.

Denition 3.1.20. Let / be a C
1
-manifold, |, |
/, and | |
,= an overlap.
For a point P | |
, having coordinates x
i
P
x(|) and x
i
P
x
(|
),
respectively, the transformation of the coordinate dierentials involves the Jacobian
matrix of the coordinate functions at P,
dx
i
=
_
(x
i
x
1
)
x
j
_
(P) dx
j
,
in which x
i
x
1
is in general not linear in x
i
.

Denition 3.1.21. Let : / ^ be a continuous map, where / and ^ may have
dierent dimensions. Furthermore, let |(P) / be the neighborhood of a point
P /, 1((P)) ^ a neighborhood of (P) ^, and
1
(1) | , = . Let (|, X),
(1, x) be appropriate charts, then x X
1
denes the chart transition concerning
with respect to X (gure 3.1):
x X
1
X(
1
(V)U)
: X
_
1
(1) |
_
x
_
1
(1) |
_
.
The chart transition is also called the local representative or the localization of . If
x
i
denote the coordinate functions of (1, x), one abbreviates
i
= x
i
X
1
, so
x
i
=
i
(X). The map is called dierentiable at P
1
(1) |, if x X
1
is
dierentiable at P.

Note that chart transitions concerning maps : / ^ reduce to 3.1.17 if = Id is
the identity map on /.
/
x X
1
X(|)
^
P
(P)
1
|
x(1)
x((P))
X
x
1
(1)
(|)
X(P)
Figure 3.1: Localization of a continuous map .
Denition 3.1.22. Consider the aforementioned situation. A map : / ^ is
called regular, if the Jacobian matrix

i
X
I
, with X
I
P
X (|), is invertible at P /
(cf. theory of parametric surfaces).

3.2. THE TANGENT SPACE 19
Denition 3.1.23. Let / and ^ be dierentiable manifolds. A bijective dieren-
tiable map
: / ^,
1
is called dieomorphism, if both and
1
are continuous dierentiable.

Corollary 3.1.24. (i) If : / ^ is a dieomorphism and / is a C
k
-manifold,
then ^ = (/) is also C
k
, that is, dieomorphisms preserve or hand down the (dif-
ferentiable) structure of /. (ii) Every dieomorphism is regular.
Denition 3.1.25. Let : / ^ be a dieomorphism, | /, 1 ^ subsets,
and let (|, X), (1, x) be appropriate charts, then one refers to as the active dieo-
morphism and to

= x X
1
as the passive dieomorphism, respectively (gure
3.2).

|
X
//
1
x
A R
n
dim
//
R
n
dim
Figure 3.2: Active dieomorphism and passive dieomorphism

.
The dierence between those maps is often ignored in applications of dierential ge-
ometry; will be identied with

also later in this text in order to simplify notation.
However, the dierence between and

plays a fundamental role in general relativity,
gauge theory, and even in the theory of materials, since it had been noticed by Einstein
in his famous Hole Argument ([24], pp. 1066-1067, also [18, 19]). A consequence of
this argument is that spacetime in Einsteins theory of gravitation does not exist in-
dependently of the matter within it. The Hole Argument is embedded in the principle
of general covariance, which will be investigated in section 4.5.
Denition 3.1.26. Let o, ^ be manifolds, m = dim(o), n = dim(^) and m n.
o ^ is called submanifold of ^, if for every P o there exists a neighborhood
| ^ and a chart (|, x), such that for o | , = ,
x(o |) =
_
R
m
x
m+1
= . . . = x
n
= 0
_
x(|) and x(P) = 0 .
The denition phrases that the charts of o and ^ have to be compatible, and that the
chart of | in x(o |) is centered at P.

Example 3.1.27. A shell is an (m=2)-dimensional submanifold in a three-dimensio-
nal space.
3.2 The Tangent Space
In ane point spaces, a vector is identied with parallel translation (see section 2.2): a
specic vector can be attached to every point of the ane point space or, equivalently,
ane point spaces are at and any point could be an origin of that vector. For a
manifold, it is not possible to dene a parallel translation, because at this stage reached,
there is not even a connecting path between the points. Consequently, there are no
vectors in the traditional sense.
In order to geometrize manifolds further, this section gives a blue print of the tangent
space, that is, a vector space attached to each point of the manifold, by beginning with
curvilinear coordinates in ane point spaces.
Denition 3.2.1. Let o be an m-dimensional ane point space and y
1
, . . . , y
m
the
coordinate functions of an ane coordinate system (o, y). Let (/, x), with coordinate
functions x
1
, . . . , x
n
, n m, be a coordinate system on an n-dimensional manifold
/. A curvilinear coordinate system on / embedded in o such that / o is a
submanifold is determined by m nonlinear functions f
i
involved in the map
R
n
R
m
(x
1
, . . . , x
n
) y
i
= f
i
(x
1
, . . . , x
n
) , i = 1, . . . , m,
so that y
i
= f
i
on / in o.

Therefore, the simple rule for the change of ane coordinates 2.2.8, y
i
=
i
(y
1
, . . . ,
y
m
) = B
i
i
y
i
+c
i
, where the B
i
i
and c
i
are constants and do not depend on the point,

changes to y
i
= (
i
f
i
)(x
1
, . . . , x
n
) if curvilinear coordinates are involved.
With curvilinear coordinates in Euclidian spaces, a vector basis of the tangent space
at point P / o can be constructed by taking the partial derivatives of the
position vector

OP = x, where O o is another point, with respect to the curvilinear
coordinates: g
i
=
x
x
i
. Indeed, since dx = dx
i
g
i
, the g
i
are linearly independent.
Hence, consulting 2.1.12 and 2.2.11 proofs the following result.
Proposition 3.2.2. Under a transformation x
i
=
i
(x
1
, . . . , x
n
) of (curvilinear) coor-
dinates, which is assumed to be invertible, the tangent basis vectors transform according
to
g
i
=
x
x
i
=
x
x
i
x
i
=

i
x
i
g
i
,
that is, the inverse matrix of the change of basis coincides with the Jacobian matrix of
the change of coordinates.
To simplify notation in this section,
x
i
x
i
instead of

i
x
i
shall denote the Jacobian matrix
of the change of coordinates x
i
x
i
, and
x
i
x
i
is its inverse.
A linear transformation changes a vector, but the vector itself is a coordinate-invariant
geometric object. For example, parallel translation is invariant because v =
AA
BB
is independent of the origin and no coordinate system is involved. Therefore, v = v

i
g
i
=
v
i
g
i
must hold for arbitrary bases g
i
, g
i
. By 3.2.2, the basis vectors transform
with the inverse Jacobian matrix of the change of coordinates, i.e. g
i
=
x
i
x
i
g
i
, so
v
i
g
i
= v
i
x
i
x
i
. .
=v
i
g
i
v
i
=
x
i
x
i
v
i
.
This transformation rule identies the vector components with components of a 1-fold
contravariant tensor:
Denition 3.2.3. A set of coordinate-dependent functions t
i
which transform under
chart transitions (or changes of coordinates) x
i
x
i
according to the rule

t
i
=
x
i
x
i
t
i
are called components of a 1-fold contravariant tensor. A set of coordinate-dependent
functions t
i
which transform under the same chart transitions according to the rule
t
i
=
x
i
x
i
t
i
are called components of a 1-fold covariant tensor.

The terminology covariant and contravariant is introduced in order to distinct the
behavior under chart transitions, so covariant means having the same transformation
rule as the basis vectors. However, subscript and superscript would be also an
appropriate distinction.
Proposition 3.2.4. On dierentiable manifolds there are 1-fold covariant and 1-fold
contravariant tensors.
Proof. Let / be an n-dimensional dierentiable manifold, 1 R an open interval
of the real line and s : 1 / a curve on /, so that s(t) | / for some open
neighborhood |. In a chart (|, x), s induces the map s(t) x
i
s(t) = s
i
(t) R
n
for
every coordinate line x
i
. By using the Jacobian matrix dened in 3.1.20, a change of
coordinates x
i
x
i
transforms the derivations of the parameterized coordinates s

i
at
xed t according to the scheme
ds
i
dt
=
x
i
x
i
ds
i
dt
.
So, by 3.2.3, 1-fold contravariant tensors on dierentiable manifolds do exist.
Next, consider a real C
1
function resp. a C
1
scalar eld

f : | R, where | /. In
a chart (|, x),

f induces the eld f(x) =

f x
1
R
n
as a function of the coordinates
x
i
. A change of coordinates x
i
x
i
transforms the derivations of f with respect to

the coordinates according to the scheme
f
x
i
=
x
i
x
i
f
x
i
.
Conclude that on dierentiable manifolds there are also 1-fold covariant tensors.

Denition 3.2.5. Let

f : / R be C
1
, and let f(x) =

f x
1
be its picture in a
chart. One denes the directional derivative of

f along a curve s(t) / at point s(0)
through
d

f
dt
t=0
=
f
x
i
s
i
s
ds
dt
t=0
=
f
x
i
ds
i
dt
t=0
=
f
x
i
w
i
= D
w
f = w[f] .
The w
i
=
ds
i
dt
t=0
= w[x
i
] are tangential to the curve s(t) through point s(0), and they
are called components of the tangent vector of the curve at s(0). The w
i
are well-dened
up to re-parametrizations
w
i
=
ds
i
d
t
= w
i
dt
d
t
.

Proposition 3.2.6. The directional derivative of a real function is coordinate-invari-
ant.
Proof. By using 3.2.4,
f
x
i
w
i
=
_
x
i
x
i
f
x
i
__
x
i
x
i
w
i
_
=
x
i
x
i
x
i
x
i
f
x
i
w
i
=
f
x
i
w
i
.

Corollary 3.2.7. If 3.2.5 is written independently of f, then w[] = w
i
x
i
is also
coordinate-invariant. Application to the coordinate functions x
i
: | R shows that
the

x
i
R
n
dim
are linearly independent, clearly: w[x
i
] = w
j x
i
x
j
= w
j
i
j
= w
i
, so
w = w[x
i
]

x
i
is a vector. Therefore,
_

x
i
_
_

x
i
_
is a vector basis for the w
i
the
so-called Gaussian basis, and R
n
dim
indeed is a vector space.
Denition 3.2.8. Let / be a dierentiable manifold, | / a subset and (|, x) a
chart, then the tangent space T
P
/ at point P / is a vector space that is spanned
by the partial derivatives of the coordinates x(P) = x
i
P
(the Gaussian basis) such
that
_

x
i
_
P
T
P
/ is a basis. Formally, the tangent space can be written as
T
P
/ = P 1
n
dim
.
That is, the tangent space is a vector space attached to a point of the manifold and
which is independent of the tangent space at any other point. Note that the pair
_
P,

x
i
_
is the local version of an ane frame of reference on / that has been intro-
duced in 2.2.6.

Denition 3.2.9. The tangent vector w T
P
/ associated with tensor components
w
i
is given by its local representative
w
i
(P) w(P) = w
i
(P)

x
i
(P) T
P
/.
Whenever one talks about a vector w in the manifold, the picture of the w
i
in the
tangent space is meant. However, to get a local representative of w, the rst step is to
choose a chart on /.

Denition 3.2.10. The disjoint union
T/ =
_
PM
T
P
/
of all tangent spaces at all points P / is called the tangent bundle of /.

Denition 3.2.11. A manifold / is called metrizable, if the tangent bundle T/ has
a bre metric, that is, there exists a positive symmetric bilinear mapping
T
P
/T
P
/ R
_

x
i
,

x
j
_

_

x
i
,

x
j
_
P
= g
ij
(P)
at every point P /. The g
ij
= g
ji
are called metric coecients. If / is also
torsion-free (
j
k i
=
j
i k
, see sec. 3.6.1), then / is called a Riemannian manifold.

Denition 3.2.12. A linear form is a map
a
: 1 R
v a
(v) a
v .
So a
, where 1
is the dual space of 1, as it is used in linear algebra. Using

the notation a
v, the map is also called contraction. Note that the operator is not
commutative and it is not equivalent to the inner product of vectors!

As there are no traditional vectors on manifolds, but only tangent vectors, the def-
inition of a linear form has to be revised. On manifolds, the linear forms are called
dierential 1-forms, or shortly 1-forms.
Denition 3.2.13. Let / be an n-dimensional dierentiable manifold. The co-
tangent space T
P
/ is a vector space at point P / that can be formally written
as T
P
/ = P 1
n
. The union T
/ =
PM
T
P
/ is referred to as the cotangent
bundle of /.

Proposition 3.2.14. In a chart (|, x) on a manifold /, where | /, the dier-
ential forms dx
i
are dual to the

x
i
such that the cotangent space is spanned by the
coordinate dierentials, that is, dx
i
P
dx
i
P
T
P
/ is a basis for every P |.
Proof. It has to be shown that the duality relation dx
i

x
j
=
i
j
holds, where
i
j
is the Kronecker delta on / and i, j 1, 2, . . . , n
dim
. However, in R
n
dim
contraction
reduces to ordinary multiplication such that for every P |,
dx
i
(P)

x
j
(P) =
x
i
x
j
(P) =
i
j
dx
i
(P)

x
j
(P) =
i
j
.

In mathematical and physical literature the

x
i
=
i
with lightface symbols of partial
derivation typically denote the basis vectors of the tangent space, and the dx
i
denote
their duals. The notation with boldface symbols used here is a reasonable convention
borrowed from [2] and [6]. Note that w
i
x
i
may be read as a scalar as well as a tangent
vector and thus may cause confusion. The chosen notation avoids such ambiguity.
Denition 3.2.15. The dierential of a C
1
scalar eld f : / R is a 1-form given
by df =
f
x
i
dx
i
, in which
f
x
i
are the components of df.

Corollary 3.2.16. (i) By 3.2.14, the contraction of a 1-form a
P
/ and a tangent
vector v T
P
/ can be written as
a
v =
_
a
i
dx
i
_
_
v
j

x
j
_
= a
i
v
j
dx
i

x
j
= a
i
v
j
i
j
= a
i
v
i
,
where a
i
dx
i
is the local representative of a
.
(ii) With 3.2.15, the derivative 3.2.5 of a C
1
real function f in the direction w T
P
/
can be written as
w[f] =
f
x
i
w
i
=
f
x
i
w
j
i
j
=
f
x
i
w
j
dx
i

x
j
= df w.
Note that neither the terminology co- and contravariant basis vectors nor a metric
for raising or lowering the indices is involved to perform a
v, as it is typically done
when using curvilinear coordinates in Euclidian spaces. This is an example of how
dierential geometry can oer advantages and clarication of the basic theory.
3.3 Tensor Algebra
Denition 3.3.1. A
_
p
q
_
-tensor T(P) at point P of a manifold / is a multilinear
mapping
T : T
P
/. . . T
P
/
. .
pfold
T
P
/. . . T
P
/
. .
qfold
R,

By multilinearity it is meant that
T
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, v
1
, . . . , x, . . . , v
q
_
= T
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, v
1
, . . . , x, . . . , v
q
_
,
for some R, and
T
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, v
1
, . . . , x +y, . . . , v
q
_
=
T
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, v
1
, . . . , x, . . . , v
q
_
+T
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, v
1
, . . . , y, . . . , v
q
_
,
where a
1
, . . . , a
p
T
P
/ and x, y, v
1
, . . . , v
q
T
P
/.
Denition 3.3.2. A
_
p r
q s
_
-two-point tensor over map : / ^ is a multilinear
mapping
T : T
Q
^. . .T
Q
^
. .
pfold
T
Q
^. . .T
Q
^
. .
qfold
T
P
/. . .T
P
/
. .
rfold
T
P
/. . .T
P
/
. .
sfold
R,
where Q = (P) and T is a function of P. Every
_
p r
q s
_
-tensor is an element of a
(p q r s)-dimensional vector space. One refers to (p+q+r+s) as the rank of the
tensor.

3.3. TENSOR ALGEBRA 25
Example 3.3.3. A dierential 1-form a
is a
_
0
1
_
-tensor, also called a covariant rank-
one tensor, and a vector v is a
_
1
0
_
-tensor by setting a
(v) = v(a
).
Denition 3.3.4. The components of a tensor, that has been dened through 3.3.1,
are obtained by delivering the basis vectors of the cotangent space and of the tangent
space as arguments of the tensor:
T
1
,
2
,...,p
1
,
2
,...,q
= T
_
dx
1
, dx
2
, . . . , dx
p
,

x
1
,

x
2
, . . . ,

x
q
_
.
Components of two-point tensors are unwrapped analogously.

If the tensor cannot be represented by a single symbol T, it will be put in parentheses
such that (T)
1
,
2
,...,p
1
,
2
,...,q
denote the components of the tensor. Lower case greek
letters are used here as coordinate indices, whereas lower case Latin denote labels. The
nested indication is necessary as p + q index slots exist, and each independently pass
through the numbers 1, 2, . . . , n
dim
.
x
,
x
denote the Jacobian matrix and its inverse, respec-

tively, of a chart transition x(| |
) x
(| |
); | |
,= being understood.
Then, by 3.2.3, the components of a
_
p
q
_
-tensor transform according to
T
1
,
2
,...,
1
,
2
,...,
q
=
x
1
x
1
x
2
x
2
. . .
x
p
x
p
x
1
x
1
x
2
x
2
. . .
x
q
x
q
T
1
,
2
,...,p
1
,
2
,...,q
.
For the sake of completeness, some generalization of the tensorial transformation cri-
terion is given here.
Denition 3.3.6. (See also [5], ch. vii; [6], ch. 21; [25], ch. 5; and [4]) Let T be a kind
of
_
p
q
_
-tensor whose components transform according to the rule
T
1
,...,
1
,...,
q
= f
_
det
_
x
__
x
1
x
1
. . .
x
p
x
p
x
1
x
1
. . .
x
q
x
q
T
1
,...,p
1
,...,q
,
where f[det(
x
)] is a function of the determinant of the inverse Jacobian matrix.

Then T is called an even relative tensor of weight w, if f[det(
x
)] = det(
x
)
w
, and
it is called an odd relative tensor of weight w, if f[det(
x
)] = [ det(
x
)[
w
. Moreover,
T is a pseudotensor, if f[det(
x
)] = sign[det(
x
)].
The even (odd) relative tensors of weight 1 are also called even (odd) tensor densities,
and the even (odd) relative scalars of weight 1 are also called even (odd) scalar densities.
An absolute tensor (or ordinary tensor) is obtained by setting f[det(
x
)] = 1. Except
for special topics of integration theory, this paper solely deals with ordinary (two-point)
tensors.

Denition 3.3.7. Contraction reduces the rank of tensors. For example, contracting
a
_
1
1
_
-tensor T and a
_
1
0
_
-tensor resp. vector v = v
i
x
i
yields the
_
1
0
_
-tensor
T v = T(v) = v
i
T
_

x
i
_
, in components T
i
j
v
j
.
The contraction of a
_
1
1
_
-tensor T and a
_
0
1
_
-tensor (1-form) a
is
a
T = a
(T) , in components T
i
j
a
i
.
The contraction two tensors T and S in the i-th covariant slot of T and the j-th con-
travariant slot of S are dened in a similar way, as if the covariant slot is a 1-form and
the contravariant slot is a vector, respectively. The contraction of two tensors T and S
in the i-th contravariant slot of T and the j-th covariant slot of S is straightforward.
Let T
abcd
and S
ijkl
be the components of two tensors T and S. Then, without a
specication of slots,
T S with T
abcd
S
ijkd
=

T
abc
ijk
denotes the contraction and
T : S with T
abcd
S
ijcd
=

T
ab
ij
the double contraction of T and S, respectively. A single tensor is contracted analo-
gously, provided that the tensor has as well covariant as contravariant slots.

Denition 3.3.8. The contraction of a
_
1
1
_
-tensor is called the trace of the tensor:
tr T = T
i
i
.

Denition 3.3.9. Let the tensors T and S have the same rank and be compatible in
terms of contraction, then T, S) denotes the contraction on all index slots resp. the
inner product. Taking the examples of T and S from denition 3.3.7, then
T, S) = T
ijkl
S
ijkl
.

By the chosen denition of tensors, T is an operator acting on the vector slots and
1-form slots of some other tensor S, that is, T(S) ,= S(T) in general!
Denition 3.3.10. Let T be a
_
p
q
_
-tensor and S a
_
r
s
_
-tensor. The tensor product
T S yields an
_
p+r
q+s
_
-tensor
(T S)(P) : T
P
/. . . T
P
/
. .
pfold
T
P
/. . . T
P
/
. .
qfold
T
P
/. . . T
P
/
. .
rfold
T
P
/. . . T
P
/
. .
sfold
R
such that
(T S)
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, v
1
, . . . , v
q
, b
1
, . . . , b
r
, w
1
, . . . , w
s
_
= T
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, v
1
, . . . , v
q
_
S (b
1
, . . . , b
r
, w
1
, . . . , w
s
) ,
and
(T S)
1
,...,p
1
,...,r
1
,...,q
1
,...,s
= T

1
,...,p
1
,...,q
S
1
,...,r
1
,...,s
.
That is, the tensor product generates ordered tuples of basis vectors, and so for a
_
p
q
_
-
tensor T one may abbreviate T T
p
q
(/), where T
p
q
(/) =
p
T/
q
T
/ is the
_
p
q
_
-tensor bundle, and
k
denotes the k-th tensor power.

Corollary 3.3.11. By using the denitions 3.3.4, 3.3.7 and 3.3.10, a
_
p
q
_
-tensor has
the local representative
T(P) = T
1
,
2
,...,p
1
,
2
,...,q
2
. . .

x
p
dx
1
dx
2
. . . dx
q
.
Denition 3.3.12. The denition 3.3.6 can be generalized further by applying the
tensor product. An absolute pseudotensor is obtained by tensor-multiplying an even
and an odd relative tensor of opposite weights, and a relative pseudotensor of weight
w = u + v is the results of the tensor product of an even relative tensor of weight u
(resp. v) and an odd relative tensor of weight v (resp. u).

The reader should carefully distinguish the tensors on manifolds from those in ordinary
vector spaces, as the latter do not carry point information. The following proposition
helps to clarify this aspect.
Proposition 3.3.13. Let 1, J be vector spaces and G
I
1, g
i
J appropriate
bases, then every linear map A : 1 J corresponds with a
_
1
1
_
-tensor.
Proof. Note that from the denitions 2.1.10 and 3.3.2, AV = V
I
(AG
I
) = A
i
I
V
I
g
i

J, where V = V
I
G
I
is a vector. On the other hand
A
i
I
V
I
g
i
= A
i
J
V
I
J
I
g
i
= A
i
J
V
I
g
i
G
J
G
I
=
_
A
i
J
g
i
G
J
_
_
V
I
G
I
_
,
so A = A
i
I
g
i
G
I
is the tensor of the linear map.

An alternative proof of the previous statement can be obtained by showing that the
A
i
I
of the linear map transform as the components of a tensor.
To simplify notation, boldface italics are used for both, linear transformations and
tensors. The dierence will become clear when the object is applied to a vector v of
the tangent space: Av is the linear map A applied to the vector v, and A v is the
contraction of the tensor A and the vector v.
Denition 3.3.14. Let / be a manifold and P /. From the metric coecients
in 3.2.11, the metric tensor, or shortly metric g(P) = g
ij
dx
i
dx
j
can be dened, so
that the pair (/, g) is a metric space (just write / instead of (/, g) if there is no
danger of confusion). Through g
ik
g
kj
=
i
j
, an inverse metric g
1
(P) = g
ij
x
i

x
j
can be obtained, such that
g g
1
=
_
g
kl
dx
k
dx
l
_
_
g
ij

x
i

x
j
_
= g
kl
g
ij
i
l
dx
k

x
j
= dx
i

x
i
= I
M
is the second-rank unit tensor on /.

Corollary 3.3.15. Since
g
ik
g
kj
= g
ik
_

x
k
,

x
j
_
=
i
j
= dx
i

x
j
dx
i
= g
ik

x
k
= g
ik
g
kj
dx
j
,
tensor indices can be raised by the inverse metric coecients, and lowered by the metric
coecients.
Denition 3.3.16. Let T = T
i
j
x
i
dx
j
be a
_
1
1
_
-tensor, then the associated tensors
of T are
T
= T
ij
dx
i
dx
j
= g
ik
T
k
j
dx
i
dx
j
and T
= T
ij

x
i

x
j
= T
i
k
g
kj

x
i

x
j
,
where

is the index lowering operator and

is the index raising operator, respectively.
If S T
p
q
(/), then S
T
0
p+q
(/) is the tensor with all indices lowered, and S
T
p+q
0
(/) is the tensor with all indices raised.

Denition 3.3.17. Let P / and v T
P
/ a vector, then dene the linear trans-
formation g
(P) : T
P
/ T
P
/by g
(P) v = v, )
P
, and its inverse g
(P) : T
P
/
T
P
/, such that for T T
1
1
(/), T
= g
T and T
= T g
, respectively.

Corollary 3.3.18. The associated tensors of I
M
are
I
= g
ik
k
j
dx
i
dx
j
= g = g
and I
=
i
k
g
kj

x
i

x
j
= g
1
= g
.
Example 3.3.19. Raising the indices of the dierential df of a scalar eld gives the
gradient f, which is a vector:
(df)
= f = g
ij
f
x
i
x
j
.
Associated tensors are dierent objects, that is, T ,= T
,= T
! In cartesian spaces,
however, the distinction is unnecessary.
Denition 3.3.20. Let /, ^ be manifolds, T(P) : T
P
/ T
Q
^ a two-point tensor
over a regular map : / ^, where Q = (P), and let U T
P
/ be a vector on /
and a
Q
^ a one form on ^. The transpose or adjoint of T, T
(Q) : T
Q
((/))
T
1
(Q)
/, is then dened through
(a
T(U))
Q
= (T
(a
) U)
P
.
The transpose will be dened slightly dierent if / and ^ are metric spaces. Let
v T
Q
^ be a vector, then the transpose T
T
(Q) : T
Q
((/)) T
1
(Q)
/ is dened
through
v, T(U))
Q
=
T
T
(v), U
_
P
.

Proposition 3.3.21. If g
ij
(Q) are the metric coecients on ^ and G
IJ
(P) are the
coecients of the inverse metric on /, then (i) the components of T
T
are
(T
T
)
I
i
(Q) = g
ij
_
T
j
J

1
_ _
G
IJ

1
_
,
and (ii) T
T
= G
.
Proof. To proof (i), let |(P) /, 1(Q) ^ be neighborhoods with appropriate
charts (|, X), (1, x), respectively, in which X(|) = X
I
U
and x(1) = x
i
V
. Then
_
dX
I
_
T
P
/ is a dual basis at P and
_

x
i
_
T
Q
^ is a basis at Q, so that
T(P) = T
i
I
(P)

x
i
dX
I
is a local representative of T. Set U = U
I
X
I
and v = v
i
x
i
,
then,
T(U) = T
i
I
U
J

x
i
dX
I

X
J
= T
i
I
U
I

x
i
and
T(U), v)
Q
= v
j
T
i
I
U
I
_

x
i
,

x
j
_
= v
j
T
i
I
U
I
g
ij
.
On the other hand, T
T
(v) = (T
T
)
I
i
v
j
X
I
dx
i

x
j
= (T
T
)
I
i
v
i
X
I
, so
U, T
T
(v)
_
P
= U
J
(T
T
)
I
i
v
i
_

X
I
,

X
J
_
= U
J
(T
T
)
I
i
v
i
G
IJ
.
By denition, v
i
U
J
T
j
J
g
ij
= v
i
U
J
(T
T
)
I
i
G
IJ
. Multiplying both sides with G
JK
, and by
noting that U and v are arbitrary, one gets
(T
T
)
I
i
= g
ij
T
j
J
G
IJ
.
The assertion follows by uncovering the point arguments.
For (ii), let a
= v
= g
v. By denition, T
(a
) = T
(g
v) = (T
)(v) is a
1-form on /, so G
((T
)(v)) = (G
)(v) is a vector on /, where the last

identity is due to linearity. Since v is arbitrary, comparison with the second denition
of a transpose gives the result.

Denition 3.3.22. Let T, U and v be as before. The operations
T
1
(P) T(P) = I
M
and T
1
T(U) = U
involve the inverse tensor T
1
. It is easy to verify that T
1
has the local representative
T
1
(P) = (T
1
)
I
i
(P)

X
I
dx
i
,
where (T
1
)
I
i
are the components of the inverse of the matrix (T
i
I
). Dene the inverse
transposed tensor T
T
(Q) analogously from
T
T
(Q) T
T
(Q) = I
N
resp. T
T
T
T
(v) = v ,
yielding T
T
(Q) = (T
T
)
j
J
(Q)

x
i
dX
I
.

The local representatives of the transpose, the inverse and the inverse transpose of
(one-point) tensors can be obtained easily by choosing P = Q and ^ = /. It is
notable that T
T
calls for metrics on / and ^, whereas T
1
does not.
Denition 3.3.23. A two-point tensor T : T
P
/ T
(P)
^ is called orthogonal
provided that
T
T
T = I
M
and T T
T
= I
N
.
T is called proper orthogonal, if it is orthogonal and det T = +1.

Denition 3.3.24. Let ^ be a metric space. A
_
1
1
_
-tensor S : T^ T^ is called
symmetric, if S = S
T
.

Note that with two-point tensors it does not make sense to talk about symmetry!
Corollary 3.3.25. Let S(Q) = S
i
j
(Q)

x
i
dx
j
be symmetric, Q ^ and g
ij
the
metric coecients on ^. Then by 3.3.21,
S
i
j
x
i
dx
j
= g
jk
S
k
l
g
li

x
i
dx
j
= S
i
j
dx
j

x
i
.
Denition 3.3.26. Let S : T^ T^ be symmetric and dim(^) = 3, then, by
Cayley-Hamiltons theorem [9, 2],
S
3
I
1
(S)S
2
+I
2
(S)S I
3
(S)I
N
= 0 .
I
1
, I
2
, I
3
are scalar functions of S, which are rotationally invariant, i.e. invariant under
transformations that belong to the special orthogonal group SO(T^). They are called
the principal invariants of S having the properties
I
1
(S) =tr S ,
I
2
(S) =det S (tr S
1
)=
1
2
_
(tr S)
2
tr(S
2
)
_
,
and I
3
(S) =det S .

3.4 Bundles and Tensor Fields
3.4.1 Sections of Fibre Bundles
The previous section was about tensors at single points of the manifold. To give an
precise denition of elds of vectors and tensors, the theory of bre bundles is briey
introduced. For further studies see, for example, [26] and [1].
3.4. BUNDLES AND TENSOR FIELDS 31
1
(|) c
y
//
| T
pr
1
xxp
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
| /
Figure 3.3: Projection and local trivialization.
Denition 3.4.1. Let c, / be at least topological spaces, dim(c) = n + m and
dim(/)=m, respectively, and let
: c /
be a continuous surjection, then the triple (c, , /) is called n-dimensional bre
bundle over / and is called projection (gure 3.3). c and / are referred to as the
total space and the base space, respectively. If | / is a subset, then [
U
: c[
U
|,
with c[
U
=
1
(|), is called the restriction of to |. For P |,
1
(P) = c[
P
is
called bre over P, so n is the dimension of the bre.

Instead of (c, , /), a frequent notation for bre bundles is : c /, or simply c
if the meaning is clear.
Denition 3.4.2. Let (c, , /) be an n-dimensional bre bundle and | / a
subset. The pair (J, y) including the homeomorphism y :
1
(|) | T, where
1
(|) = J c, is called bundle chart or local trivialization (gure 3.3). T, with
dim(T) = n, is called the bre space. The term bre space is legitimate since the
bre
1
(P) is homeomorphic to T through y(
1
(P)) = P T. The mappings
pr
1
: | T | and pr
2
: | T T denote the projections onto the rst and second
factor of y(
1
(|)), respectively.

Denition 3.4.3. A collection (y
i
:
1
(|
i
) |
i
T)
iI
of bundle charts of (c, ,
/), such that
iI
|
i
= / for 1 N, is called bundle atlas of (c, , /).

Denition 3.4.4. Let (c, , /) be a bre bundle. If all
1
(|), | /, are locally
trivializable and
1
(/) / T is a homeomorphism, then the bre bundle is
called globally trivializable. If the total space is the product topology c = / T,
and (/, y = Id) is a global bundle chart such that = pr
1
: / T / and
1
(P) = P T, then (c, , /) is a trivial bundle.

Denition 3.4.5. If the bre space is an n-dimensional vector space 1
n
, a bre bundle
(c, , /) is called a vector bundle, and for c = / 1
n
it is called a trivial vector
bundle.

Denition 3.4.6. If the bre of a bre bundle over / is spanned by the tangent
vectors at each P /, i.e.
1
(P) = T
P
/, then the total space is denoted by T/,
and =
M
: T/ / respectively (T/,
M
, /) is referred to as the tangent
bundle over / (cf. 3.2.10). A local trivialization is then assumed to be dieomorphic,
not only homeomorphic.

Example 3.4.7. The simplest example of a tangent bundle is found in the ane point
space (R
n
, R
n
). The set of all vectors v = v
1
, . . . , v
n
at all points P R
n
, i.e. set of
all pairs (P, v), is just the cartesian product R
n
R
n
= TR
n
. So TR
n
is trivial, and
P R
n
is a tangent space at P.
Example 3.4.8. A tube is a trivial bundle, in which the base space is the circular
cross section S
1
, and S
1
R
1
is the total space. The bre
1
(P), P S
1
, is a line on
the tube parallel to the axis. The Mobius strip is a non-trivial bundle over S
1
. Locally,
tube and M obius strip are identical.
Proposition 3.4.9. Let / be an n-dimensional dierentiable manifold, then (i) T/
is a 2n-dimensional manifold, and (ii)
M
: T/ / is a vector bundle.
Proof. (i) Let | / be a subset and (|, x) a chart, where x : | x(|) R
n
.
Then, by recalling the denitions 3.2.8 and 3.2.10, a natural chart of the tangent bundle
would be (T|, Tx) including the map
Tx : T/[
U
x(|) R
n
(P, v) Tx(P, v) =
1
(v(P)),
2
(v(P)), . . .
. . . ,
n
(v(P)), v
1
(v), v
2
(v), . . . , v
n
(v) .
Therein,
i
(v(P)) = x
i
(P) are the local coordinates of P /, v
i
(v) = v[x
i
] are the
components of v(P) T
P
/, and T/[
U
is the restriction of T/ to |.
The natural atlas of T/, then, is the collection TA = (T|
i
, Tx
i
)
iI
of natural
charts, where T/ =
iI
T|
i
and 1 N. Hence, T/ is homeomorphic to R
2n
, so
dim(T/) = 2n. As / is Hausdoran and second countable by denition, and Tx
is a dieomorphism by 3.4.6, T/ is also Hausdoran and second countable, i.e. a
manifold.
(ii) By the denition of a local chart, x(|) is homeomorphic to |, and T/[
U
=
PU
T
P
/ =
1
M
(|), so
y
TM
:
1
M
(|) | R
n
v(P) = (P, v) P, v
1
, v
2
, . . . , v
n
,
v
i
= v[x
i
] being understood, is a local trivialization of T/ and
1
M
(P) = T
P
/ is
a bre. By 3.2.7 and the example 2.1.7, R
n
is also a vector space, so that T
P
/
P R
n
is an isomorphism. Therefore, T/ has a vector bundle structure induced
by the dierentiable structure of /.

Corollary 3.4.10. Let | /, / being dierentiable, be a subset and (|, x) a chart,
then
Tx : T/[
U
x(|) R
n
dened in 3.4.9(i) is a local tangent bundle map.
Proposition 3.4.11. (Without proof; cf. [1], p. 155.) Let (|, x) and (|
, x
), | |
,=
, be regular charts on a dierentiable manifold / such that the chart transition map
x
x
1
[
x(UU
)
: x(| |
) x
(| |
) is a dieomorphism, then T(x
x
1
) is a
local tangent bundle isomorphism meaning that it is an isomorphism on each bre.
Denition 3.4.12. Let (c, , ^) respectively : c ^ be a bre bundle with bre
space T and let : / ^ be a continuous map. The induced bundle or pullback
bundle is dened through
c /,
in which the total space
c has the same bres as c, that is,
c = (/)T provided
that c = ^ T is trivial.

Vector elds are sections of vector bundles. Moreover, the tensor product of vector
spaces can be transferred to vector bundles to generate tensor bundles, whose sections
are then called tensor elds.
Denition 3.4.13. Let : c / be a bre bundle, then a map
: / c ,
with ((P)) = P, P /, is called bundle section. If the bre bundle is a vector
bundle, then is called vector eld on /. The set of all sections of c is denoted by
(c).

In the physical and mechanical literature, instead of the correct (c) respectively
: / c it is common to write (P) for the eld, indicating that depends on the
points P /.
Denition 3.4.14. Let : c / be a vector bundle with n-dimensional bre,
y :
1
(|) | 1
n
a bundle chart and g
i
a basis in 1
n
, then
i
(P) = y
1
(P, g
i
) , i = 1, . . . , n,
denes the local basis sections or local basis vector elds
1
, . . . ,
n
: | c[
U
for
every P | /.

The local basis sections are necessary to express vector elds and tensor elds in local
coordinates, so to get a local representative of tensor elds.
Denition 3.4.15. Let
M
: T/ / be a tangent bundle and (T|, Tx) a natural
chart of T/, with the chart map Tx : T/[
U
x(|) R
n
, as dened in 3.4.9(i)
resp. 3.4.10. If y R
n
and e
i
: R
n
TR
n
are the canonical basis sections in R
n
so e
i
is the canonical basis at every y, then
(Tx)
1
(y, e
i
) =
_
x
1
(y),

x
i
_
=

x
i
(P) , i = 1, . . . , n,
denes the local basis sections of T/ for all x
1
(y) = P | /, that is,
_

x
i
, . . . ,

x
n
_
: | T/[
U
.
If e
i
is the dual basis of e
i
, then (Tx)
1
e
i
= dx
i
.

Denition 3.4.16. Let (c
1
, /,
1
) and (c
2
, /,
2
) be vector bundles, P /, and
let c
1
c
2
be their tensor product. Moreover, let
1
(c
1
),
2
(c
2
) be sections,
then
T(P) = (
1

2
)(P) (c
1
c
2
)
is called second-rank tensor eld on /. Therein, the tensor product of the sections
has been applied point-by-point:
(
1
2
)(P) =
1
(P)
2
(P) .
Tensor elds of any rank are dened analogously. A
_
p
q
_
-tensor eld on a manifold /
is a section of the tensor bundle T
p
q
(/). The set (T
p
q
(/)), resp.
(T
p
q
(/)) on
smooth manifolds, is usually written T
p
q
(/).

M
: T
1
1
(/) / be a
_
1
1
_
-tensor bundle, (|, x) a chart of
| / and T(P) T
1
1
(/) a tensor at P |. Then, by 3.4.2 and 3.4.9(ii),
y
TM
[
1
M
(P)
:
1
M
(P) P R
n
1+1
T(P) (T
i
j
)(P)
is a vector space isomorphism that gives the components of T for all P |, where
R
n
1+1
= R
n
R
n
denotes the n n-matrices (see also [4], ch. 4).
The corollary can be applied in a simmilar form to arbitrary
_
p
q
_
-tensor elds in order
to undress the tensor components at every point where the eld is dened.
Denition 3.4.18. Let (c
1
, /,
1
), (
c
2
, /,
2
) be vector bundles,
1
(c
1
)
and
2
(
c
2
) sections, and : / ^ a continuous map. The section
T(P) = (
1
2
)(P) (c
1
c
2
)
where P /, is called second-rank two-point tensor eld over on /, if (
c
2
, /,
2
) is the induced bundle of some (c
2
, ^,
2
). With this,
2
: / T^
is called induced section or vector eld over . Note that if
2
(Q) (c
2
) and Q =
(P), then
(
2
)(P) =
2
((P)) .

Example 3.4.19. Two-point tensors and induced sections play an important role in
continuum mechanics. A famous example of a two-point tensor eld is the deformation
gradient, as it acts on two dierent congurations of a material body. The Lagrangian
or particle velocity eld is an induced section V
t
: B To, where B is the material
body and o is the ambient space (see section 4.2).
The algebraic operations on tensors dened in section 3.3 all carry over to tensor elds,
by applying the operation to each bre of the corresponding bundle.
3.4.2 Action of Maps
The following paragraphs should investigate the action of maps on tensor elds, by
starting with linear transformations and then concentrating on maps : / ^
between manifolds.
Denition 3.4.20. Let A : 1 J be an isomorphism of vector spaces, T T
p
q
(1)
a
_
p
q
_
-tensor eld, a
1
, . . . , a
p
J
and v
1
, . . . , v
q
J. Then
(A
T)
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, v
1
, . . . , v
q
_
= T
_
(A
1
), . . . , (A
p
), (A
1
v
1
), . . . , (A
1
v
q
)
_
.
is called the pushforward of T by A. The pullback by A is dened through A
=
(A
1
)
.

Denition 3.4.21. Let /, ^ be continuous dierentiable manifolds and : / ^
a dierentiable map. The tangent bundle homeomorphism
T : T/ T^
(P, V ) T(P, V ) = ((P), D(P) V )
is called the tangent map or the dierential of . D(P) is the derivation of at
P / and D(P) V means D(P) applied to V T
P
/ as a linear map. Write
T
P
: T
P
/ T
(P)
^ for the restriction of T to P.
To get a local version of the tangent map, let (|, X), (1, x) be appropriate charts, with
| / and 1 ^, respectively, so that
i
= x
i
X
1
is the coordinate system on
^ arising from the coordinate functions X
I
of (|, X) via . Let
_

X
I
_
T
P
/ and
_

x
i
_
T
(P)
^ be the related bases of the tangent spaces, then
T : T/ T^
_
P,

X
I
(P)
_

_
(P),

i
X
I
(P)

x
i
((P))
_
,
i.e. D =

i
X
I
in coordinates.

Corollary 3.4.22. From the given coordinate expression the chain rule T( ) =
T T can be easily veried.
Corollary 3.4.23. Let V = V
I
X
I
be a vector, then
T(V ) (P) =
_

i
X
I
V
I
_
. .
=(T(V))
I
(P)

x
i
((P)) = V
I

i
X
I
x
i
.
As the tangent map is linear, one may dene a two-point tensor F to obtain the same
result:
T(V ) = V
I

i
X
I
x
i
= V
I
_

i
X
J
x
i
dX
J
_
. .
=F

X
I
= F V .
Conclude that the tangent map acts on a vector like a linear transformation.
Denition 3.4.24. With the conventions of 3.4.21, the inverse tangent map over dif-
feomorphisms : ^ / is dened through
T(
1
) : T^ T/
x
i

(
1
)
I
x
i
X
I
,
with (
1
)
I
= X
I
(
1
) x
1
. Dual to the tangent map, the cotangent map over is
for 1-forms:
T
: T
^ T
/
dx
i

i
X
I
dX
I
,
so T
(a
)(Q) = a
F, where a
Q
^. T
has the inverse T
(
1
)(dX
I
) =
(
1
)
I
x
i
dx
i
.

Note that T and T
, respectively T(
1
) and T
(
1
), have the same component
matrices, but are evaluated at dierent points!
For vector elds V : / T/, the operation T(V ) is also called the tilt of V by
[2]. If /and ^ have dierent dimensions, the vector T(V ) at point (P) is tangent to
^, but it need not to be tangent to (/). This is because T(T/) = T((/)) T^
is a subspace of T^.
Denition 3.4.25. A map : / ^ is called immersion, if its tangent T
P
:
T
P
/ T
(P)
^ is injective at each P /. If T
P
is surjective at each P /, then
is called submersion.

Proposition 3.4.26. (Without proof; cf. [1], p. 165.) Let : / ^ be an immer-
sion, then there is a neighborhood |(P) / such that (|) ^ is a submanifold
(see denition 3.1.26) and | (|) is a dieomorphism.
The preceding proposition does not imply that (/) is a submanifold, and even if T
is injective, might not be. However, dene the following for being injective.
Denition 3.4.27. Let : / ^ be an injective immersion, then : / (/)
is a dieomorphism and (/) is called an immersed submanifold in ^. An immersion
: / ^ is called embedding provided that it is a homeomorphism onto (/) with
the topology induced by ^.

In other words, an immersion : / ^ is a local embedding, and if in an
embedding, then (/) ^ is a submanifold and / (/) is a dieomorphism.
Corollary 3.4.28. An injective immersion : / ^ is an embedding, if it maps
open (closed) sets in / onto open (closed) sets in ^, and inversely in fact, this is
what the homeomorphism in the denition 3.4.27 of an embedding requires.
T/
T
//
T^
/
V
OO
//
T(V )
<<
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
^
V
OO
Figure 3.4: Tilt and pushforward of a vector eld V (T/).
Example 3.4.29. The circle is an embedding S
1
R
2
, and the 8 is an immersion
S
1
R
2
that is not injective.
After some tangent map T : T/ T^ has been applied to the vector eld V :
/ T/, the vector eld became a so-called vector eld over the map : / ^
(see denition 3.4.18), which is not an honest vector eld on ^. In order to transfer
the eld to ^ with respect to , the reference point have also to be switched. The
emerging operations are referred to as the pushforward and the pullback (gure 3.4).
The reader should be warned about dierent uses in the literature. There is often
no distinction being made between vectors and vector elds, and the tangent map is
carelessly identied as the pushforward.
Denition 3.4.30. Let g : ^ R be a scalar eld on ^, and : / ^ a
continuous map. The pullback
g = g : / R
has the same value at P /, as g has at Q ^, where Q = (P).

Denition 3.4.31. Let f : / R be a scalar eld on / and : / ^ a
regular map. The pushforward of f to ^ is dened through
f = f
1
, that is,
= (
1
)
.

Corollary 3.4.32. (i) If g =
f arises from the pushforward of f, then the pullback

is the inverse operation:
f)(P) = f
1
(P) = f(P) .
(ii) For a composition of maps and , the chain rule gives
( )
and ( )
.
Denition 3.4.33. Let V : / T/ resp. V (T/) be an honest vector eld
on / and let : / ^ be a dieomorphism. The pushforward
V : ^ T^ is
a vector eld on ^ = (/) given by
V = T V
1
.

Denition 3.4.34. Let w : ^ T^ be a vector eld on ^ = (/). The pullback
w : / T/ is a vector eld on / =
1
(^) dened through
w = T(
1
) w .

Note that
also marks induced sections of vector bundles, but the meaning is dierent!
Induced sections
: / T^ are not proper vector elds on / (or ^).

Denition 3.4.35. The specication of the pullback and pushforward operators for
elds of dierential 1-forms a
: ^ T
^ and B
: / T
/, respectively, is
straightforward. They are being dened through their action on vector elds. Let
V : / T/, then the pullback of a
is given by
((
) V )(P) = (a
) (T V ) ,
for P / and (P) ^, clearly,
= (a
) T.
The pushforward
: ^ T
^ of B
is a 1-form on ^ dened by
= (
1
)
= (B

1
) T(
1
) .
This can be easily obtained from the denition of the pullback of a
by setting
=
a
.

The pushforward and the pullback of arbitrary tensor elds can be realized through the
application of the pushforward and the pullback of vector elds and elds of 1-forms,
respectively, to all index slots of the tensor.
Denition 3.4.36. Let : / ^ be regular, T T
p
q
(/) and t T
p
q
(^), then
(
T)(Q)
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, w
1
, . . . , w
q
_
= T(P)
_
(
1
), . . . , (
p
), (
w
1
), . . . , (
w
q
)
_
,
and
(
t)(P)
_
B
1
, . . . , B
p
, V
1
, . . . , V
q
_
= t(Q)
_
(
1
), . . . , (
p
), (
V
1
), . . . , (
V
q
)
_
,
where P / and Q = (P).

Proposition 3.4.37. If : / ^ is a dieomorphism, then
: T
p
q
(/) T
p
q
(^)
is an isomorphism.
Proof. This statement is brewisely proved by noting that
(
1
)
= (
1
)
=
Id
is the identity on T
p
q
(/).

Corollary 3.4.38. Let : / ^ be a map, s T
0
p
(^) and t T
0
q
(^), then
(s t) =
t.
Note that if = Id : / / is the identity map, then the pushforward of a tensor
reduces to the transformation under a change of coordinates. Therefore, a dierentiable
map of manifolds provides the natural analogon of a linear transformation of vector
spaces discussed in section 2.1.
One is now able to obtain expressions of tensor elds in local coordinates.
Denition 3.4.39. Let v (T^) be a vector eld and (1, x) a chart on ^, dim(^)
= n, and let y R
n
and e
i
(TR
n
) the canonical basis vector eld, then
(x
v)(y) = Tx v(x
1
(y)) = v
1
(y), . . . , v
n
(y) = v
i
(y) e
i
is called the local representative of v in the chart at every x
1
(y) P 1 ^. The
tangent map Tx has been dened in 3.4.9(i) resp. 3.4.10.

Corollary 3.4.40. Let ^, v, x etc., be as before. Since Tx is an isomorphism on
each bre of T^, x
also is, and thus x
= (x
1
)
= (x
)
1
does exist:
x
(v
i
e
i
) = (Tx)
1
v
1
, . . . , v
n
x = v .
The local representative of 1-forms is dened analogously by adopting 3.4.35 and re-
placing by x.
Corollary 3.4.41. Let e
i
and e
i
be the canonical basis sections of TR
n
and its
duals, respectively, then from 3.2.14 and 3.4.15, x
(e
i
) =

x
i
and x
(e
i
) = dx
i
, i =
1, . . . , n.
Proposition 3.4.42. Let (1, x), 1 ^, be a chart and t T
p
q
(^) a tensor eld,
then the local representative of t on 1 is
t[
V
= t
1
,...,p
1
,...,q
1
. . .

x
p
dx
1
. . . dx
q
.
Proof. The components of t at every P 1 are the scalar functions
t
1
,...,p
1
,...,q
= t
_
dx
1
, . . . , dx
p
,

x
1
, . . . ,

x
q
_
.
Setting y = x(P) and applying 3.4.39, the local representative x
t on the subset x(1)

R
n
dim
would be
x
(t[
V
) = (t
1
,...,p
1
,...,q
x
1
) e
1
. . . e
p
e
1
. . . e
q
,
Application of 3.4.38 and 3.4.41 at every point then proofs the statement.

3.5 Exterior Algebra of Dierential Forms
Exterior algebra deals with the cross product in three-dimensional vector spaces and
with determinants. On manifolds, exterior algebra is a basic ingredient to detect sym-
metries and orientations, in order to establish measures in n-dimensional non-Euclidian
spaces and to generalize integrals, balance equations and the theorems of Gau and
Stokes. Fundamental objects of exterior algebra are totally skew-symmetric covariant
tensors, which are generally called alternating multilinear forms respectively dieren-
tial forms on manifolds.
In this section, lower case Greeks are used for coordinate indices, and lower case Latins
are used for labels.
Denition 3.5.1. A permutation of a set o
k
= 1, . . . , k N is a map : o
k
o
k
.
Note that the set
k
of all permutations (1), . . . , (k) on o
k
has k! elements. Dene
the permutation of a k-tuple of any elements (a
1
, . . . , a
k
) by
(a
1
, . . . , a
k
) = (a
(1)
, . . . , a
(k)
) .
A transposition is a permutation that interchanges only two elements. Every per-
mutation is composed of even or odd numbers of transpositions. An even (odd)
permutation is obtained from an even (odd) number of transpositions. Dene the sig-
nature of the permutation by sgn :
k
1, +1, then set sgn = +1 for even
permutations, and sgn = 1 for odd permutations, so that sgn = (1)
.

Denition 3.5.2. A permutation
k,l

k+l
of the set 1, . . . , k, k + 1, . . . ,
k +l N is called a shue permutation or (k, l)-shue, if (1) < . . . < (k) and
(k + 1) < . . . < (k +l).

Proposition 3.5.3. The number of all shue permutations on 1, . . . , k +l is
_
k +l
k
_
=
(k +l)!
k! l!
.
Proof. A shue permutation 1, . . . , k +l = (1), . . . , (k +l) can be realized
as follows. Choose k numbers without repetitions and put the last l numbers behind
them. Reorder if the sequence of numbers does not satisfy (1) < . . . < (k) and
(k + 1) < . . . < (k +l).
Therefore, the rst k of k +l numbers chosen completely determine a shue permuta-
tion, and allowing for reordering means that the order does not matter. However, the
number of such combinations without repetitions is just the binomial coecient
_
k+l
k
_
,
so the assertion follows.

Denition 3.5.4. Let T(P) T
0
k
(/) be a
_
0
k
_
-tensor at P /, i.e. a multilinear
mapping
T(P) : T
P
/T
P
/. . . T
P
/
. .
kfold
R.
3.5. EXTERIOR ALGEBRA OF DIFFERENTIAL FORMS 41
The alternation mapping Alt : T
0
k
(/)
_
k
T
/, where
_
k
is called k-th exterior
power, is pointwisely dened by
Alt T(v
1
, . . . , v
k
) =
1
k!
k
(sgn ) T(v
(1)
, . . . , v
(k)
) ,
for every P / and v
1
, . . . , v
k
T
P
/. denotes the permutation on 1, . . . , k and
the factor 1/k! is a convention to avoid double counts.

It should be clear that
_
k
T
/ is a subspace of T
0
k
(/). If n is the dimension of /,
then the dimension of
_
k
T
/ is
_
n
k
_
.
Denition 3.5.5. A (dierential) k-form (P)
_
k
T
P
/ at P / is a
_
0
k
_
-tensor
such that Alt = .

Corollary 3.5.6. For T T
0
k
(/), Alt T
_
k
T
/, thus Alt(Alt T) = Alt T by

3.5.5.
Proposition 3.5.7. Let (P)
_
k
T
P
/ be a k-form and v
1
, . . . , v
k
T
P
/, then
(v
(1)
, . . . , v
(k)
) = (sgn ) (v
1
, . . . , v
k
) .
Proof. First, note that (sgn )
2
= 1 and the number of all permutations on 1, . . . , k
is k!, that is,
k
a = k! a. Then from Alt = ,
1
k!
k
(sgn) (v
(1)
, . . . , v
(k)
) = (v
1
, . . . , v
k
)
=
1
k!
k
(sgn )
2
(v
1
, . . . , v
k
) .
Comparing both sides gives the result.

Denition 3.5.8. Let T(P) T
0
k
(/) and S(P) T
0
l
(/) be tensors, then the exte-
rior product or wedge product (T S)
_
k+l
T
P
/ is a (k +l)-form dened by
T S =
(k +l)!
k! l!
Alt (T S) ,
where the point arguments have been omitted. The wedge product for dierential
forms (P)
_
k
T
P
/ and (P)
_
l
T
P
/ is dened in the same manner.

Corollary 3.5.9. Let a
, b
P
/ be 1-forms, then
a
=
(1 + 1)!
1!1!
1
2!
(a
) = a
= (b
) = b
.
Proposition 3.5.10. Let (P)
_
k
T
P
/ be a k-form, (P)
_
l
T
P
/ an l-form
and v
1
,. . ., v
k+l
T
P
/ vectors, then
( )(P)(v
1
, . . . , v
k+l
) =
k,l
(sgn ) (v
(1)
, . . . , v
(k)
)(v
(k+1)
, . . . , v
(k+l)
) ,
where
k,l
denotes the sum over all (k, l)-shues on 1, . . . , k +l.
Proof. By 3.5.7, alternation of (or ) reduces to the sum with a single summand:
Alt (v
1
, . . . , v
k
) =
1
k!
k
(sgn ) (v
(1)
, . . . , v
(k)
)
=
(1)<...<(k)
(v
(1)
, . . . , v
(k)
) .
Therefore, the sum in Alt ( ) = Alt (Alt Alt ) is only over the shue permu-
tations that satisfy (1) < . . . < (k) and (k + 1) < . . . < (k + l). From 3.5.3, the
number of all shue permutations is
(k+l)!
k! l!
, so
Alt ( )(v
1
, . . . , v
k+l
)
=
k! l!
(k +l)!
k,l
(sgn ) (v
(1)
, . . . , v
(k)
)(v
(k+1)
, . . . , v
(k+l)
) ,
where the denition 3.3.10 of the tensor product has been used. Substitution into 3.5.8
then gives the result.

Proposition 3.5.11. (Without proof.) For a R and forms
_
k
T
P
/,
_
l
T
P
/ and
_
m
T
P
/, the exterior product has the properties
(i) a( ) = a = a (bilinearity),
(ii) ( ) = ( ) (associativity), and
(iii) = (1)
kl
(supercommutativity).
Corollary 3.5.12. For a 1-form T
P
/, = 0 by 3.5.11(iii) (see also corollary
3.5.9). However, if
_
k
T
P
/, then ,= 0 in general.
Corollary 3.5.13. Recall 3.3.4 for the components of a tensor, and let (|, x), with
| / a subset, be a chart with coordinate functions x
.
(i) If T T
0
2
(/) is a
_
0
2
_
-tensor, the components of Alt T are
(Alt T)
= Alt T
_

x
,

x
_
=
1
2
_
T
_

x
,

x
_
T
_

x
,

x
__
=
1
2
(T
) .
(ii) Let
_
2
T
P
/ be a 2-form, then 3.5.7 yields
=
_

x
,

x
_
=
_

x
,

x
_
=
.
3.5. EXTERIOR ALGEBRA OF DIFFERENTIAL FORMS 43
(iii) Let
_
k
T
P
/ and
_
l
T
P
/, then 3.5.10 gives
( )
1
...
k+l
=
k,l
(sgn )
(
1
)...(
k
)
(
k+1
)...(
k+l
)
,
where
k,l
again denotes the sum over all (k, l)-shues in
k+l
.
Proposition 3.5.14. Let P | /, dim(/) = n and (|, x) a chart such that
x(P) = x
P
.
(i) A local representative of (P)
_
k
T
P
/, k n, is
(P) =
1
<...<
k
1
...
k
(P) dx
1
. . . dx
k
.
(ii) dx
1
. . . dx
k
, with 1
1
< . . . <
k
n, is a basis of
_
k
T
P
/, which
therefore has the dimension
_
n
k
_
=
n!
k!(nk)!
.
Proof. (i) Through
_
k
T
/ T
0
k
(/), every k-form is a
_
0
k
_
-tensor that has a local
representative
=
1
...
k
dx
1
. . . dx
k
in a chart (|, x), | /, by 3.3.11. Here
1
...
k
=
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
k
_
, and dx
. . . dx
k
is the tensor basis of T
0
k
(/) at P |. Alternation and 3.5.8 then gives
= Alt =
1
...
k
Alt (dx
1
. . . dx
k
) =
1
k!
1
...
k
dx
1
. . . dx
k
.
Note that the Einstein summation convention is still in force and the sum runs over
all choices of indices
1
, . . . ,
k
1, . . . , n, including those where not all indices are
distinct. However, in that latter case,
1
...
k
= 0 from 3.5.12. For the other cases where
1
, . . . ,
k
are distinct, applying 3.5.7 for both
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
k
_
and dx
1
. . . dx
k
yields
1
...
k
dx
1
. . . dx
k
=
(
1
)...(
k
)
dx
(
1
)
. . . dx
(
k
)
for any permutation
k
and by noting that (sgn )
2
= 1. Now, since rear-
ranging the indices does not change
1
...
k
dx
1
. . . dx
k
, the sum needs to be
only over one of the k! index permutations. Choose
1
< . . . <
k
to nally get
=
1
<...<
k
1
...
k
dx
1
. . . dx
k
as desired.
(ii) Linear independency of the dx
1
. . . dx
k
can be shown by using the complemen-
tary set dx
k+1
, . . . , dx
n
and the condition (dx
1
. . . dx
n
)
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
= 1 (see,
for example, [1], p. 332). As the number of ways that k coordinate dierentials can be
chosen from n coordinate dierentials regardless of order (equivalently, with one xed
order) is just
_
n
k
_
, the assertion follows.

Corollary 3.5.15. Let be a k-form and an l-form, then in a coordinate system
x
, the local representative of = (Alt ) (Alt ) is

=
1
k! l!

1
...
k
k+1
...
k+l
dx
1
. . . dx
k
dx
k+1
. . . dx
k+l
.
: / T
/ denote the sections of the cotangent bundle

T
/ of a manifold /, then a k-form eld is dened as a section of the k-th exterior

power of the cotangent bundle,
= Alt (
2
. . .
k
) (
_
k
T
/) ,
where (
_
k
T
/) is usually written
k
(/).

Note that in the literature, the term k-form is generally reserved for the sections of
_
k
T
/, and not for the totally skew-symmetric covariant tensors at single points of
a manifold. This is because of their predominance in dierential and integral calculus.
By abuse of language, k-form will be adopted for both elements of
_
k
T
/ and
k
(/) in the paper, as long as the meaning will be clear from the context.
Proposition 3.5.17. Let : / ^ be a map,
k
(^) and
l
(^), then
( ) =
.
Proof. Every dierential form constitutes a covariant tensor, so 3.4.38 can be applied,
and alternation commutes with the pullback.

Denition 3.5.18. For
k
(/), dene the interior product or degree-1 derivation
(, = inner product!) by contracting a vector eld u (T/) with the rst index of
at every P /:
i
u
:
k
(/)
k1
(/)
(v
1
, . . . , v
k
) i
u
(v
2
, . . . , v
k
) = (u, v
1
, . . . , v
k
) .
In local coordinates x
,
i
u
=
1
(k 1)!
u
2
...
k
dx
2
. . . dx
k
.

Proposition 3.5.19. (Without proof.) If is a k-form and an l-form, then
i
u
( ) = i
u
+ (1)
k
i
u
.
3.6 Dierentiation on Manifolds
So far only the algebra of tensor elds on manifolds has been analyzed. However, in
continuum mechanics, tensor elds generally depend on time and location. Due to
the various geometric facilities on manifolds, beyond partial derivatives there are three
possible types of dierential calculi: covariant dierentiation, Lie dierentiation and
exterior dierentiation. Each is appropriate for special problems, but all types have to
satisfy Leibniz rule
D(AB) = (DA)B +A(DB) .
3.6. DIFFERENTIATION ON MANIFOLDS 45
D is the dierential operator under consideration and A, B are arbitrary tensor elds.
The so-called exterior derivative d satises the general Leibniz rule
d( ) = d + (1)
k
d ,
where
k
(/) and is an arbitrary form. First, the covariant derivative is being
briey introduced.
3.6.1 Covariant Derivative
Denition 3.6.1. Let | / be a subset. A curve c : 1 /, where 1 R is
open, is called integral curve of a vector eld w : | T/, if w(c(t)) = dc/dt(t) is a
tangent vector of the curve for every t 1. Clearly, (w c)(t) = Tc(t, 1), where
Tc : T1 = 1 R T/
(t, s) Tc(t, s) =
_
c(t),
dc
dt
(t) s
_
,
and Tc(, 1) : 1 T/.

Corollary 3.6.2. Let c, w be as in 3.6.1. Moreover, let x
i
P
= x(P) be the local
coordinates of P = c(t) | / in a chart (|, x), w = w
i
x
i
and c
i
= x
i
c. Then
w
i
(c(t)) = dx
i
w(c(t)) = dx
i
(Tc(t, 1)) =
dc
i
dt
(t) = c
i
(t) ,
by noting that dc
i
/dt = dx
i
(dc/dt) through 3.2.5 and 3.2.7.
Denition 3.6.3. A vector eld v : / T/ dened along a curve c : 1 /
is called locally parallel transported along the curve, if there is an (ane) connection
: (T/) (T/) (T/) on /, so that
c
v(P) = 0 .
Vector elds v which fulll this condition are called covariant-constant.

Denition 3.6.4. Manifolds with connection according to 3.6.3 are called anely
connected.

In general, parallelism is not global this holds only for Euclidian point spaces. A
locally parallel transported tangent vector of a curve remains tangent to the curve.
Indeed, the main dierence between Euclidian and non-Euclidian geometry rests on
the fact that for the latter any geometric consideration is local, whereas the former
implies the existence of a global parallelism.
The abstract denition 3.6.3 should now be motivated step by step. The total dieren-
tial dv of a vector eld does not transform as a tensor, hence avoiding invariant results.
This drawback is eliminated by dening the absolute dierential.
Denition 3.6.5. Let v
i
x
i
be the local representative of a vector eld v (T/)
in a chart (|, x), where | /. Then
Dv
i
(P) = dv
i
+v
k
dx
j
i
k j
are referred to as the absolute dierentials of the components of v at P |. If
a
= a
i
dx
i
(T
/) is a 1-form, then dene

Da
i
(P) = da
i
+a
j
dx
k
j
k i
in the same chart. The
j
k i
are called the connection coecients.
In Riemannian spaces (/, g), the
j
k i
are called Christoel symbols of the second kind.
As they depend on the metric coecients g
ij
and g
ij
in a chart (|, x) of / via
k
i j
=
1
2
g
kl
_
g
jl
x
i
+
g
il
x
j

g
ij
x
l
_
,
which is not shown here, one has
j
k i
=
j
i k
. For that reason Riemannian spaces are
called torsion-free, and the connection on (/, g) is referred to as the Levi-Civita
connection.

Denition 3.6.6. Let (|, x), (|
, x
) be regular charts on /, and x
x
1
[
x(UU
)
:
x(| |
) x
(| |
) the chart transition map, then dene
j
k i
=
(x
k
x
1
)
x
k
(x
j
x
1
)
x
j
(x
i
x
1
)
x
i

j
+
(x
j
x
1
)
x
m
2
(x
m
x
1
)
x
k
x
i
.

Corollary 3.6.7. The absolute dierentials Dv
i
are proper tensor components.
Denition 3.6.8. Let v = v
i
x
i
(T/) a vector eld, then the
i
v
j
(P) =
(v
j
+ Dv
j
) v
j
x
i
(P) =
Dv
j
x
i
=
v
j
x
i
+v
k
j
k i
are called the covariant derivatives of the components v
i
at every P /. It is not
uncommon to write v
i
|j
or v
i
;j
instead of
j
v
i
.

Denition 3.6.9. Since the
i
v
j
are components of a
_
1
1
_
-tensor eld, dene the co-
variant derivative of v pointwisely through
v(P) =
i
v
j
dx
i

x
j
T
1
1
(/) .
Let w be another vector eld, then
w
v = v(w) =
j
v
i
w
j

x
i
=
_
v
i
x
j
w
j
+v
k
w
j
i
k j
_

x
i
is called the covariant derivative of v along w. Note that the latter gives a condition
for the
j
i k
:

x
j
x
k
=

x
j
_

x
k
_
=
i
k j
x
i
.

Descriptively, the covariant derivative is the deviation of the locally parallel transported
vector from the original vector in the vicinity of a point.
Proposition 3.6.10. For covariant-constant vector elds the absolute dierentials of
their components vanish, that is, in a coordinate system x
i
, Dv
i
= 0 and
v
i
x
j
= v
k
i
k j
.
Proof. In 3.6.9, set w = c and use the condition 3.6.3, then
c
v = c
j
_
v
i
x
j
+v
k
i
k j
_

x
i
= 0.
As c is arbitrary and the

x
i
are linearly independent, the assertion follows.

Corollary 3.6.11. Let a
: / T
/ a eld of 1-forms, T T
1
1
(/) and P |
/. By dening
a
(P) =
_
a
i
x
j
a
k
k
i j
_
dx
i
dx
j
in a chart (|, x), one has
i
T
j
k
(P) =
T
j
k
x
i
+T
l
k
j
l i
T
j
l
l
k i
,
and
w
T(P) =
k
T
i
j
w
k

x
i
dx
j
=
_
T
i
j
x
k
w
k
+T
l
j
w
k
i
l k
T
i
l
w
k
l
j k
_

x
i
dx
j
.
Proposition 3.6.12. Let (/, g), g = g
ij
dx
i
dx
j
, be a metric space with connection
, then
g = 0.
Proof. From 3.6.11 and 3.6.5,
i
g
jk
=
g
jk
x
i
2g
jl
l
k i
=
g
jk
x
i

_
g
ij
x
k
+
g
kj
x
i

g
ki
x
j
_
= 0 .

The covariant derivative can also be applied to vector and tensor elds over maps, from
which the following important result can be obtained.
Theorem 3.6.13 (Induced Connection). (See also [3], sec. 5.7) Let ^ be a mani-
fold with connection and v (T^). A regular map : / ^ induces a unique
connection
on / such that for t T

P
/, with P /, one has
t
(v ) =
T(t)
v (
T^) ,
where (v ) : / T^ is the corresponding vector eld over .
Proof. Let P | / and Q 1 ^, and let (|, X), (1, x), respectively, be
appropriate charts such that t(P) = t
I
X
I
and v(Q) = v
i
x
i
. Moreover, let F
i
I
(P) =
x
i
X
1
X
I
(P) be the components of the tangent map T : T/ T^, and
i
j k
(Q) the
coecients of . By 3.6.9 and 3.4.23, locally there is
T(t)
v = t
I
F
k
I
_
v
i
x
k
+v
j
i
j k
_

x
i
=
__
v
i
x
k

_
F
k
I
t
I
+
_
v
j

_
t
I
_
i
j k

_
F
k
I
_

x
i
=
_
(v
i
)
X
I
t
I
+
_
v
j

_
t
I
i
j I
_

x
i
=
t
(v ) ,
where
i
j I
(P) = (
i
j k
) F
k
I
are the coecients of the induced connection
on
/.

Corollary 3.6.14. Additional to the previous denitions, let
J
I K
(P) be the connec-
tion coecients at every P /, and T (T
1
1
(/)
T
1
1
(^)) a
_
1 1
1 1
_
-two-point
tensor eld over : / ^. Use 3.6.11 and 3.6.13 to get
(i) At P /, the components of the covariant derivative of T are
I
T
J i
K j
=
T
J i
K j
X
I
+T
L i
K j

J
L I
T
J i
L j

L
K I
+T
J k
K j

i
k l
F
l
I
T
J i
K k

k
j l
F
l
I
,
where the point arguments have been omitted.
(ii) The covariant derivative of T at P / along a vector eld W (T/) reads
W
T =
I
T
J i
K j
W
I

X
J
dX
K

x
i
dx
j
=
_
T
J i
K j
X
I
W
I
+T
L i
K j
W
I
J
L I
T
J i
L j
W
I
L
K I
+T
J k
K j
W
I
i
k l
F
l
I
T
J i
K k
W
I
k
j l
F
l
I
_

X
J
dX
K

x
i
dx
j
.
Here the symbol should cover the covariant derivative of the T
P
/- and T
P
/-slots,
as well as of the T
(P)
^- and T
(P)
^-slots, that is, in the above constitutes an
operator for two-point-tensorial covariant dierentiation. Again, the point arguments
have been omitted.
(iii) Let T(P) = S , then, by noting that
K
J I
(P) =
K
J i
(P) F
i
I
(P), one has
W
(S ) (P)
= W
I
F
k
I
__
S
J i
K j
x
k

_
+
_
S
L i
K j

_
J
L k

_
S
J i
L j

_
L
K k
+
_
S
J l
K j

i
l k

_
_
S
J i
K l

l
j k

_
_

X
J
dX
K

x
i
dx
j
=
T(W)
S .
The application to arbitrary
_
p
q
_
- and
_
p r
q s
_
-tensor elds is straightforward.
Denition 3.6.15. The divergence of an at least 1-fold contravariant tensor eld T
is dened as the contraction of the rst covariant and last contravariant slots of T.
For example, let T T
2
0
(/), then
(div T)
i
=
j
T
ij
= T
ij
|j
,
and for a vector eld v,
div v =
i
v
i
=
v
i
x
i
+v
j
i
j i
.

Denition 3.6.16. A vector eld v is called solenoidal, if div v = 0.

Proposition 3.6.17. If (/, g) is a Riemannian manifold with metric coecients g
ij
,
and (|, x), | /, a (positively oriented) chart, then
div v =
1
det g
kl
x
i
_
_
det g
kl
v
i
_
.
Proof. The reader probably remembers from linear algebra that the (i, j)-th cofactor
of a matrix A = (A
ij
) is dened through det A = A
ij
(CofA)
ij
, and that
det A
A
ij
= (CofA)
ij
,
assuming the determinant function to be dierentiable. Therefore,
det g
kl
g
ij
=(det g
kl
)g
ij
,
by noting that g
1
is symmetric, and
det g
jk
x
i
=
det g
jk
g
mn
g
mn
x
i
= (det g
kl
) g
mn
g
mn
x
i
.
Substitution into
k
i j
=
1
2
g
kl
_
g
jl
x
i
+
g
il
x
j

g
ij
x
l
_
yields
i
j i
=
1
2
g
ikl
g
ik
x
j
=
1
2 det g
ik
det g
ik
x
j
=
1
det g
ik
det g
ik
x
j
,
so nally,
div v =
v
i
x
i
+v
j
1
det g
ik
det g
ik
x
j
=
1
det g
kl
x
i
_
_
det g
kl
v
i
_
.

3.6.2 Lie Derivative
Another choice of calculus on manifolds is the Lie dierentiation, which constitutes
a measure for the change of tensor elds under action of maps, i.e. if the manifold
evolves.
Denition 3.6.18. In a dynamical system, let the states of the system at time t be
represented by points P(t) /, in which / is then called the state space or phase
space. At starting time s, P(s) = P
s
are the starting points that constitute the initial
state. After some time t s has elapsed, the state changes to
t,s
(P
s
) = P(t)
at time t. The operator
t,s
is referred to as the time-dependent ow on / provided
that
t,s

s,r
=
t,r
and
t,t
= Id
M
.

Proposition 3.6.19. A time-independent ow is a one-parameter group of mappings
: /1 /,
where 1 R is open, (P, t) =
t
(P) at xed t and
t
: / /.
Proof. If the evolution of the dynamical system is time-independent, then the ow
only depends on the dierence t s, i.e.
t,s
=
ts
, and the terms starting time
and ending time are meaningless. Setting
t
=
t,0
, 3.6.18 becomes
t,0

s,0
=
t

s
=
t+s
and
tt
=
0
= Id
M
.
By noting that
t+s
=
s+t
=
s

t
also holds,
t
fullls the group properties.

Recalling 3.6.1, every integral curve c : 1 / denes a eld of tangent vectors
u(c(t)) = c(t). However, in this section the converse statement is more interesting:
Proposition 3.6.20. Let | / be n-dimensional, and u : | T/ a C
k
vector
eld, where k 1, i.e. u has k continuous derivatives. Then there exists a R 1 , =
and a unique C
k+1
integral curve c : 1 / of u for each P | such that c(0) = P.
Proof. Let x
i
P
= x(P) be the local coordinates of P = c(t) | / in a chart
(|, x), then from 3.6.2,
u
i
(c(t)) =
dc
i
dt
(t) = c
i
(t) .
where u = u
i
x
i
and c
i
= x
i
c. Moreover, c(0) = P becomes c
i
(0) = x
i
c(0) = x
i
(P)
in the chart, so there is a system of n ordinary dierential equations with given initial
conditions. As u resp. the u
i
are C
k
, by Picard-Lindel ofs theorem they have a unique
solution satisfying the initial conditions: the C
k+1
functions c
i
(t).

Denition 3.6.21. By 3.6.20, the vector eld u : / T/generates integral curves
for every P /. The totality or collection
t
= c(t) [ t c(t) =
t
(P), P / of
integral curves c(t) through c(0) =
0
(P) = P is a one-parameter group of mappings,
thus called the time-independent ow of u.
Note that the ow need not be dened explicitly, but it is implicitly well-established
by the vector eld. Therefore, u is called the generating vector eld of the ow
t
.

Denition 3.6.22. Let u(P), P /, be the (time-independent) vector eld gen-
erating the ow
t
, then the Lie derivative of a possibly time-dependent tensor eld
T T
p
q
(/) is dened by
L
u
T(P) = lim
t0
t
(T(
t
(P))) T(P)
t
= lim
t0
t
T
0
T
t
=
d
dt
t
T
t=0
.
t
is the pullback concerning
t
.

The Lie derivative approximately answers the question how a tensor eld T changes
under some ow.
Denition 3.6.22 is only for time-independent vector elds u. In general, however, the
generating vector eld is time-dependent, i.e. u : /1 T/, where 1 R. What
is the ow that will be generated? Clearly, it is asked for the solution of the dierential
equation
c(t) = u(c(t), t) and c(s) = P
s
,
where s is the starting time and P
s
= c(s) is the initial condition. However, this is
again an ordinary dierential equation which has the unique solution c(t) =
t,s
(P
s
),
where
t,s
is a time-dependent ow on / note this is a more general version of
proposition 3.6.20. Again, a proof can be performed with the aid of Picard-Lindel ofs
theorem, and uniqueness of the solution gives the properties 3.6.18 of the ow (see also
[1], ch. 4; and [4], ch. 5).
Denition 3.6.23. A mapping
t,s
: / /, t, s 1 R, is referred to as the
time-dependent ow of u : /1 T/, if for each s and P /
c(t) =
t,s
(P
s
) = (P
s
, s, t)
is the unique integral curve of u starting at P
s
at time t = s, i.e.
c(t) =
d
dt
t,s
(P
s
) = u(
t,s
(P
s
), t) and c(s) =
s,s
(P
s
) = P
s
.

Denition 3.6.24. The Lie derivative of a possibly time-dependent tensor eld T
T
p
q
(/) along a time-dependent vector eld u on / is dened by
L
u
T (P
s
, t) = lim
t0
t,s
T
t
T
s
t
= lim
t0
t,s
T
t

s,s
T
s
t
=
d
dt
t,s
T
t
t=s
,
with t = t s and the pullback operator
t,s
concerning the ow
t,s
. Fixing t in
T
t
= T(, t) gives the autonomous Lie derivative
lim
t0
t,s
T
s
s,s
T
s
t
=
d
dt
t,s
T
s
t=s
= L
u
T
T
t
=
u
T .
That is, if T is time-independent, L
u
T
u
T. Figure 3.5 illustrates the concept.

u
P(t) =
t,s
(P
s
)
P
s
=
s,s
(P
s
)
v(P
s
) = (
s,s
v)(P
s
)
L
u
v t
(
t,s
v)(P
s
)
v(
t,s
(P
s
))
Figure 3.5: Lie derivative of a time-independent vector eld v along a time-dependent
vector eld u.
Proposition 3.6.25.
L
u
T =
t,s
d
dt
t,s
T
t
,
that is, the Lie derivative of an arbitrary tensor is obtained by pulling it back from t to
s, performing the time derivative, and then pushing it forward to t again.
Proof. Let t ,= s and f : / R be a dierentiable function on /, then
t,s
(L
u
f) =
t,s
d
dr
r,t
f
r
r=t
=
d
dr
f
r

r,t

t,s
r=t
=
d
dr
(
r,t

t,s
)
f
r
r=t
=
d
dt
t,s
f
t
by the property 3.4.32(ii) of pullbacks. Since this result holds for f replaced by ar-
bitrary, and possibly time-dependent tensor elds T (see [1], sec. 5.4 for a detailed
discussion), the assertion follows.

Example 3.6.26. Let f : /1 R be a dierentiable time-dependent scalar eld,
where f
t
(P) = f(P, t) and P /, and let u(P, t) be a time-dependent vector eld
the time-dependency of P being understood. By 3.4.30, (
t,s
f
t
)(P
s
) = f
t

t,s
=
f(
t,s
(P
s
), t). Therefore
L
u
f (P, t) =
d
dt
t,s
f
t
t=s
=
d
dt
f(
t,s
(P
s
), t)
t=s
=
f
t
(P, t) +
f
x
i
(P, t)
i
t,s
t
(P) =
f
t
(P, t) +
f
x
i
(P, t) u
i
(P, t) ,
that is, L
u
f =
f
t
+u[f].
Proposition 3.6.27. (Without proof.) The Lie derivative of a vector eld v is
L
u
v =
v
t
+ [u, v] ,
where [u, v] =
_
v
i
x
j
u
j
u
i
x
j
v
j
_

x
i
is the so-called Lie bracket of u and v.
Corollary 3.6.28. If is a connection without torsion, i.e.
i
k j
=
i
j k
, and u, v are
vector elds, then
L
u
v =
v
t
+
u
v
v
u.
Some additional properties of the (autonomous) Lie derivative are being stated without
proof:
Proposition 3.6.29. (Without proof.) (i) If T T
p
q
(/) and is a dieomorphism,
then
(
u
T) =
T, that is,
u
is natural with the pullback. (ii) If u, v are
vector elds, then
u+v
=
u
+
v
.
Denition 3.6.30. Let (/, g) be a metric space, then a map : / / is called
isometry of g, if
g = g. If each map
t,s
of the ow generated by a vector eld
u : / 1 T/ is an isometry, then u is referred to as a Killing vector eld. It is
easy to verify that for Killing vector elds,
L
u
g = 0 .

3.6.3 Exterior Derivative
The third type of a calculus of dierentiation on manifolds involves the exterior deriva-
tive, which is restricted to elds of dierential forms.
k
(/) be a k-form on /, then its exterior derivative is
the (k + 1)-form
d = d =
1
k!
d
1
...
k
dx
1
. . . dx
k
=
1
k!
1
...
k
x
dx
dx
1
. . . dx
k

k+1
(/) .
If = f is a scalar eld, then df is its dierential, dened by 3.2.15.

Denition 3.6.32. A k-form is called exact, if there exists a (k 1)-form such
that d = , and is called closed, if d = 0.

Corollary 3.6.33. (i) Since d d = 0 from Schwarz theorem, every exact form is
closed, but the converse need not hold. (ii) By 3.5.12 and 3.5.14, every (k = n
dim
)-
form is closed.
Proposition 3.6.34. (Without proof.) (i)
(d) = d(
), i.e. the exterior deriva-

tive commutates with the pullback. (ii) Let u be a vector eld, then
u
= i
u
d+di
u
(Cartans formula).
Summarizing the preceding sections, the covariant derivative needs an additional struc-
ture on manifolds, whereas the Lie derivative restricts the direction of dierentiation.
The exterior derivative is exclusively for dierential forms. All three types lead to
proper tensors, whereas the usual partial derivative does not. The coordinate-invariant
or covariant formulation of physical equations, therefore, is ensured when applying
the covariant, Lie, and exterior calculus.
3.7 Integration on Manifolds
A rough introduction of integration calculus will be given in the following section. In
order to dene the integral in Riemannian and non-Riemannian spaces, one needs a
more detailed study of the dierential n-forms in an n-dimensional manifold, as well
as a terminology for orientation.
As in section 3.5, lower case Greeks are used for coordinate indices and lower case
Latins are used for labels.
3.7.1 Orientation and Determinants
Denition 3.7.1. Let n here and in the remainder of this section denote the
dimension of the manifold /. An n-form
n
(/) such that (P) ,= 0 for all
P / is called volume form, and the set of all volume forms on / is the volume
bundle. If there exists a volume bundle on /, then / is called orientable and the
pair (/, ) is referred to as a volume manifold.

Denition 3.7.2. Two volume forms
, are equivalent, if there is some f : / R

with f(P) > 0 such that
= f. The equivalence classes [] and [] of volume forms

are called the orientation and the reverse orientation (which is also an orientation) on
/, respectively. An orientable manifold is referred to as an oriented manifold, if it has
an orientation.

Denition 3.7.3. Let
N
be a volume form on the manifold ^. A dierentiable map
: / ^ is called volume preserving, if
N
=
M
is a volume form on /,
i.e.
N
,= 0 and the determinant of the Jacobian matrix of is non-zero at every
P /. is called orientation preserving, if
N
[
M
], and orientation reserving,
if
N
[
M
].

Note that if is volume preserving, it can be either orientation preserving or orientation
reserving, that is, the determinant of the Jacobian matrix of is either positive or
negative, respectively. The sign of the determinant, however, is important when it
comes to the denition of volume measures.
3.7. INTEGRATION ON MANIFOLDS 55
Example 3.7.4. The Moebius strip is a non-orientable manifold, because the equiv-
alence classes [] and [] can only be dened locally.
Proposition 3.7.5. Volume forms (and n-forms) have a single component, that is,
dim(
n
(/)) = 1.
Proof. This follows directly from 3.5.14 by setting k = n.

Corollary 3.7.6. (i) 3.5.14(i) states that the order of the coordinate dierentials in
the basis of
_
k
T
P
/ is arbitrary. So carrying this over to each bre of
k
(/) and
using 3.7.5, one obtains a local representative of the volume form at P / in a
coordinate system x
U
on | /:
(P) = (P) dx
1
. . . dx
n
.
(ii) By 3.7.5, any other volume form
= f is a linear combination of the basis

dx
1
. . . dx
n

n
(/), by choosing suitable f : / R. If f > 0, then
[], and if f < 0, then
[].
Denition 3.7.7. Let / be orientable with orientation [], P | and
_

x
_

T
P
/ a basis. If (P)
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
> 0 (resp. < 0) for all P |, then the basis is
called positively (resp. negatively) oriented relative to the volume form .

Denition 3.7.8. For every chart (|, x) on orientable / with orientation [], where
x : | R
n
, dene a map x
through
x
[
U
:
n
(|)
n
(x(|)) ,
and set x
(dx
1
. . . dx
n
) = f dx
1
. . . dx
n
. The chart (|, x) is then called
positively oriented, if x
([
U
) is equivalent to
dx
1
. . . dx
n

n
(x(|)) ,
the standard volume form on R
n
.

The reader should notice that the map x
has been already dened in a similar form to

obtain the local representative of tensor elds. However, for n-forms one sets x
(dx
i
. . . dx
n
) = dx
1
. . . dx
n
instead of taking x
dx
i
= e
i
(see 3.4.41). It can be shown
that x
is an isomorphism on each bre of

_
n
T
|, so the inverse map x
indeed exists.
Corollary 3.7.9. For / being orientable, there is an atlas A(/) = (|
i
, x
i
)
iI
,
with 1 N, of which all charts are positively oriented, that is, the determinant of the
Jacobian matrix of every two chart transitions x
j
(|
j
|
k
) x
k
(|
j
|
k
), j ,= k 1,
is positive.
Theorem 3.7.10 (Transformation of n-Forms). Let a
i
= a
T
P
/, where
1 i n, be vectors (the subscript labels are for convenience), and let
n
(/),
then at P /,
(a
1
, . . . , a
n
) = det (a
i
)
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
,
where (a
i
) is the matrix whose columns are the components of a
i
.
Proof. It is convenient to prepare the proof in two steps. First, it will be shown that
_
a
1
. . . a
n
_
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
= det
_
a
i
_

x
__
,
where a
1
, . . . , a
n
are 1-forms. For the purpose of this paper it is sucient to consider
the case n = 2; a generalization can be found in [1], sec. 6.2. Dene a
i
= a
i
dx
P
/, then, by 3.5.10,
_
a
1
a
2
_
_

x
1
,

x
2
_
=
1,1
(sgn ) a
1
_

x
(1)
_
a
2
_

x
(2)
_
= a
1
1
a
2
2
a
1
2
a
2
1
= det
_
a
i
_
.
Here
1,1
denotes the sum over the two (1, 1)-shues on 1, 2, and (a
i
) =
_
a
i
_

x
__
is the matrix whose rows are the components of a
i
, as desired.
Now dene = a
1
. . . a
n
. As a special case of the previous result is dx
1
. . .
dx
n
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
= 1, one has
dx
1
. . . dx
n
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
= det (a
i
)
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
.
Here (a
i
) is the inverse of the matrix (a
i
), whose components are a
i
= dx
(a
i
) and
a
i
= a
i
_

x
_
, respectively. It follows that a
i
and a
i
so dened are dual, such that
a
i
(a
i
) = a
i
i
dx
_

x
_
= a
i
= a
i
i
= 1 (no sum over i) ,
for all i 1, . . . , n. From this and by using dened above, dx
1
. . . dx
n
_

x
1
,
. . . ,

x
n
_
= (a
1
, . . . , a
n
), which proofs the theorem.

Proposition 3.7.11. Let : / ^ be a dierentiable map, | /, 1 ^
and
1
(1) | , = . Moreover, let (|, X), (1, x) be appropriate charts such that
x X
1
denes the chart map x concerning with respect to X. Let x
P
= x(P)
and X
P
= X(P) for some P
1
(1) | /, and let
N
= dx
1
. . . dx
n
n
(^), then
(dx
1
. . . dx
n
) = det
_
x
X
1
X
_
( ) dX
1
. . . dX
n
,
where
_
x
X
1
X
_
is the Jacobian matrix of with respect to x and X.
Proof. Because : ^ R, one has
= by 3.4.30, so it is left proving
(dx
1
. . . dx
n
) = det
_
_
dX
1
. . . dX
n
,
where
= x
X
1
has been set, and point arguments are omitted. Multiplying
both sides with
_

X
1
, . . . ,

X
n
_
, then the right hand side becomes just det
_
_
. On
the left hand side, however,
(dx
1
. . . dx
n
)
_

X
1
, . . . ,

X
n
_
= (dx
1
. . . dx
n
)
_
_

X
1
_
, . . . ,
_

X
n
__
= (dx
1
. . . dx
n
)
_
X
1
, . . . ,

X
n
_
= det
_
_
(dx
1
. . . dx
n
)
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
= det
_
_
by 3.4.35 and theorem 3.7.10.

Corollary 3.7.12. Let = Id : / /, and (|, x), (|
, x
) be regular charts on
/, then by 3.7.11,
(i) Under chart transitions x
x
1
[
x(UU
)
: x(| |
) x
(| |
),
dx
1
. . . dx
n
= det
_
(x
x
1
)
x
_
dx
1
. . . dx
n
.
(ii) If =
dx
1
. . . dx
n
= dx
1
. . . dx
n
, then
= det
_
(x
x
1
)
x
_
1
.
Conclude that =
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
is not a scalar, and that n-forms are even relative
scalars of weight 1, i.e. even scalar densities in terms of 3.3.6.
Corollary 3.7.13. Recall the denitions in 3.7.11 and let (|
, X
), (1
, x
) be other
charts on / and ^, respectively. Then, by using the abbreviation
(x
x
1
)
x
=
x
and applying the standard rule for the determinant of products of matrices,
det
_
_
= det
_
x
_
= det
_
x
_
det
_
_
det
_
X
_
.
Thus det(

) is not a proper scalar function in general, i.e. it is not coordinate-

invariant.
Denition 3.7.14. Let A : 1 J be an isomorphism of vector spaces and
_
n
J an n-form with respect to the vector space J, then, by 3.7.11 and 3.4.20, a
coordinate-free denition of the determinant can be obtained:
A
= (det A) .
Note that det A = det (A
i
), where (A
i
) is the matrix of the linear transformation
(see 2.1.10).

Denition 3.7.15. Let a
1
, . . . , a
n
T
P
/be 1-forms, then dene the n-form-valued
-tensor at P / through
(P) : T
P
/. . . T
P
/
. .
n-fold
P
/
_
a
1
, . . . , a
n
_
a
1
. . . a
n
=
1
...n
a
1
. . . a
n
,
in which
1
...n
(P) is the Levi-Civita symbol or permutation symbol, given by
1
...n
=
_
_
_
+1 if
1
, . . . ,
n
is an even permutation of 1, . . . , n
1 if
1
, . . . ,
n
is an odd permutation of 1, . . . , n
0 if
i
=
j
for some i ,= j
in every coordinate system.

Proposition 3.7.16. The -tensor is an even relative tensor of weight 1.
Proof. In a regular chart (|, x) on /, note that (dx
1
, . . . , dx
n
) = dx
1
. . . dx
n
=
1
...n
dx
1
. . . dx
n
by denition, and a
1
. . . a
n
= det(a
)dx
1
. . . dx
n
by
3.7.10, where a
= a
dx
has been set here lower case Greeks are also used for
labels. Therefore,
_
a
1
, . . . , a
n
_
= a
1
. . . a
n
= det
_
a
1
...n
dx
1
. . . dx
n
= det
_
a
_
,
so that =
1
...n
dx
1
. . . dx
n
is a local representative of .
Now, under a chart transition x
x
1
[
x(UU
)
: x(| |
) x
(| |
),
dx
1
. . . dx
n
= det
_
x
_
1
dx
1
. . . dx
n
= det
_
x
_
1
1
...n
dx
1
. . . dx
n
by 3.7.12 and using the abbreviation
(x
x
1
)
x
=
x
. But is a tensor, so
1
...
n
dx
. . . dx
n
=
1
...n
x
1
x
1
. . .
x
n
x
n
dx
1
. . . dx
n
from 3.3.5. Substitution into the
preceding then yields
1
...
n
= det
_
x
_
1
x
1
x
1
. . .
x
n
x
1
...n
as desired.

Note that as a tensor has n
n
components, but only n! are non-zero. Hence, the even
relative -tensor of weight 1 boils down to the even relative scalar dx
1
. . . dx
n
=
(dx
1
, . . . , dx
n
) of weight 1 when applied to the n-tuple (dx
1
, . . . , dx
n
).
3.7.2 Stokes Theorem and Volume Measures
The n-forms on n-dimensional manifolds have a single component, thus they can be
integrated over open sets by prescribing the following:
Denition 3.7.17. Let A R
n
be open and f dx
1
. . . dx
n

n
(A), f =
f(x
1
. . . x
n
) being understood, then dene
_
X
f dx
1
. . . dx
n
=
_
X
f dx
1
. . . dx
n
_
X
f ,
where
_
X
f is the ordinary Riemann integral of f in R
n
.

Theorem 3.7.18 (Change of Variables). (Without proof.) Let / be orientable,
: / ^ an orientation preserving map and
n
((/)), then
_

=
_
.
This fundamental theorem well-known from the analysis of real functions leads to the
answer of how n-forms are to be integrated over manifolds.
Proposition 3.7.19. Let (|, x), | /, be a positively oriented chart and
n
(/) an n-form, then
_
U
=
_
x(U)
x
1
.
Proof. Without loss of generality assume that (P) = (P) dx
1
. . . dx
n
for every
P /, then
x
([
U
) = ( x
1
) dx
1
. . . dx
n
by 3.7.8 together with 3.4.42, and
_
x(U)
x
=
_
x(U)
x
1
by denition. The result then follows by the change of variables formula.

In other words, n-forms get access to the calculus of integration of real functions by
dening their integral in the chart as the ordinary Riemann integral in R
n
(cf. [1],
sec. 7.1). Clearly, dx
1
. . . dx
n
is replaced by its Lebesgue measure, and the 1-form
valued coordinate dierentials dx
i
on | are read as the usual coordinate dierentials
dx
i
of the chart x(|) R
n
note that this approach is comparable to the denition
of a dierentiable structure on manifolds presented in section 3.1.
If the atlas A(/) = (|
i
, x
i
)
iI
of / =
iI
|
i
contains of more than one chart,
then the integral of over / is dened via the sum of integrals over the subsets |
i
by assuming that there is a so-called partition of unity subordinate to the atlas.
R
n1
x(|)
/
|
n
x
= (0, . . . , 0, 1)
x
/

x
n
x
n
= 0
Figure 3.6: Denition of the outward normal on the boundary /.
In continuum mechanics, Stokess theorem is of fundamental importance. For its gen-
eral version on manifolds, it is necessary that the oriented manifold / has a compat-
ible oriented boundary / for / being n-dimensional, note that / is (n1)-
dimensional.
Remember that the classic Stokes theorem for surfaces embedded in R
3
applies the
right-hand rule to achieve compatibility: the outward normal vector of the surface is
linked to the counter-clockwise, i.e. positive orientation of the boundary. This rule is
used to dene the positively oriented boundary of a manifold (gure 3.6):
Denition 3.7.20. Let /be oriented and (|, x) a chart, then a basis
_
g
1
, . . . , g
n1
_
T
P
(/) at P / is positively oriented, if
_

x
n
, g
1
, . . . , g
n1
_
T
P
/ is posi-
tively oriented in the orientation of /. By this, / induces an orientation on /.

Theorem 3.7.21 (Stokes Theorem). (Without proof; see [1] or [4]) Let / be ori-
ented with an oriented boundary /, and let be an (n1)-form, then
_
M
d =
_
M
.
On Riemannian manifolds, i.e. metric spaces, volume forms enable volume measure-
ment. The volume measure should always be non-zero and positive to be consistent
with the specication in ordinary R
3
.
From linear algebra, the volume of the parallelepiped spanned by the three independent
vectors w
1
, w
2
, w
3
R
3
is given by Vol(w
1
, w
2
, w
3
) =
_
det w
i
, w
j
), if w
1
, w
2
and
w
3
are positively oriented, and by
Vol(w
1
, w
2
, w
3
) =
_
[det w
i
, w
j
)[ ,
if w
1
, w
2
and w
3
are negatively oriented. detw
i
, w
j
) denotes the determinant of the
matrix (W
ij
), whose elements are given by the inner products W
ij
= w
i
, w
j
). To
carry this over to manifolds, one needs to dene quantities that involve the absolute
value of a determinant.
Denition 3.7.22. A multilinear mapping
: 1 . . . 1
. .
n-fold
R
over a vector space 1 is called an -density, if for every v
1
, . . . , v
n
1 and every
endomorphism A : 1 1,
(Av
1
, . . . , Av
n
) = [det A[
(v
1
, . . . , v
n
) .
The set of all -densities over 1 is denoted by [
_
n
[
1. 1-densities (or just densites)

are also called odd or twisted n-forms.

-densities can be constructed from n-forms as follows: If
_
n
1 is an n-form, then
the -density [[
[
_
n
[
1 is dened through [[
(v
1
, . . . , v
n
) = [(v
1
, . . . , v
n
)[
.
Conversely, let 1 be orientable, g
i
1 a positively oriented basis, v
i
= Ag
i
, and
[
_
n
[ 1 a 1-density, then
(v
1
, . . . , v
n
) = (det A) (g
1
, . . . , g
n
)
denes an n-form on 1. -densities can be carried over to manifolds in order to derive
the next result.
Corollary 3.7.23. Let = Id : / / and (|, x), (|
, x
) be regular charts
on a dierentiable manifold /. Let ([
_
n
[ T
/) be a twisted n-form and

x
x
1
[
x(UU
)
: x(| |
) x
(| |
) the chart transition map, then 3.7.22 carries

over to
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
=
det
_
(x
x
1
)
x
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
,
where Av
i
has been replaced by the tangent map T(

x
) =
(x
x
1
)
x
. Conclude
that =
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
is not a scalar, and that twisted n-form are odd relative
scalars of weight 1, i.e. odd scalar densities in the sense of 3.3.6.
With twisted n-forms one can formulate integrals and Stokes theorem even on non-
orientable manifolds.
Denition 3.7.24. Let (/, g) be an oriented Riemannian manifold and the set w
1
,
. . . , w
n
(T/) positively oriented, then the Riemannian volume form or g-volume
dv
n
(/) is dened by
dv(w
1
, . . . , w
n
) =
_
det w
, w
) ,
i.e. dv(w
1
, . . . , w
n
) is the volume of the parallelepiped spanned by the vectors w
1
, . . . ,
w
n
. More general, and for arbitrary orientations of the w
1
, . . . , w
n
, dene the Rie-
mannian -density or g--density through
[dv[
(w
1
, . . . , w
n
) = [det w
, w
)[
2
.

Let e
1
, . . . , e
n
T
P
/be a positively oriented orthonormal basis, and e
1
, . . . , e
n

T
P
/ its dual. The volume of the parallelepiped spanned by the e
1
, . . . , e
n
is just
dv(e
1
, . . . , e
n
) = 1, but from 3.7.10 this is achieved with dv = e
1
. . . e
n
. The more
general case follows.
Corollary 3.7.25. In a regular chart (|, x) on (/, g), let
_

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
_
T
P
/ be
a positively oriented basis, then dv(

x
1
, . . . ,

x
n
) =
_
det
,

x
_
=
_
det g
is
the component of the Riemannian volume form such that
dv =
_
det g
dx
1
. . . dx
n
is its local representative.
Proposition 3.7.26. Let (/, G), (^, g) be orientable, : / ^ a dieomor-
phism, | /, 1 ^ and
1
(1) | , = . Moreover, let (|, X), (1, x) be positively
oriented charts and let
= x
X
1
denote the coordinate functions of x concern-
ing with respect to X
P
= X(P), for every P
1
(1) | /. Let dV , dv be
the Riemannian volume forms on / and ^, respectively, then
dv = J
dV ,
where J
(P) = det
_
_
(
det g)
det G
, called the Jacobian of , is a proper scalar.

Proof. By 3.7.11,
dv =
_
_
det g
(dx
1
. . . dx
n
)
=
_
_
det g

_
det
_
_
dX
1
. . . dX
n
.
But dX
1
. . . dX
n
= (det G
1
2
dV by 3.7.25, hence
dv = J
dV as desired.
To proof the second part, i.e. the invariance of J
(P), let (|
, X
), (1
, x
) be other
regular and positively oriented charts on / and ^, respectively. Now, since det g
=
det
_
g
_
, where the abbreviation
(x
x
1
)
x
=
x
has been used, it is

_
det g
_
det g
= det
_
x
_
.
Therefore,
J
= det
_
_
_
det(g
)
_
det(G
)
= det
_
_
_
det(g
)
_
det(g
)
_
det(G
)
_
det(G
)
_
det(g
)
_
det(G
)
= det
_
_
det
_
x
_
det
_
X
_
_
det(g
)
_
det(G
)
= det
_
_
_
det(g
)
_
det(G
)
= J
,
so J
in contrast to det
_
x
_
, see 3.7.13 indeed is a scalar.

Proposition 3.7.27. In the light of 3.3.12, Riemannian volume forms are absolute
pseudoscalars such that the formula of 3.7.26 boils down to
dv = J
dV .
Proof. For the moment, drop the condition that both (1, x) and (1
, x
) previously
dened are positively oriented, then
_
det g
det
_
g
_
=
_
det g
det
_
x
.
Let dv =
_
det g
dx
1
. . . dx
n
=
_
det g
dx
1
. . . dx
n
, then use 3.7.12(i) to

obtain
_
det g
dx
1
. . . dx
n
= det
_
x
_
_
det g
dx
1
. . . dx
n
=
det
_
x
det
_
x
_
det g
dx
1
. . . dx
n
= sign
_
det
_
x
__
_
det g
dx
1
. . . dx
n
,
as desired. Now since dv is a scalar, one arrives at
dv = dv by applying denition
3.4.30.

Corollary 3.7.28.
_
det g
is an odd relative scalar of weight 1, i.e. an odd scalar

density, and dv =
_
det g
1
...n
dx
1
. . . dx
n
=
_
det g
(dx
1
, . . . , dx
n
).
Denition 3.7.29. =
_
det g
is called the Levi-Civita tensor.

Corollary 3.7.30. By 3.3.12, 3.7.16 and 3.7.28 the Levi-Civita tensor is an absolute
pseudotensor.
Proposition 3.7.31. (Without proof.) If dv is a Riemannian volume form, then
u
dv = d(i
u
dv) = (div u) dv.
Note this characterization of divergence does not require any metric or ane connec-
tion.
Proposition 3.7.32. Let / be a manifold with boundary /, w (T/) a vector
eld and n
(T
/) the unit normals on /. Then, on /,

i
w
dv = (n
w) da,
where da, dened through n
da = dv, is called area form.

Proof. Note that da is eectively the dv for /, thus it also has a single component.
Now let x
be a coordinate system for / and choose / to be the plane where

x
1
= 0 and n
= dx
1
, then da =
det g
ab
dx
2
. . . dx
n
(a, b = 2, . . . , n). By 3.5.18,
3.5.19, and noting that 0! = 1,
i
w
dv = i
w
(n
da) = i
w
n
da n
i
w
da
= w
1
_
det g
ab
dx
2
. . . dx
n
dx
1
i
w
_
det g
ab
dx
2
. . . dx
n
.
Evaluated on /, i.e. at x
1
= 0 = const., the second term vanishes and one is left
with w
1
det g
ab
dx
2
. . . dx
n
= (n
w) da.

Instead of presuming the unit normals to be 1-forms, they may also be interpreted as
a vector eld n satisfying i
n
dv = da (cf. gure 3.6 and [2], pp. 136-137).
Theorem 3.7.33 (Divergence Theorem).
_
M
(div w) dv =
_
M
(n
w) da.
Proof. The proof can be obtained by using Stokes Theorem 3.7.21 and applying the
propositions 3.7.31 and 3.7.32.

Chapter 4
Application: Continuum Mechanics
The geometric concepts introduced in the previous chapter should be applied to contin-
uum mechanics in the following. It is being restricted here to the equations of kinemat-
ics with important strain measures, and the conservation of mass as example of balance
equations. The derivations are mainly based on the contributions [2, 11, 12, 13]. The
concept of an abstract material manifold follows Noll [27, 28]. In the last section,
a framework is outlined so as to extend the geometric continuum mechanics by an
Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) formulation [e.g. 22] of kinematics on manifolds.
4.1 Material Body and Ambient Space
Denition 4.1.1. Considering the geometrical denition of a continuum, let Mdenote
a sucient dierentiable material manifold. A submanifold B M is referred to as
a material body. Its particles or material points possess the relevant properties of the
material. The material body is placed in the ambient Riemannian space o via the
embedding
: B o ,
and changes in congurations are noticed and measured in o. One refers to B =
(B) o, where B (B) is a dieomorphism, as the reference conguration of the
body and to P B as the particles of the body in the reference conguration.

Denition 4.1.2. Given a reference conguration B, the set ( =
t
[
t
: B o
of embeddings
t
is called the conguration space conguration is used here as a
synonym for deformation. A motion of the body is a family of congurations dependent
on time t R, i.e. a curve t
t
(:
t
: B o
P
t
(P) = Q,
with
t
(P) = (P, t) at xed t.
t
(B) is referred to as the current conguration
of the body (gure 4.1). The placement
t
at time t, then, can be dened through
t
=
t

1
.

66 CHAPTER 4. APPLICATION: CONTINUUM MECHANICS
B
M
B
t
(B)
P
Q
o
t,s
=
t

1
s
s
(B)
Q
s
Figure 4.1: Material body B, reference conguration B, current conguration
t
(B)
and related mappings.
0
(B) = B, that is
0
= Id
S
, then
t
is a one-parameter group
of mappings (see 3.6.19 for details), and B B
0
is called the initial conguration of
the body at t = 0.
If B is the initial conguration, the particles of the body are identied with its initial
places in o. Although the choice of a initial conguration is not necessary to describe
the kinematics and kinetics of the body, it has historical signicance in continuum
mechanics.
To the neighborhoods |(P) B, charts (|, X) with local coordinate functions X
I
can
be assigned. As o and B are dierentiable manifolds, the partial derivatives
_

X
I
_
T
P
B establish a basis of the tangent space at each P, and the coordinate dierentials
_
dX
I
_
T
P
B is its dual in the cotangent space. Since o is Riemannian, G
IJ
(P) =

X
I
,

X
J
_
P
are the metric coecients on B. The current conguration contains the
current places Q =
t
(P) o of the particles of the material body. Charts of the
neighborhoods 1(Q) o are denoted by the pairs (1, x), with x
i
Q
= x(Q) R
3
,
that is, x
i
are the coordinates of the ambient space. The denition of a local base
_

x
i
_
T
t(P)
o and the dual base dx
i
T
t(P)
o is straightforward. The g
ij
(Q) =

x
i
,

x
j
_
Q
are the metric coecients on o.
As congurations are understood as embeddings, chart transitions from X to x and
vice versa are compatible. Herein, regularity of the local coordinate systems is de-
manded everywhere in order to exclude breaks and cracks of the material respectively
the ambient space.
4.1. MATERIAL BODY AND AMBIENT SPACE 67
The dierence between Q and
t
(P) is important: the spatial points Q and also
o are independent of the motion of the body. By contrast,
t
(P) denotes the point
occupied by the particle P at time t in the ambient space, and
t
(B) only considers
those spatial points which are occupied by the body during its motion.
As a common notation, upper case Latins are used for coordinates (I, J, K, . . .
1, 2, 3), vectors and tensors of the reference conguration, or are related to the
Lagrangian formulation dened later on. Lower case Latins are related to the cur-
rent conguration, the ambient space, or to the Eulerian formulation. This is only a
general convention, inconsistency might be useful. Moreover, in order to reduce the
amount of necessary symbols within the text and in formulas, the picture X(P) in
the chart is often identied with the particle P and a function f(X) = f X(P), for
example, is written f(P). However, it should be emphasised that there is a fundamen-
tal dierence between the object in the manifold and its picture or localization in the
chart.
The embedding of the body in space enables the observation of the body, and the mea-
surement of physical properties or deformations, as B benets from the inner product
in o. In the material manifold Mit does not exist any metric because of the arbitrary
choice of the map [27, 28]. Lengths and angles change permanently during a defor-
mation process, hence it does not make any sense to dene a distance and suchlike
measures. The material manifold is merely a continuous assembly of particles with
certain physical properties. It is indeed a useful construction in fracture mechanics
and in material sciences, for example. Therein, it is used to establish microstruc-
ture of the material or forces on cracks, inclusions and dislocations of crystal lattices
(cf. conguration mechanics, Eshelby mechanics).
It is assumed throughout this chapter that both the ambient space and the body are
three-dimensional. However, for some concepts it is illuminative to include the case
where dim(B) < dim(o). For example, if B is a shell, note that dim(B) = dim(B) =
2, because is an embedding. Since
t
is also an embedding and
t
(B) o is a
submanifold, dim(
t
(B)) = 2 and charts of
t
(B) and o are compatible in the sense of
3.1.26. Note that even if B and o have dierent dimensions,
t
can be invertible, i.e. a
regular map.
Denition 4.1.4. Let
t
: B o be the motion of a material body, and let | B,
1 o and
1
t
(1) | , = . Additionally, let (|, X), (1, x) be appropriate charts,
then, analogous to denition 3.1.21,
x
t
X
1
X(
1
t
(V)U)
: X
_
1
t
(1) |
_
x
_
1
t
(1) |
_
.
denes the chart transition concerning
t
or the localization of the motion. If x
i
Q
=
x(Q) for Q 1, then abbreviate
i
t
= x
i

t
X
1
, so x
i

t
=
i
t
are the coordinates
on
t
(B).

TB
Tt
//
To
B
v
t
OO
t
//
Vt=Tt(vt)
77
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
o
vt=tvt=Vt
1
t
OO
Figure 4.2: Material, Lagrangian and Eulerian velocity elds.
Denition 4.1.5. Let
t
be a C
1
-motion of B in o, that is,
t
is at least 1-fold
continuous dierentiable, and let the spatial coordinates x
i

t
=
i
t
be given as
functions of the motion
t
according to 4.1.4, then
V
t
=

i
t
t
x
i
= V
i
t
(P)

x
i
(Q)
describes the particle velocity eld at time t, called the Lagrangian velocity eld over
t
. Clearly: V
t
: B To, with V
t
(P) = V (P, t) at xed t. The corresponding spatial
or Eulerian velocity eld,
v
t
= V
t

1
t
=
_
i
t
t
P

1
t
_

x
i
= v
i
t
(Q)

x
i
(To) ,
where Q = (P, t), is obtained by switching the point arguments (gure 4.2).

v
t
(Q) = v(Q, t) is a proper vector eld on o as it follows the motion on
t
(B); in
other words, v
t
is the instantaneous velocity at Q. The Lagrangian velocity eld V
is certainly no vector eld on B, because

x
i
(Q) T
Q
o depends on the choice of Q.
Denition 4.1.6. Let
t
be the motion of B in o, and v
t
the spatial velocity, then
the vector eld v
t
=
t
v
t
(TB) on the initial conguration is called the material
velocity, that goes along with the use of so-called convected coordinates
I
t
(x(Q)) =
X
I

1
t
.

Corollary 4.1.7. In the chart (|, X), | B, set v = v
I
X
I
. Then, by noting that
(P) =
I
t
x
t
= X
I

1
t

t
= X
I
(P),
V
t
= T
t
(v
t
) =
X
I
v
I
t
J
t
= v
I
t
(P)

I
t
(Q) .
The

I
(Q, t) are time-dependent basis vectors that are scribed on B and follow its
deformation. For
t
being a one-parameter group,

I
t

X
I
at t = 0.
If B and o have dierent dimensions, as this is the case for shells, the Eulerian velocity
eld v
t
is tangent to o, but it is not necessarily tangent to
t
(B). Thus, dening
the material velocity through v
t
=
t
v
t
has no physical meaning. Note that in the
literature, v is often called the convective velocity. This, however, conicts the term
used for a fundamental velocity eld in the ALE formulation.
4.2. DEFORMATION GRADIENT AND STRAIN MEASURES 69
Considering section 3.6.2, every proper vector eld v
t
(To) generates a ow
t,s
on
o. Hence, one may ask: what is the ow of the spatial velocity eld associated with
the motion
t
? The following proposition gives the answer (see also [2], p. 95).
Proposition 4.1.8. The time-dependent ow
t,s
on o associated with the regular
motion
t
: B o is given by
t,s
=
t

1
s
: o
s
(B)
t
(B) o ,
1
t,s
, t, s R.
Proof. Note that before reaching Q =
t
(P) at time t, the particles pass some points
Q
s
=
s
(P) at t = s (gure 4.1). For the components of the spatial velocity v at Q
s
,
v
i
t
(Q
s
) =

i
t
t
P

1
s
=

t
i
t
_
1
s
(Q
s
)
_
=

t
i
t,s
(Q
s
) .
Since
s,s
(Q
s
) = Q
s

Proposition 4.1.9. The Lie derivative of arbitrary t T
p
q
(o) along the spatial velocity
is
L
v
t = (
t

1
s
)
d
dt
(
t

1
s
)
t =
t

s
d
dt
(
s

t
t) =
t
d
dt
t
t .
Proof. This follows from the previous proposition, by recalling the chain rule 3.4.32,
using 3.6.25, and by noting that (
s
)
1
= (
1
s
)
=
s
.

4.2 Deformation Gradient and Strain Measures
The denitions made in section 4.1, concerning
t
, B, o, coordinates X
I
and x
i
etc.,
are used throughout.
Denition 4.2.1. Let : B o be a conguration. According to 3.4.23, a two-point
tensor F, called the deformation gradient, is assigned to the tangent map T:
T : T
P
B T
(P)
o
X
I
T
_

X
I
_
=

i
X
I
x
i
= F

X
J
,
that is, for each P B,
F(P) =

i
X
I
x
i
dX
I
= F
i
I
(P)

x
i
dX
I
(
To T
B) .
The expression
To denotes the induced bundle of To over the map according to

3.4.12, i.e.

x
i
attached to (P) being understood. If
t
is a motion of B in o, then F
depends on both P B and t R, that is, F(P, t) = F
i
I
(P, t)

x
i
dX
I
.

Corollary 4.2.2. (i) By 3.3.20 and 3.3.21, the transpose of the deformation gradient
is
F
T
: To T((B)) TB
x
i
F
T

x
i
= (F
T
)
I
i
X
I
= g
ij
F
j
J
G
IJ

X
I
for each P =
1
(Q). In fussy local notation this reads
F
T
(Q) = g
ij
_
j
X
J

1
_
_
G
IJ

1
_

X
J
dx
j
=
_
F
i
I

1
_
dX
I

x
i
.
(ii) Recall 3.3.22 and 3.4.24, then conclude that the inverse deformation gradient
F
1
(P) : T
(P)
o T
P
B corresponds to the inverse tangent map with switched base
points, i.e. F
1
= T(
1
) . Therefore,
F
1
(P) =
_
(
1
)
I
x
i

_

X
I
dx
i
,
where (
1
)
I
= X
I

1
x
1
and
(
1
)
I
x
i
(Q) =
(
1
)
I
x
i
(P).
(iii) From 3.3.22, also obtain the inverse transpose of the deformation gradient:
F
T
(Q) = g
ij
(
1
)
J
x
j
_
G
IJ

1
_

x
i
dX
I
=
_
(F
1
)
I
i

1
_
dx
i

X
I
.
Applying the relations to 3.4.36 proofs the following corollary concerning the pushfor-
ward and pullback of tensor elds on B and o, respectively.
Corollary 4.2.3. (i) Let T T
p
q
(B), a
1
, . . . , a
p
(T
o) and w
1
, . . . , w
q
(To),
and let : B o be a regular conguration. Then, by dropping the point argument,
T
_
a
1
, . . . , a
p
, w
1
, . . . , w
q
_
= T
_
(a
1
F), . . . , (a
p
F), (F
1
w
1
), . . . , (F
1
w
q
)
_
.
(ii) On the other hand, if t T
p
q
(o), B
1
, . . . , B
p
(T
B) and W
1
, . . . , W
q
(TB),
then
t
_
B
1
, . . . , B
p
, W
1
, . . . , W
q
_
= t
_
(B
1
F
1
), . . . , (B
p
F
1
), (F W
1
), . . . , (F W
q
)
_
.
Example 4.2.4. Let t = t
ij
dx
i
dx
j
T
0
2
(o) and W
k
= W
I
k
X
I
(TB), k = 1, 2,
then
t (W
1
, W
2
) = t ((F W
1
), (F W
2
))
= t
ij
W
I
1
W
J
2
F
k
K
F
l
L
_
dx
i
_

x
k
dX
K

X
I
__
_
dx
j
_

x
l
dX
L

X
J
__
= t
ij
W
I
1
W
J
2
F
k
I
F
l
J
_
dx
i

x
k
__
dx
j

x
l
_
= t
ij
W
I
1
W
J
2
F
i
I
F
j
J
.
Since W
1
, W
2
are arbitrary, (
t)
IJ
= t
ij
F
i
I
F
j
J
.
Proposition 4.2.5. Let t T
0
2
(o), then, without point arguments,
t = F
T
t F .
Proof. By 4.2.3(ii),
t (, ) = t (F(), F()). However, for t = t

ij
dx
i
dx
j
,
t (F(), F()) = t
ij
dx
i
(F()) dx
j
(F())
= t
ij
g
ik
_

x
k
, F()
_
_
dx
j
F()
_
= t
ij
g
ik
_
F
T

x
k
, ()
_
_
dx
j
F()
_
= t
ij
F
T
dx
i
() dx
j
F()
= (F
T
t F) (, )
by 3.3.16 and 3.3.20. It is important to keep in mind that for the proposition to be
valid, a metric structure on o is required.

Corollary 4.2.6. Operate analogously to show that if (i) s T
2
0
(o), then
s =
F
1
s F
T
. (ii) Let S T
2
0
(B), then
S = F S F
T
, and (iii)
T = F
T
T F
1
for T T
0
2
(B).
Denition 4.2.7. In numerical applications of continuum mechanics it is the tangent
map T = F of the conguration : B o that is usually given, and not itself.
Therefore, it might be convenient to borrow the notation of denition 3.4.20 and to
replace
by F
, and
by F
. For example, if T = R : T
P
B T
Q
o is orthogonal
and t T
0
2
(o), then R
t = R
T
t R denotes the pullback of t over pure rotational ,
also called the R-pullback of t.

The deformation gradient includes stretches as well as rigid rotations of the body. There
are dierent choices to split o the stretches and, therefore, dierent strain measures
can be dened. Their applicability depends on the problem and is controversially
discussed. However, all strain measures are symmetric tensors by denition.
Denition 4.2.8. The right Cauchy-Green tensor C : TB TB, often just called
the deformation tensor, is a so-called Lagrangian strain measure, and it is dened for
every P B through
C(P) = (F
T
) F = G
KI
(g
ik
) F
k
K
F
i
J
X
I
dX
J
.

Proposition 4.2.9. Let g = g
ij
dx
i
dx
j
T
0
2
(o) be the local representative of the
spatial metric tensor, then
C
g .
Proof. By 4.2.5, 4.2.2(i) and 3.3.16,
g(P) = (F
T
) (g ) F = (g
ij
)F
i
I
F
j
J
dX
I
dX
J
= C
(P) .

Denition 4.2.10. The Green-Lagrange strain tensor or material strain tensor E :
TB TB is also a Lagrangian strain measure. It is dened through
2E(P) = (C I
B
)(P) =
_
C
I
J

I
J
_
(P)

X
I
dX
J
,
where I
B
is the second-rank unit tensor and
I
J
is the Kronecker delta on B, respec-
tively. Note that E
=
1
2
(C
G), where G = G
IJ
dX
I
dX
J
is the metric on
B.

Denition 4.2.11. Eulerian strain measures can be dened as mappings T
oTo
R on the current conguration. The left Cauchy-Green tensor on o is
b =
_
F
1
_
F
T
.
Suppressing the arguments, in local coordinates one has
b = G
IJ
g
jk
F
i
I
F
k
J
x
i
dx
j
.
In contrast to the right Cauchy-Green tensor, the left Cauchy-Green tensor requires
: B o to be regular (i.e. invertible).

Denition 4.2.12. Let the conguration map be regular, then dene the Euler-
Almansi strain tensor or spatial strain tensor e : To To through
2e = i
S
c =
_
i
j
c
i
j
_

x
i
dx
j
,
in which c = b
1
is called the Finger tensor, i
S
is the unit tensor and
i
j
is the
Kronecker delta on o, respectively.

Corollary 4.2.13. By 4.2.6, (
G)
ij
= (G
IJ
)
1
(F
1
)
I
i
(F
1
)
J
j
= (g
b
1
)
ij
, so
G = c
. From this and 4.2.9,
=
1
2
(
G) =
1
2
(g c
) = e
.
An important observation on manifolds respectively in Riemannian spaces is that there
are indeed strains, but no displacement elds such a kind that u(P) = (x X)(P),
because of the loss of position vectors.
Several problems ask for the rate of strain. Because of the time-dependence of the
motion (, t) =
t
of the material body, all strain measures are time-dependent.
Denition 4.2.14. Let the motion
t
: B o be dierentiable and C the right
Cauchy-Green tensor, then the Lagrangian or material rate of deformation tensor is
dened by
2D(P, t) =

t
C(P, t) .
Note that an equivalent denition is D = E/t.

Proposition 4.2.15. The components of D are
2D
I
J
(P, t) = G
KI
(g
ik

t
)
__
K
V
k
_
F
i
J
+
_
J
V
i
_
F
k
K
,
where
t
(P) = (P, t), V
i
are the components of the Lagrangian velocity, and
is
the connection on B induced by the connection on o (see section 3.6.1).
Proof. Let
j
i k
be the coecients of on o, then by 3.6.8 and 3.6.13,
V
i
X
I
=
I
V
i
V
j
i
j k
F
k
I
=
I
V
i
1
2
V
j
F
k
I
g
il
_
g
kl
x
j
+
g
jl
x
k

g
jk
x
l
_
.
By denition 4.2.8, G
IK
(P)C
I
J
(P, t) = (g
ik
(P, t)) F
k
K
(P, t)F
i
J
(P, t) note that
the metric coecients G
IJ
are time-independent. By using the abbreviation
i
t
(P) =
x
i

t
X
1
and ommiting the arguments, dierentiating in t then gives
2G
IK
D
I
J
=
g
ik
x
j
V
j
F
k
K
F
i
J
+g
ij
V
j
X
K
F
i
J
+g
ij
F
j
K
V
i
X
J
.
Now substitute the identity for
V
i
X
I
to obtain
2G
IK
D
I
J
=
g
ik
x
j
V
j
F
k
K
F
i
J
+g
ik
(
K
V
k
)F
i
J

1
2
V
j
F
m
K
F
i
J
_
g
mi
x
j
+
g
ji
x
m

g
jm
x
i
_
+g
ik
(
J
V
i
)F
k
K

1
2
V
j
F
i
J
F
k
K
_
g
ik
x
j
+
g
jk
x
i

g
ji
x
k
_
= g
ik
_
(
K
V
k
)F
i
J
+ (
J
V
i
)F
k
K
+V
j
F
i
J
F
k
K
g
ik
x
j
1
2
V
j
F
i
J
F
k
K
g
ki
x
j

1
2
V
j
F
i
J
F
k
K
g
ik
x
j
= g
ik
_
(
K
V
k
)F
i
J
+ (
J
V
i
)F
k
K
,
g
ij
and
g
ij
x
k
evaluated at P being understood. Multiplying both sides with G
KL
and
relabelling the indices then gives the result.

t
be a regular motion of B in o, then dene the Eulerian or
spatial rate of deformation tensor d, where d
t
T
1
1
(o) for t xed, through
d
=
t
(D
) ,
or, equivalently, d
= e
/t.

Note that for arbitrary tensor elds T,
(T
) ,= (
T)
in general!
Proposition 4.2.17. Let v be the spatial velocity and g the spatial metric, then
2d
(Q, t) = L
v
g .
Proof. Denition 4.2.16 implies 2D
=

t
C
, and from 4.2.14 and proposition 4.2.9

one has
2d
g .
Now setting

t
=
d
dt
t
makes sense, because the pullback describes a curve of tensors
with parameter t. The result then follows from proposition 4.1.9. (Consult [2], p. 98,
for an alternative proof.)

4.3 Lagrangian and Eulerian Formulations
The following section should give a precise denition of the Lagrangian and Eulerian
formulations of classic resp. traditional continuum mechanics, and it points to the
dierent use of the term convective.
Denition 4.3.1. A
_
p
q
_
-tensor-valued physical eld f on the ambient space o, also
called a spatial eld, is a function
f : o 1 T
p
q
(o) ,
where 1 R. Dependent on the order of p and q, the physical eld thus appears as
a tensor-valued function of (Q, t) (o 1), i.e. a time-dependent scalar, vector or
tensor eld f on o. The eld is presumed to be measurable on a subset 1 o lled
with matter; however, f would be meaningless in an empty space.

Denition 4.3.2. Let : B 1 o be the motion of a material body, then the
physical eld dened in 4.3.1, but restricted to (B, t), can be written as
f : B 1 1 T
p
q
(o) .
Here 1 1 = (t, t) [ t 1 is meant to be the diagonal, i.e. both t in f((P, t), t)
take the same value. Depending on whether Q =
t
(P) o or P B serve as the
independent variables, one refers to f
t
(Q) = f(Q, t) as the Eulerian formulation, and
to F
t
(P) = f
t

t
as the Lagrangian formulation of the eld at xed t, respectively.

4.3. LAGRANGIAN AND EULERIAN FORMULATIONS 75
Corollary 4.3.3. The
_
p
q
_
-tensor-valued Lagrangian eld F is understood as a map
F : B 1 T
p
q
(o). The dierence between F and f dened vanishes for xed t,
that is,
F
t
= f
t

t
: B T
p
q
(o) ,
so F
t
= f
t

t
is a
_
p
q
_
-tensor eld over
t
.
It is notable that the distinction between the Lagrangian formulation and the Eulerian
formulation of the same physical eld is only valid if there are ane point spaces
resp. general manifolds together with a point map. In ordinary vector spaces, the
equation F
t
(P) = f
t

t
does not make sense, as the related tensors have no base
points. However, for simplicity, the dierence between f, F and their localizations
f x
1
and F X
1
, respectively, is dropped throughout.
Denition 4.3.4. Another way to formulate the spatial eld f in terms of the refer-
ence conguration B is to pull it back by the motion
t
, such that (
t
f
t
) T
p
q
(B),
which is then called the convective representative of f at time t [2, 11, 12]. However,
one better uses the term material rather than convective, because in the ALE
community and so within this paper, convective has a dierent meaning.

Denition 4.3.5. The material time derivative of a physical eld f(Q, t) on o is
dened through
f(Q, t) =
f
t
Q
+
v
f = (Q, t) ,
in which (Q, t) denotes a source term, e.g. a constitutive equation. The convective
term
v
f is the covariant derivative of f along the spatial velocity eld v, and
denotes the connection on o.

It should be clear that
v
f is due to Q = (P, t), thus legitimating the term mate-
rial.
Corollary 4.3.6. Let f : o R R be a scalar eld, then
f =
f
t
Q
+
f
x
i
v
i
=
f
t
Q
+v[f] = L
v
f .
Corollary 4.3.7. Let F
t
(P) = f
t
t
be the Lagrangian representative of a spatial eld
f(Q, t). By noting that
f((P, t), t) =
F
t
resp.

f
t
=
_
t
(f
t

t
)
_

1
t
through the chain rule, an important link between the Lagrangian formulation and the
Eulerian formulation is
F
t
t

1
t
=
f
t
Q
+
v
f = (Q, t) .
Denition 4.3.8. Let V
t
(
To) be the particle velocity resp. the Lagrangian

velocity and
t
: B o a C
2
-motion that is,
t
should be twice continuous
dierentiable, then
A(P, t) =

t
V (P, t)
is called the particle acceleration or Lagrangian acceleration. The spatial or Eulerian
acceleration, dened by a
t
= A
t

1
t
, is a proper vector eld on o.

Proposition 4.3.9. Let v be the spatial velocity, then a = v.
Proof. Due to V
i
(P, t) = v
i
((P, t), t) by freezing t, and 4.3.7, one has
V
i
t
=
v
i
t
+
_
v
i
x
j

_
V
j
for each component, and
_
V
i
t
+V
k
V
j
_
i
k j

_
_

x
i
=
V
t
= A(P, t)
by denition 3.6.9 covariant dierentiation is applied here because A should trans-
form as a vector. Substituting A(P, t) = a((P, t), t), with Q = (P, t), then yields
a(Q, t) =
v
t
Q
+
_
v
i
x
j
v
j
+v
k
v
j
i
k j
_

x
i
=
v
t
Q
+
v
v = v
as desired.

4.4 Conservation of Mass and Piola Transformation
Proposition 4.4.1. Let the material manifold be a measure space (M, m) with a non-
negative scalar measure m, called the distributed mass, and a mass m(P) R should
be assigned to every part P B of the material body B M. Furthermore, let the
measure be handed down to every orientable placement 1 =
t
(P) o in the ambient
space at time t 1 R, and let dv and
_
V
dv denote the Riemannian volume form
and the volume measure (Lebesgue measure) of 1, respectively, then there is a function
: 1 1 R such that
m(P) =
_
V
dv .
Proof. Note that m(P)=m(1), because P and
t
(P) are assumed to have the same
mass measure. The rest of the proof can be done with the aid of Radon-Nikodyms
theorem, but it should be omitted here.

Denition 4.4.2. (Q, t) is called spatial or Eulerian mass density at Q 1 and time
t, and dm = dv is called mass form on 1.

4.4. CONSERVATION OF MASS AND PIOLA TRANSFORMATION 77
Denition 4.4.3. Let B = (B) be the reference conguration of a material body,
t
=
t

1
: B o a motion and | B a subset with piecewise continuous dier-
entiable (at least C
1
) boundary. Then, the spatial mass density obeys conservation
of mass, if
d
dt
_
t(U)
dv = 0 ,
so that the mass is constant in every (orientable) conguration
t
(|) of the subset.

Proposition 4.4.4. Let dim(B) = dim(o), and let the motion
t
= (, t) : B o be
a one-parameter group of C
1
dieomorphisms for each
t
(B) o such that
0
(B) B
is the initial conguration. In addition, let both B and o be orientable, J
the Jacobian
and v the spatial velocity of , respectively, then
J
t
= (div v
t
) J
.
Proof. Let dV , dv be the Riemannian volume forms on B and o, respectively, then
t
dv = J
dV by proposition 3.7.26. Holding t xed, then by 3.6.25 and 3.7.31 the

time derivative becomes
t
J
dV =
v
dv =
t
((div v) dv) = (div v
t
) J
dV .

Proposition 4.4.5. Let the motion
t
: B o, P Q =
t
(P) be as before, then
conservation of mass is equivalent to
(i) ((P, t), t) J
(P, t) =
ref
(P),
where
ref
(P) = (P, 0) is the mass density of a subset | B, and
(ii)

t
Q
+ div( v) = 0.
Proof. (i) By
0
(|) |, conservation of mass can be written
_
t(U)
(Q, t) dv =
_
U

ref
(P) dV . Application of the change of variables theorem 3.7.18 and the formula
t
dv = J
dV then gives
_
U
(Q, t) J
(P, t) dV =
_
U
ref
(P) dV .
Since Q = (P, t), and | is arbitrary, (i) follows.
(ii) Use 4.4.4 and (i) to obtain
t
( J
) = J
+
J
t
= J
+ ( div v)J
= 0 ,
where is the material time derivative of (Q, t). Multiplying both sides with 1/J
and noting that div( v) =

x
i
v
i
+ div v then proofs the assertion.

Denition 4.4.6. One refers to 4.4.5(ii) as the continuity equation, and to

t
( J
) = 0
as its conservative form.

Corollary 4.4.7. By 3.7.3, a motion
t
is volume preserving, if J
= 1.
Another important geometric concepts in Lagrangian and Eulerian continuum me-
chanics is the Piola transformation, which can be applied to any tensor. The Piola
transform of the Cauchy stress tensor, for example, provides the rst Piola-Kirchho
stress tensor.
Denition 4.4.8. Let the initial conguration
0
(B) B and the current congu-
ration
t
(B) o of a material body be orientable and w (To), then the Piola
transform of w is dened through the proper vector eld
W = J
t
w = J
F
1
t
(w
t
) J
t
((To)) (TB) ,
where J
is the Jacobian of
t
.

Proposition 4.4.9. (Without proof; a proof can be found in [2], p. 117.) Let dV , dv
be the Riemannian volume forms on B and o, respectively, then W is the Piola trans-
form of w, if and only if for a motion
t
: B o,
t
(i
w
dv) = i
W
dV .
Theorem 4.4.10 (Piola Identity). Let DIV, div denote the divergence operators on
B and o, respectively, and let W be the Piola transform of w with respect to the motion
t
: B o, then
DIVW = (div w
t
)J
.
Proof. Note that by 3.6.34, d commutes with pullback, so by propositions 3.7.31,
4.4.9, and the formula
t
dv = J
dV ,
(div w
t
)J
dV =
t
((div w) dv) =
t
d(i
w
dv) = d
t
(i
w
dv)
= di
W
dV = (DIVW) dV ,
that is, DIVW = (div w
t
)J
as desired.

Proposition 4.4.11 (Nansons Formula). Let dA, da be the area forms on posi-
tively oriented B and
t
(B), respectively, then
da(Q, t) = (J
dA F
1
t
)
1
t
.
Proof. dA and da are dened through N
dA = dV and n
da = dv, respec-
tively, where N
and n
are the related unit normals (also consider the remark after
3.7.32). By using the property 3.5.11(i), J
dV = N
(J
dA). However, setting

N
t
n
and applying 3.5.17 yields

J
dV =
t
(n
da) = N
t
da,
that is,
t
da = J
dA. Note that
t
da is evaluated on B and has a single covariant
component, so pushing forward and recalling 4.2.6(iii) nally gives (point arguments
are suppressed)
da =
t
(
t
da) =
t
(J
dA) = J
dA F
1
t
.

4.5. OBJECTIVITY AND COVARIANCE 79
4.5 Objectivity and Covariance
4.5.1 Motions, Framings, and the Gauge Freedom
The notion of objectivity has been introduced in section 2.2 for vectors in at spaces,
in particular Euclidian point spaces, and it should be generalized to arbitrary tensor
elds on dierentiable manifolds. By applying the pushforward and pullback operators
for tensor elds derived in section 3.4.2, objectivity is dened as follows:
Denition 4.5.1. Let o, o
be dierentiable manifolds, t T
p
q
(o) a tensor eld on o
and : o o
a dieomorphism, then
t
t
is called the objective transformation of t under the map . t is called invariant under
the transformation
, if
t = t, where it is being understood that both sides are to

be evaluated at the same point.

In the light of denition 2.2.17 and if o
= o, then can be understood actively or

passively. From the passive viewpoint, is understood as a chart transition so that
t
(Q) =
t(Q) is the standard tensor transformation 3.2.3 resp. 3.3.5 at every Q o.

By denition, however, every honest tensor eld is passively objective. Applications in
continuum mechanics especially within the theory of materials generally involve
the active form of objectivity, in which t itself will be changed.
It has been shown in section 2.2, that for Euclidian point spaces the active view on
the transformation
respectively on an ane isometry is twofold. It can either

be interpreted as a transformation under superposed rigid motions, as done in 2.2.15,
or as a transformation under change of framings, that is, a quasi-motion (cf. 2.2.16).
Therefore, it is appropriate for continuum mechanical reasons to subdivide active ob-
jectivity into active objectivity under superposed motions and active objectivity with
respect to changes of framings [29, 30].
Denition 4.5.2. Let : B o be a conguration of the material body B in the
ambient space o, then a superposed rigid body motion is a regular map : o o
(time-dependency is dropped for simplicity, but the term motion is used throughout)
such that the tangent map at Q o, T
Q
: T
Q
o T
(Q)
o, is proper orthogonal and
the spatial metric g =
g is left unchanged.

Denition 4.5.3. Let : o o be a superposed rigid body motion, then a spatial
tensor eld t T
p
q
(o) is called indierent with respect to superposed rigid body motions
(IRBM), if it transforms (actively) objective under the map , that is, t
t.

It is necessary to clarify what is meant with a change of framing that is equivalent to
a superposed rigid body motion, so as to dene an equivalent pushforward by change
of framing on the manifold. Note that in denition 4.5.3 it is not the motion itself
that needs to be known, but only its tangent T implemented into the pushforward
operator
(see section 3.4.2).

Denition 4.5.4. Let Q, Q
o and R : T
Q
o T
Q
o an orthogonal spatial two-
point tensor, then dene the invertible change of framings (Q, v) (Q
, R(Q)v) for
every spatial vector v, and (Q, a
) (Q
, a
R
1
(Q)) for every spatial one-form a
,
respectively, by assuming the inverse R
1
to exist.

Corollary 4.5.5. Let : o o be a superposed rigid body motion, R : T
Q
o T
Q
o
proper orthogonal (i.e. det R = +1) and Q
= (Q), then
(i) By 3.4.21, the change of framing (Q, v) (Q
, R v) for vectors v is the tangent

map of ,
T : To To
(Q, v) T (Q, v) = ((Q), D(Q) v) ,
so that R(Q) T
Q
: T
Q
o T
(Q)
o.
(ii) It follows from 3.4.24 that the change of framing (Q, a
) (Q
, a
R
1
) for
one-forms a
is the inverse cotangent map T
(
1
), and R
1
(Q) T
Q
(
1
) : T
Q
o
T
(Q)
o.
Corollary 4.5.5 phrases that changes of framings dened point by point through 4.5.4
are compatible with superposed rigid motions , that is, they can be interchanged
with the dierential resp. tangent T. Moreover, changes of framings are invertible for
every Q, Q
o by denition, even if R is only orthogonal, but not proper orthogonal.

Therefore, changes of framings even if o is Riemannian (curved) and not Euclidian
(at) can be applied to elds of vectors and one-forms on o as pushforwards and
pullbacks (see section 3.4.2). Finally, the pushforward
t under a change of framing

is well-dened by 3.4.36:
Denition 4.5.6. Let t T
p
q
(o), and t
t its (active) objective transformation

under a change of framing that is compatible with a superposed rigid motion by
means of 4.5.5, then t is called Euclidian frame-indierent (EFI). To make a notational
dierentiation, write t
=
EFI
t for the EFI interpretation and t
=
IRBM
t for the IRBM

interpretation of objectivity, respectively.

Denition 4.5.7. A tensor eld t on the ambient space o which transforms objective
under superposed rigid motions : o o, i.e. under spatial isometries, is just called
objective (the same applies to viewed as a change of framing). If t transforms objec-
tively under arbitrary spatial dieomorphisms, then it is called spatially covariant.

Objective resp. covariant tensors become manifest in the mathematical formulation of
physical theories, e.g. the theory of materials and also in general relativity. However,
the principle of objectivity applied to the tensor elds of the theory should not be
confused with that of invariance of the governing equations of the theory. While the
former demands the use only of those tensors which are objective with respect to
some group of transformations, i.e. which are geometric objects, the latter requires the
equations set up to be form-invariant (or generally covariant), i.e. to have the same
form before and after a transformation belonging to the group of transformations.
Denition 4.5.8. Let a physical theory be described by some spatial tensor elds
s, t, . . . T
p
q
(o), and the governing equations of the theory have the form f(s, t, . . .) =
0. The equations are called generally covariant (also called form-invariant or dieo-
morphism-invariant), if for any dieomorphism : o o,
(f(s, t, . . .)) = f(
s,
t, . . .) ,
so that f remains functionally unchanged under the map . A theory is covariant if all
its governing equations are covariant. Let = Id
S
, then generally covariance requires
the equations to be form-invariant under arbitrary coordinate transformation, which
is then referred to as their passive dieomorphism invariance.

Historically, general covariance had solely become manifest in passive dieomorphism
invariance; the advanced tensor calculus on manifolds presented in this paper was not
available to Einstein when he proposed his theory of gravitation. Since nowadays it is
well-known that any physical theory can be set up passively dieomorphism-invariant
by using proper tensor equations, some scientists denounced this principle as physically
vacuous (see [19] for a historical survey).
The active view on 4.5.8, however, needs to be analyzed in more detail. By restricting
the tensors s, t, . . . to a subset 1 o, the reader will recognize that the left hand side
of the equation in 4.5.8 is evaluated at some Q 1 before it is pushed forward by ,
whereas the right hand side is evaluated at Q
= (Q) (1). Therefore, denition

4.5.8 implies the following theorem to hold.
Theorem 4.5.9 (Gauge Theorem). (See also [18]) Let f(s, t, . . .) = 0, where s, t,
. . . T
p
q
(o) and o is dierentiable, be an equation of a physical theory that is form-
invariant with respect to any regular coordinate transformation, and let : o o be
an arbitrary dieomorphism, then f(
s,
t, . . .) = 0 is also an equation of the theory.

Proof. Let (1, x) be a regular chart of 1 o. According to 3.1.17 and 4.5.8,
the form-invariance with respect to any regular coordinate transformation can be
identied with passive dieomorphism-invariance for xed 1, i.e. with invariance of
f(s, t, . . .) = 0 under arbitrary relabelling of points x

x, where

is a passive dif-
feomorphism in terms of denition 3.1.25. By this denition, then, there are innitely
many pairs (, x
) of active dieomorphisms : o o that take 1 to 1
= (1), and
chart maps 1
(1
) R
n
dim
such that
x
=

x.
What is the consequence? Having the new coordinates of points in 1 o, one cannot
decide whether they result from a relabelling

of 1, i.e. a chart transition, or a warping
of o (gure 4.3). Clearly, there is some indeterminism in the physical theory under
consideration, which is also called the gauge freedom.
1
x
//
1
x(1)
//
x
(1) =

x(1)
Figure 4.3: Changed coordinates of 1 o can either result from a relabelling

of 1,
or a warping of o.
Now by arbitrariness of

and : o o presumed, set = x
1

x. Then, by
3.4.21, for a spatial vector eld v : o To, the tangent map consistent with, that is,
comprising the relabelling of points Q o, is just
T (Q, v) = ((Q), D(Q) v) ,
where D = D(x
1

x).
If x
i
, x
i
denote the local coordinate functions of x and x
, respectively, and
i
=
x
i
x
1
is the coordinate transition concerning , then
i
= x
i
(x
1

x) x
1
. Therefore, the components of the tangent map T are equal to the partial deriva-
tives of the relabelling of points

x
i
, and thus for a local representative v(P) = v
i
x
i
of the vector eld,
v = T v
1
=
__
x
i
v
i
_

1
_

x
i
by 3.4.33. Because the pushforward by : o o of arbitrary

_
p
q
_
-tensor elds on o is
realized in a similar way setting
i

The gauge freedom underlying the principle of general covariance is an important
ingredient to restrict or reduce the governing equations of a physical theory considerably
which is basically the main goal of the endeavor. However, if the particular equation
f(
s,
t, . . .) = 0 is physically substantial or not depends on the physical theory under

consideration.
4.5.2 Material Frame-Indierence
In continuum mechanics, a typical application of the principles of objectivity and gen-
eral covariance can be found in the material frame-indierence of constitutive equations
of materials. The remainder of the section will be devoted to this topic, but only a few
key facts will be outlined using the example of simple hyperelastic material.
Denition 4.5.10. A hyperelastic or Green elastic material is an ideally elastic ma-
terial that relates the conguration resp. deformation : B o of the material body
B at every particle P B (time-dependency will be again omitted) to the stress by
the stored energy at P.

Proposition 4.5.11. (Without proof; cf. [2]) A hyperelastic constitutive equation can
locally be written in the form
P = P(P, F) ,
in which F is the deformation gradient at P B, and P : T
P
B T
(P)
o is called the
rst Piola-Kirchho stress tensor.
Note that P is a two-point tensor having the one leg at P and a spatial leg at
Q = (P) o.
Normally, the theory of materials concerns the elds of stress and deformation rather
than their point values. The hyperelastic constitutive equation then becomes P =
P(F), in which P : B To T
B now is the rst Piola-Kirchho stress eld, and

the constitutive function is a map
P: c T ,
where c is the bundle over B whose bre at P B is T
(P)
o T
P
B, and T =
To
T
B.
Denition 4.5.12. Let : o o be an arbitrary spatial dieomorphism resp. a
superposed motion taking spatial points Q to Q
(equivalently, can be understood as

a change of framing), then the hyperelastic constitutive equation P = P(F) is called
spatially covariant provided that
P
= P(F
) ,
where F
(P) : T
P
B T
Q
o and Q
= (Q) = ((P)) o. Spatial covariance means

that the constitutive equation Pitself is form-invariant under spatial dieomorphisms.
If the spatial dieomorphism is replaced by a superposed rigid body motion, i.e. a
spatial isometry such that T
Q
: T
Q
o T
Q
o is proper orthogonal and P
= P(F
) still
holds, then the constitutive equation is called material frame-indierent (MFI).

Material frame-indierence in Euclidian point spaces has often been the matter in
dispute in the last decades, and it is usually stated as an independent assumption
or axiom. However, it can be derived from the more general principles of Euclidian
frame-indierence and form-invariance:
Proposition 4.5.13. (See also [29, 30].)
(i) Both Euclidian frame-indierence (EFI) and form-invariance (FI) of constitutive
equations together demonstrate material frame-indierence (MFI); conceptually, EFI+
FI = MFI.
(ii) Indierence of constitutive equations with respect to superposed rigid body motions
(IRBM) is equivalent to material frame-indierence; conceptually, IRBM = MFI.
Proof. (i) F
F = T(F)
1
, so F transforms objectively (clearly, the spatial
leg of F), and since P is a two-point tensor of the same class, it also does. Now
P
=
EFI
P demands (P(F))
=
EFI
(P(F)) from the constitutive equation. On

the other hand, form-invariance forces
EFI
(P(F)) = P(
EFI
F) = P(F
), therefore,
P
= P(F
) as desired.
(ii) Indierence of the constitutive equation P with respect to superposed rigid body
motions means that
IRBM
P = P(
IRBM
F). As shown in (i), however, P and F

transform objectively in the same manner, so IRBM and MFI are equivalent.

Basically, proposition 4.5.13(i) derives material frame-indierence from the relative
motion of dierent Euclidian observers, whereas 4.5.13(ii) involves two motions of a
body the original motion and the motion overlayed by a rigid one with respect
to the same observer. However, both viewpoints are equivalent, except for the fact
that the rst requires the linear transformation of both frames to be orthogonal, while
the latter includes motions with proper orthogonal tangents only, since rigid motions
necessarily are orientation-preserving.
In their encyclopedia ([8], appendix 19A), Truesdell and Noll summarize that the form
4.5.13(i) is historically connected with the names Zaremba and Jaumann, and 4.5.13(ii)
is a form that has essentially been proposed by Hooke, Poisson and Cauchy. Truesdell
and Noll [8] side themselves with Zaremba and Jaumann, as Noll [31] did already
before; he called material frame-indierence at that time the principle of objectivity
of material properties. Therefore, the following notational dierentiation would be
convenient.
Denition 4.5.14. Refer to the fact 4.5.13(i) as the Zaremba-Jaumann-Noll form,
and to 4.5.13(ii) as the Hooke-Poisson-Cauchy form of material frame-indierence.

The reader probably knows that material frame-indierence is a useful concept to
reduce the form of constitutive equations, but not all materials comply with it. For
example, kinetic gas does not fulll invariance with respect to superposed rigid body
motions and thus it is not material frame-indierent [29, 30].
4.6 Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian Formulation
Large deformation initial boundary value problems in continuum mechanics are usually
solved by applying the nite element method. In this context, however, the classical
Lagrangian and Eulerian formulations have some shortcomings. In the Lagrangian
nite element formulation, excessive element distortions may occur that may lead to
unstable and inaccurate numerical analyses, or even terminate the calculation. From
the Eulerian viewpoint, the discretized domain is xed in space and, therefore, following
free surfaces and moving material interfaces becomes a cumbersome task.
The Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) formulation succeeds in combining the ad-
vantages of both classic Lagrangian and Eulerian viewpoints by choosing the nite
element mesh as a time-dependent reference domain dierent from the material (La-
grangian) and spatial (Eulerian) congurations [20, 21, 22]. For the last two decades the
4.6. ARBITRARY LAGRANGIAN-EULERIAN FORMULATION 85
ALE framework has been developed to a powerful analysis tool for large deformation
problems, especially metal forming processes, free surface ows and uid-deformable
structure interaction.
Consistent with the geometrical overall context of the paper, the reference domain
underlying the ALE formulation is introduced as a grid manifold that is embedded in
the ambient space, and which is independent of the material and its congurations.
The ane connection and the inner product of the ambient space are used to establish a
covariant derivative on the reference domain and to enable measurement of deformation
of the grid, respectively. It has to be noted that this additional functionality is not
intrinsic, whether to the underlying material manifold, nor to the grid manifold, but
it is induced to the latters congurations in space.
The important convective velocity eld, which is well-known in the ALE community,
will be dened subsequently as a section of the tangent bundle of the ambient space.
Dierential geometry, then, reveals three important facts resulting from the relative
motion between the body and the reference domain. First, the pullback of the convec-
tive velocity concerning the relative motion establishes the so-called referential velocity
eld, which is essential for the denition of a material time derivative on the reference
domain. Second, the fundamental ALE operator takes advantage of an induced con-
nection on the reference domain given by the Levi-Civita connection of the ambient
space and, third, mesh regularization or optimization of the mesh, in context of the
ALE nite element method, can be interpreted as the numerical representative of a
time-dependent ow of the reference domain in the ambient space.
4.6.1 Grid Manifold and Velocity Fields
Denition 4.6.1. In order to describe geometry and kinematics of a material body
independent of its reference conguration and current conguration, let G be a man-
ifold, called the grid manifold. A subset R G is referred to as the reference grid of
the material body B, shortly: reference grid, provided that the map R B between
the reference grid and the reference conguration is a homeomorphism.

The required homeomorphism ensures the one-to-one correspondence of grid nodes and
particles of the body. Hence, the grid manifold G is also a continuum and the reference
grid R inherits the topology of the body. The grid cells are innitely small and every
grid node has a neighborhood containing other grid nodes. Descriptively, the grid is a
prototype of a manifold: it has no further properties besides its topology.
Due to the arbitrary choice of the reference grid, it does not make sense to dene an
inner product or an ane connection on the grid manifold. But in order to specify the
state of the grid, that is, stretches of the grid cells and distances of the grid nodes, R
is embedded in the ambient space in the same way as the material body (gure 4.4):
Denition 4.6.2. Considering that the ALE formulation has its origin in computa-
tional mechanics, one may refer to /, dened by the map : G R / o and
being dierentiable, as the computational representative or the model of B, that is, /
is the reference conguration of R in o this is the same idea as mapping a set of
nodes with topology onto the nite element mesh (i.e. the model) of a work piece.

Denition 4.6.3. A time-dependent conguration or motion of / is a map
: /R o
(M, t) (M, t) =

Q,
with
t
(M) = (M, t) at xed t, and
t
an embedding of / in o. The current
conguration
t
(/) = 1 o at time t is referred to as the reference domain of the
body (, = reference conguration!).

Q is called reference point.

Time-dependency of 1 can be dropped if desired (as in the Eulerian formulation; see
below). But if existent, it is assumed that the parameter time is universal, i.e. all
processes on 1, B and o are synchronous. Otherwise, relativistic eects have to be
considered.
To the neighborhoods J(

Q) 1 of a reference point

Q, charts (J, ) with regular
local coordinates
Q
= (

Q) can be assigned. As 1 o is embedded, 1 is likewise
dierentiable and the partial derivatives

Q
1 establish a basis of the tangent
space, and the coordinate dierentials d
Q
1 its dual in the cotangent space at
Q. The g
(

Q) =

Q
are the metric coecients on 1. As a general convention,
coordinate indices related to the reference domain will be denoted by lower case Greeks,
with , , . . . 1, 2, 3. If appropriate, vectors, tensors etc. will be marked with a
hat.
Denition 4.6.4. Let the spatial coordinates x
i
be given as functions of the C
1
grid
motion
t
, that is,
i
t
(M) = x
i

t

1
, then
t
(M) =

i
t
t
x
i
=
i
t
(M)

x
i
(Q)
denes the grid velocity over
t
. The corresponding spatial grid velocity eld
t
=
t

1
t
(To)) is obtained by switching the point arguments.

Denition 4.6.5. Let
t
: 1 o,

Q Q =
t
(

Q) be a time-dependent embedding
of 1 in o, and
t
: 1 B,

Q P =
t
(

Q) a regular map, where
t
(

Q) = (

Q, t)
and
t
(

Q) = (

Q, t) at xed t. Then
t
and
t
are called the relative map and the
referential map of 1 =
t
(/), respectively, provided that
t
=
t

1
t
,
that is, the physical motion
t
is a superposed motion of the body relative to the
reference domain. Both
t
and
t
are in general explicitly time-dependent.

The next theorem states how to specify the ow of the material particles via the ow
of the reference points.
B
M
B
t
(B)
P
Q
o
t
/
1 =
t
(/)
M
t
G
R
reference
current
reference domain
t
reference grid
material body
model of B
(ALE)
conguration
conguration
Figure 4.4: General Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian formulation: reference grid, cong-
urations and related mappings.
t
(B)
t,s
=
t

1
s
t
(/)
t,s
=
t

1
s
s
(/)
s
(B)
s
Figure 4.5: Flows associated with the motion
t
of the body B and the motion
t
of
its model / in the ambient space.
Theorem 4.6.6 (Compatibility of Flows). Let

t,s
be the time-dependent ow of
the spatial grid velocity , and
t
,
t
the relative map and referential map of 1 =
t
(/), respectively, then the ow
t,s
=
t

1
s
of the regular physical motion
t
:
B o can be obtained from
t,s
=
t

t,s

1
s
.
Proof. Since
t
(B) and
t
(/) evolve synchronously, compatibility of the maps re-
quires (see gure 4.5)
t

t

1
s
=
t

1
s

s
, t, s R.
Considering 4.1.8 and assuming
t
: / o to be regular, the time-dependent ow
associated with the spatial grid velocity
t
(Q) = (Q, t) is
t,s
=
t

1
s
: o
s
(/)
t
(/) o , t, s R.
Substitution into the previous equation and composing both sides with
1
s
from the
right then gives the result.

Example 4.6.7. In a numerical implementation when using the nite element me-
thod, the discretization of the domain in its current conguration, i.e. the deformed
nite element mesh at time t, is a numerical representative of the reference domain
1 =
t
(/). A mesh regularization or an r-adaption of the mesh that preserves the
mesh topology, then, represents the discretization of the time-dependent ow

t,s
:
s
(/)
t
(/).
The localizations of the relative map
t
: 1 o and the inverse referential map
1
t
: B 1 should be discussed next.
Denition 4.6.8. Keeping the denitions made in 4.1.4 in mind, let J 1 be an
open neighborhood of

Q 1having a chart (J, ), and 1(
t
(

Q)) o a neighborhood
of
t
(

Q) with a chart (1, x). Moreover, let J
1 be a neighborhood of

Q
1
t
(P) 1 having a chart (J
), where P | B and (|, X) is a chart of the

material body. Then, by presuming
1
t
(1) J and
t
(J
) | to be non-empty,
dene the localizations of
t
and
1
t
by
(
t
)
x
= x
t

1
(
1
t
(V)W)
:
_
1
t
(1) J
_
x
_
1
t
(1) J
_
and
(
1
t
)
X
=

1
t
X
1
X(t(W
)U)
: X (
t
(J
) |)
(
t
(J
) |) ,
respectively for those who want to make a dierence between
t
and (
1
t
)
1
: the
latter is meant here. If x
i
Q
= x(Q) are the coordinates of Q 1 and
= x(

Q
)
the coordinates of

Q
=
1
t
(P) J
, then abbreviate
i
t
= x
i

t

1
and (
1
t
)

1
t
X
1
,
where
i
t
(

Q) =
i
(

Q, t) and (
1
t
)
(P) = (
1
)
(P, t), respectively.

Corollary 4.6.9. Considering the previous denitions, and let
t
=
t

1
t
: B o
be the motion of a material body and x
t
X
1
= (
t
)
xX
resp.
i
t
= x
i

t
X
1
its
localization. If J
= J, then
(
t
)
xX
= (
t

1
t
)
xX
= (
t
)
x
(
1
t
)
X
,
that is,
i
t
= x
i

t

1
t
X
1
resp.
i
(P, t) =
i
((
1
)(P, t), t) .
1
t
and
t
be at least C
1
-continuous, then the referential
velocity eld on 1 is dened by
_
(
1
t
)
P

t
_

t
(

Q)

=
t
(T1) ,
and
_
i
t
t
Q

1
t
_

x
i
= w
i
t
(Q)

x
i
= w
t
(To)
is called the relative velocity eld on o, in which
t
= (, t) resp. w
t
= w(, t) at xed
t. The referential velocity can be interpreted as the particle velocity measured on the
reference domain, and w
t
is the spatial velocity of
t
.

The relative velocity w
t
might be confused with the grid velocity
t
, but notice there
is the following relation:
Corollary 4.6.11. The composition (
t

t
)(/) can be interpreted as a superposed
motion of the model / in o leading to
(
i
t

t
)
t
M
= w
i
t

t

t
+

i
t
k
t
k
t
.
Corollary 4.6.12. By 4.1.8, the time-dependent ow of w
t
is
t
1
s
, where t, s R.
Denition 4.6.13. The tangent of the map
t
is
T
t
: T1 T(
t
(1)) To

i
t
x
i
,
and its inverse is given by
T(
1
t
) : To T(
t
(1)) T1
x
i

(
1
t
)
x
i
,
in which (
1
t
)

1
t
x
1
, i.e. (
1
t
)
(x(Q)) =

1
t
.

Again, the case should be mentioned where dim(1) < dim(o). Since
t
is an embed-
ding and
t
(1) o is a submanifold, T
t
(T1) = T(
t
(1)) To is a subspace of
To, so that the Jacobian matrix

i
t
is invertible at

Q 1 (cf. denitions 3.1.22 and
3.1.26, and section 4.1).
Denition 4.6.14. The two-point tensor elds F
t
(
t
TB T
1) and F
t

(
t
To T
1) associated with the tangent maps T

t
and T
t
, respectively, are
dened by
F
(

Q, t) =

I
t
X
I
d
and F
(

Q, t) =

i
t
x
i
d
,
with
I
t
= X
I

t

1
. F
is called the referential deformation gradient and F
is
called the relative deformation gradient.
t
TB and
t
To are the tangent bundles on
the reference domain 1 induced by the tangent bundle of B via
t
and the tangent
bundle of o via
t
, respectively.

Corollary 4.6.15. By 3.4.22 and 4.6.5, one has T
t
= T(
t

1
t
) = T
t
T(
1
t
).
Therefore, the total deformation gradient is
F
t
(P) =
_
F
t
F
1
t
_

1
t
,
where F
1
t
(

Q, t) =
(
1
t
)
X
I
dX
I
= (T(
1
t
)
t
) is the inverse of F
t
.
Theorem 4.6.16. Let v be the spatial velocity of the motion of a material body, w
the spatial velocity of the relative map (i.e. the relative velocity) and the referential
velocity (see also 4.6.10 for denitions), then
v
t
w
t
=
t
t
.
Proof. Substituting 4.6.9 for the components of the spatial velocity v
t
(Eulerian
velocity eld) gives in detailed expression
v
i
t
(Q) =

i
t
t
P

1
t
=
(x
i

t
(
1
)
1
t
)
t
P

1
t
=
_
i
t
t
Q

1
t
_
(Q) +
_
i
t
(

Q)
_
(
1
t
)
P

t
_
(

Q)
1
t
_
(Q)
= w
i
t
(Q) +
__
i
t
t
_

1
t
_
(Q) .
Recalling 3.4.33, it should be clear that the second term on the right hand side includes
the components of the pushforward of the referential velocity eld. More general, for
vector elds (T1) one has
t
= T
t

1
t
= (F
t
)
1
t
(To) ,
hence, in direct notation, one is left with v
t
= w
t
+
t
t
.

Denition 4.6.17. c
t
= v
t
w
t
=
t
t
(To), where c
t
(Q) = c(Q, t) at xed t,
is called the convective velocity eld on o.

The convective velocity c should not be confused with the Finger tensor (see denition
4.2.12). However, the meaning will be clear from the context.
Note that the convective velocity is a proper vector eld on o, and it provides a
fundamental link between the body, its congurations and the reference domain. It
denotes the relative velocity between the particles P =
1
t
(Q) and the reference points
Q =
1
t
(Q) as measured from the places Q.
The Lagrangian formulation and the Euler formulation are special cases of the ALE
formulation. On the one hand, if
t
= Id
S
, then w = v and c = 0. The equivalence of
the particle velocity and the velocity of the reference domain, however, identies the
Lagrangian formulation: the observer moves with the particles. On the other hand,
if
t
= Id
S
, then w = 0 and c = v, but this is the basic principle of the Eulerian
formulation: the observer permanently takes up the same spatial points.
Proposition 4.6.18. Let t T
p
q
(o) be a time-dependent spatial resp. Eulerian tensor
eld, then
t
(L
v
t) = L
t
c
(
t
t) .
Proof. (See also [2], p. 101, and [12], p. 130.) By proposition 3.6.29 and theorem
4.6.16,
L
v
t =

t
t +
w+
t =

t
t +
w
t +
t)) ,
where the time index is omitted for notational convenience. By 3.6.24, 4.6.10, and
the corollaries 3.4.32 and 4.6.12,
L
v
t =

t
t +
w
t +
t))
=
d
dt
(
t

1
s
)
t
t
t=s
+
t))
=
d
dt
t
(
1
s
)
(
t
(
t
t
t
))
t=s
+
t))
=
d
dt
s
(
t
t
t
)
t=s
+
t))
=
_
d
dt
(
t
t
t
)
t=s
+
t)
_
=
(L
t)) .
The result is obtained by noting that c =
, and applying the pullback by on

both sides.

Proposition 4.6.18 shows that it is possible to compute the Lie derivative of a spatial
tensor eld by performing the Lie derivative on the reference domain along the relative
velocity between the body and the reference domain.
4.6.2 The General ALE Operator
Denition 4.6.19. By introducing a reference domain 1 together with a relative map
t
onto the ambient space o, and a referential map
t
onto the material body B, the
_
p
q
_
-tensor-valued physical eld f : o 1 T
p
q
(o) dened in 4.3.1 can be referred to
the reference domain by setting
f
t
=

f
t

1
t
resp. F
t
=

f
t

1
t
at xed t. The map

f : 11 T
p
q
(o), where

f
t
1
t
= f
t
T
p
q
(o), is then called the
Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian (ALE) formulation of the physical eld f. In an ALE
formulation, the reference points

Q 1 serve as the independent point variables.

In section 4.3, the material time derivative of the Eulerian eld f(Q, t) has been dened
through

f =
f
t
Q
+
v
f, in which the rst term on the right hand side represents the
local time derivative at xed Q, and the second term (the convective term) denotes
the covariant derivative of f along the spatial resp. Eulerian velocity eld v. In what
follows, the material time derivative of the ALE eld

f(

Q, t) should be established.
Proposition 4.6.20. Let f(Q, t) = f
t
(Q) be (the Eulerian formulation of ) a physical
eld, and
t
at least C
1
, then the material time derivative of the ALE eld

f
t
= f
t

t
on the reference domain 1 is
f =

f
t
Q
+
f =

(

Q, t) ,
in which is the referential velocity eld from denition 4.6.10 and

(

Q, t) is a source
term accounting for some corresponding response function (e.g. a constitutive equation).
f is the covariant derivative of

f along in terms of the
t
-induced connection
on 1.
Proof. Proving the local time derivative is trivial, but the convective term bares
some intricacy. Recall that the Eulerian eld f
t
T
p
q
(o) has been dened in 4.3.1 as
an honest tensor eld on o. Therefore, the corresponding ALE eld

f
t
= f
t

t
is a
tensor eld over
t
, that is, an induced section of the tensor bundle T
p
q
(o) (see denition
3.4.18). As proposed by theorem 3.6.13 in section 3.6, the covariant derivative of an
induced section calls for a connection
on 1 that is induced by the connection

on o via the map
t
.
Without loss of generality, for the rest of the proof it will be considered the case where
f
t
(To) is a vector eld. In a chart (1, x) on o, f
t
has the local representative
f
t
(Q) = f
i
t
(Q)

x
i
. It then follows that

f
t
: 1 To is a vector eld over
t
, i.e.
f
t
(

Q) = (f
i
t

t
)(

Q)

x
i
(
t
To) ,
and

f
t
(T
t
To) is a two-point tensor eld:

f
t
=
_
(f
i
t

t
)
+ (f
j
t

t
)
_
i
j k

t
_
(F
t
)
k
_
d

x
i
.
Therein,
i
j k
(Q) are the coecients of on o, and (
i
j k
(F
t
)
k
)(

Q), by theorem
3.6.13, are the coecients of
on 1 induced by
t
. Moreover, note that (f
i
t

t
)
above functionally depends on the coordinates
Q
= (

Q) of the reference domain
1.
Now

f at each pair (

Q, t) has legs in the tangent space T
Q
o at each Q = (

Q, t) o,
so

f, as well as

f
t
Q
, at each (

Q, t) also has. Thus

f =

f
t
contracted by some
vector eld must also be a vector eld over
t
for the proposed material time derivative
for

f to make sense. This, however, can only be realized by a honest vector eld on 1.
For example, taking the referential velocity eld
t
=
(T1) gives
f (

Q) =
_
(f
i

t
)
(f
j

t
)
_
i
j k

t
_
k
t
_

x
i
(
t
To) .
On the other hand, for
t
= Id
S
, the relative map
t
: 1 o just becomes a coordinate
transformation or relabelling of points, and the proposed material time derivative for
f must reduce to the material time derivative for the Eulerian eld f dened in 4.3.5.
However, in this case one also has
t
= Id
S

1
t
by 4.6.5, and thus v = (Id
S
)
by
4.6.10. Therefore, the referential velocity is the proper vector eld to accomplish the
convective term
f, and to proof the assertion.

Theorem 4.6.21 (General ALE Operator). Let F, f and

f, respectively, be the
Lagrangian, Eulerian and ALE formulation of the same time-dependent tensor-valued
physical eld, then
F
t
=

f
t
Q
+
(c)
f =

(

Q, t) .
Proof. As F
t
=

f
t

1
t
, by the chain rule one has (see also 4.3.7)
f(
1
(P, t), t) =
F
t
resp.

f
t
=
_
t
_
f
t

1
t
_
_

t
.
In addition, from theorem 3.6.13, and noting that c
t

t
= T
t
(
t
) by 4.6.17,
f =
(c)
f .
Use both relations to replace the respective terms in 4.6.20, and nally obtain the
desired result.

Finally, the substitution of the ALE operator for material time derivatives in the bal-
ance equations of continuum mechanics enables the solution of initial boundary value
problems with respect to an arbitrary time-dependent reference domain.
Proposition 4.6.22. Let the material body B, the reference domain 1and the ambient
space o have the same dimensions, and let (

Q, t) and (Q, t) be the mass densities on
1 and o, respectively, then conservation of mass in ALE setting reads

t
Q
+
_
x
i
c
i
+ div v
_

t
= 0 .
Proof. The mass densities and are scalar elds, hence the covariant derivative is
(
)(

Q) =

=

x
i
i
t
=
_
x
i
c
i
_

t
= (
(c)
)(

Q) .
Also note that from proposition 4.4.5(ii) and by using the relation

f
t
=

f
t

1
t

1
t
,
continuity reads

t

1
t

1
t
= div v ,
By 4.6.21, one is allowed to write
_

t
Q

1
t

1
t
_
+

x
i
c
i
+ div v = 0 ,
where the left hand side is evaluated at spatial points Q o. However, since each
term is a proper scalar, the assertion follows by switching the point arguments.

Chapter 5
Summary and Conclusions
After an introduction to modern dierential geometry, some geometric concepts in
continuums mechanics have been reviewed. In particular, the formulation of kinematics
of a body and balance equations benet from the precise geometric terminology. On
the one hand, a clear and precise distinction of the Lagrangian formulation from the
Eulerian formulation can be drawn. On the other hand, by using a general term
of space, those issues can be revealed, for which the introduction of a metric, an
ane connection or other geometric structures physically make sense, or merely lead
to simplications.
Subsequent to the classic formulations according to Lagrange and Euler, an implemen-
tation of the geometric concepts in the context of the Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian
formulation has been presented. As an essential component, the introduced grid mani-
fold facilitates a consistent description of the relations between the material, the ambi-
ent space and the reference domain. This also concerns the numerical implementation
by using the nite element method. The grid manifold establishes the topology of
the reference domain respectively the nite element mesh, whereas the time-dependent
placement of the grid in the ambient space represents the conguration of the mesh,
owning the physical properties and the state of the material body. The continuous mesh
regularization in the course of an ALE nite element simulation has been formulated
geometrically as a ow of the grid nodes in the ambient space.
By dening mappings between the introduced manifolds namely the material body,
its congurations and the reference domain, pushforward and pullback operators have
been obtained that provide the mapping of arbitrary spatial and material tensor elds
onto the reference domain. As a fundamental result, the convective velocity eld on the
current conguration of the body, which is well-known in the ALE community, emerges
from the pushforward of the referential velocity eld over the relative motion between
body and grid. Finally, the paper uncovered that the fundamental ALE operator
involves the notion of an induced connection, so that ALE computation can be done
without dening an extra ane connection on the reference domain.
96 CHAPTER 5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Bibliography
[1] R. Abraham, J. E. Marsden, and T. Ratiu. Manifolds, Tensor Analysis, and
Applications. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1983.
[2] J. E. Marsden and T. J. R. Hughes. Mathematical Foundations of Elasticity. Dover
Publications, New York, 1994. (Originally published: Prentice-Hall, 1983).
[3] R. L. Bishop and S. I. Goldberg. Tensor Analysis on Manifolds. The Macmillan
Company, New York, 1968.
[4] M. Spivak. A Comprehensive Introduction to Dierential Geometry, volume 1.
Publish or Perish, Inc., Houston, Texas, 3rd edition, 1999.
[5] J. L. Synge and A. Schild. Tensor Calculus. Dover Publications, New York, 1978.
(Originally published: University of Toronto Press, 1949).
[6] C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne, and J. A. Wheeler. Gravitation. W. H. Freeman and
Company, San Francisco, 1973.
[7] P. K. Raschewski. Riemannsche Geometrie und Tensoranalysis. Verlag Harri
Deutsch, GmbH, 2nd edition, 1995. (in German).
[8] C. Truesdell and W. Noll. The Non-Linear Field Theories of Mechanics. Springer-
Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York, 3rd edition, 2004.
[9] R. A. Sharipov. Course of Linear Algebra and Multidimensional Geome-
try. Publications of Bashkir State University, Ufa, Russia, 1996. URL
http://arxiv.org/abs/math.HO/0405323.
[10] D. Lau. Algebra und Diskrete Mathematik 1. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
New York, 2nd edition, 2007. (in German).
[11] J. C. Simo and J. E. Marsden. On the rotated stress tensor and the material version
of the doyle-ericksen formula. Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 86
(3):213231, 1984.
[12] J. C. Simo, J. E. Marsden, and P. S. Krishnaprasad. The hamiltonian structure
of nonlinear elasticity: The convective representation of solids, rods, and plates.
Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 104(2):125183, 1988.
[13] A. Yavari, J. E. Marsden, and M. Ortiz. On spatial and material covariant balance
laws in elasticity. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 47(042903), 2006.
97
98 BIBLIOGRAPHY
[14] M. Epstein and R. Segev. Dierentiable manifolds and the principle of virtual work
in continuum mechanics. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 21(5):12431245, 1980.
[15] R. Segev. Forces and the existence of stresses in invariant continuum mechanics.
Journal of Mathematical Physics, 27(1):163170, 1986.
[16] R. Segev. The geometry of cauchys uxes. Archive for Rational Mechanics and
Analysis, 154(3):183198, 2000.
[17] B. Riemann. On the hypotheses which lie at the bases of geometry. Nature, 8
(183-184):1417, 36, 37, 1873. (Reprint, Translated by W.K. Cliord).
[18] J. Earman and J. D. Norton. What price spacetime substantivalism? the hole
story. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 38:515525, 1987.
[19] J. D. Norton. General covariance and the foundations of general relativity: Eight
decades of dispute. Reports on Progress in Physics, 56(7):791858, 1993.
[20] T. J. R. Hughes, W. K. Liu, and T. K. Zimmermann. Lagrangian-eulerian -
nite element formulation for incompressible viscous ows. Computer Methods in
Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 29:329349, 1981.
[21] J. Huetink, P. T. Vreede, and J. van der Lugt. Progress in mixed eulerian-
lagrangian nite element simulation of forming processes. International Journal
for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 30:14411457, 1990.
[22] J. Donea, A. Huerta, J.-Ph. Ponthot, and A. Rodrguez-Ferran. Arbitrary
Lagrangian-Eulerian Methods, volume 1 of Encyclopedia of Computational Me-
chanics, chapter 14. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2004.
[23] T. Belytschko, W. K. Liu, and D. Moran. Finite Element for Nonlinear Continua
and Structures. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2000.
[24] A. Einstein. Die formale Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativit atstheorie. Sitzungs-
berichte der Preuischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, pages 1030
1085, 1914. (in German).
[25] L. Florack. Image Structure. Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht Boston
London, 1997.
[26] N. Steenrod. The Topology of Fibre Bundles. Princeton University Press, 1951.
[27] W. Noll. Materially uniform simple bodies with inhomogeneities. Archive for
Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 27(1):132, 1967.
[28] W. Noll. A new mathematical theory of simple materials. Archive for Rational
Mechanics and Analysis, 48(1):150, 1972.
[29] B. Svendsen and A. Bertram. On frame-indierence and form-invariance in con-
stitutive theory. Acta Mechanica, 132:195207, 1999.
[30] A. Bertram and B. Svendsen. On material objectivity and reduced constitutive
equations. Archives of Mechanics, 53(6):653675, 2001.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 99
[31] W. Noll. A mathematical theory of the mechanical behavior of continuous media.
Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, 2:197226, 1958.

Verffentlichungen des Grundbauinstitutes der Technischen
Universitt Berlin

Erschienene Hefte:

Herausgegeben von H. Mller-Kirchenbauer

[1] Aufbau und Arbeitsgebiete des Instituts 1977, 166 S. (vergriffen)
ISBN 3 7983 578 1

[2] Allgemeine experimentelle Ergebnisse und Betrachtungen des 3,00
Spannungs-Deformationsverhaltens von Sand
Savidis, S. A.
ber die theoretische Erfassung nichtlinearen Spannungs-
Verformungsverhaltens von Boden
Richter, T., 1978, 100 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0622 2

[3] Experimentelle und Theoretische Untersuchungen zum 4,50
Tragverhalten der Spundwand mit Sporn
Prager, J., 1978, 165 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0621 4

[4] Der Nachweis der ueren Standsicherheit suspensionsgesttzter 3,50
Erdwnde nach der Elementscheibentheorie
Walz, B.; Prager, J., 1978, 124 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0627 3

[5] Berechnungsverfahren zum aktiven rumlichen Erddruck 4,50
1979, 124 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0665 6
enthlt:
Vergleichende Untersuchungen der Berechnungsverfahren zum Nachweis
der Sicherheit gegen Gleitflchenbildung bei suspensionsgesttzten
Erdwnden
Mller-Kirchenbauer, H.; Walz, B.; Kilchert, M.
Berechnungen zum dreidimensionalen aktiven Erddruckproblem
bei rolligen Bden
Karstedt, J.
Grundlagen und Anwendung der Erdscheibentheorie
Walz, B.
[6] Pressenkrfte und Bodenverformungen beim Rohrvortrieb 4,00
Salomo, K.-P., 1980, 162 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0666 4

[7] Experimentelle und theoretische Untersuchungen zum 4,00
Erddruckproblem auf radialsymetrische Senkksten und Schchte
Mller-Kirchenbauer, H.; Walz, B.; Klapperich, H. 1980, ca. 200 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0705 9

[8] Klassische Verfahren zur Berechnung des seismischen Erddruckes 2,50
Savidis, S.A.; Klapperich, H.; Abdel-Karim, M.
Berechnung der zeitabhngigen Verformung einer mehrfach
verankerten chemisch verfestigten Baugrubenwand
Borchert, K.-M.; Mller-Kirchenbauer, H.;
Hebener, H.; Richter, T., 1980, 73 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0706 7

[9] Untersuchung zur Eignung von Silikatgelen fr Abdichtungsinjektionen 4,00
Tausch, N., 1980, 191 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0733 4

[10] Untersuchungen zum aktiven rumlichen Erddruck im rolligen Boden 8,00
bei hydrostatischer Sttzung der Erdwand
Karstedt, J., 1982, 160 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0807 1

Herausgegeben von H. Mller-Kirchenbauer und S.A. Savidis

[11] Grundwasserbeeinflussung durch Silikatgelinjektionen 12,00
zweite unvernderte Auflage 1984
Mller-Kirchenbauer, H. u.a., 1984, 378 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0817 9

[12] Untersuchungen zum Tragverhalten von Verpreankern in Sand 8,00
Mayer, G., 1983, 171 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0841 1

Herausgegeben von S.A. Savidis

[13] Beitrge aus Forschungsschwerpunkten des Grundbauinstituts 10,50
Savidis, S.A. u.a., 1983, 200 S.
ISBN 3 7983 0930 2

[14] Untersuchungen zum dynamischen Erddruck 10,00
Klapperich, H., 1983, 192 S.
ISBN 3 7983 3940 X

[15] Vergleich zwischen berechneten und gemessenen 11,50
Kriechverformungen an mit Silikatgel verfestigtem Sand
Borchert, K.-M., 1985, 200 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1042 4

[16] Zur Mechanik der Entwicklung von Erosionskanlen in 10,50
geschichtetem Untergrund unter Stauanlagen
Hanses, U., 1985, 200 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1042 4

[17] Ein allgemeines Berechnungsverfahren fr Grenzlastzustnde im 10,50
Grundbau, dargestellt am Beispiel des Grund- und Bschungsbruchs
Sturm, U., 1987, 189 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1174 9

[18] Beitrge zur Modellversuchstechnik in der Geotechnik 10,50
1988, 188 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1269 9

[19] Beitrge zur Umwelttechnik 10,50
1989, 104 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1320 2

[20] Beitrge zur Probabilistik in der Geotechnik 10,50
1989, 104 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1409 8

[21] Zur analytischen Lsung der dreidimensionalen Wellenausbreitung 10,50
in elastischen Halbraum mit Anwendung auf
Interaktionsprobleme Baugrund - Bauwerk
Mitakidis, A., 1991, 257 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1417 9

[22] Numerische Verfahren zur dynamischen Boden - Bauwerk Interaktion 15,50
Sarfeld, W., 1994, 147 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1624 4

[23] Vorhersage gebirgsrelevanter Parameter im Tunnelbau 15,50
mittels stochastischer Prozesse
Kleen, H., 1994, 243 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1626 0

[24] Selbstheilungsvermgen toniger Erdstoffe in Dichtungs- 18,00
systemen von Deponien bei Schdigung durch
mechanische Risse und Austrocknung
Mallwitz, K., 1996, 266 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1693 7

[25] Einflufunktionen fr inhomogene Bden und ihre Anwendung 15,50
bei der Boden-Bauwerk Interaktion
Vrettos, C., 1997, 138 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1750 X

[26] Experimentelle Untersuchung des dynamischen Verhaltens 15,50
starrer Fundamente mit Impulserregungen in situ und an
kleinmastblichen Modellen
Fritsche, M., 2000, 234 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1854 9

[27] Untersuchungen zum Filtrationsverhalten von Feinstbindemittel- 18,00
suspensionen bei der Injektion in Sande
Mittag, J., 2000, 208 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1855 7

[28] Numerische Verfahren zur Berechnung von Baugrund-Bauwerk- 16,00
Interaktionen im Zeitbereich mittels GREENscher Funktionen
fr den Halbraum
Bode, C., 2000, 168 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1856 5

[29] Oberflchenabdichtungen fr Deponien - Technische Entwicklungen, 31,00
Wirtschaftlichkeit, Genehmigungsfhigkeit
Gemeinschaftstagung TUB, BAM, LUAB
2001, 116 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1857 3

[30] Verformbarkeit von Dichtungsasphalt 15,50
Franke, J., 2001, 147 S.
ISBN 3 7983 1862 X

[31] Kopplung von Finiten Elementen mit Rand-Elementen 18,00
zur Berechnung der dynamischen Baugrund-Bauwerk-Interaktion
Hirschauer, R., 2001, 150 S.
ISBN 3-7983-1883-2

[32] Numerische Untersuchungen zum Tragverhalten von Zugpfhlen und 18,00
Zugpfahlgruppen in Sand auf der Grundlage von Probebelastungen
Rackwitz, F., 2003, 206 S.
ISBN 3-7983-1907-3

[33] Untersuchungen zu Verschiebungen von Schlitzwnden beim 19,00
Unterwasseraushub in Berliner Sanden
Schran, U., 2003, 248 S.
ISBN 3-7983-1919-7

[34] Untersuchungen zum Trag- und Schdigungsverhalten 19,00
Fester Schienenfahrbahnen in Betonbauweise
Bergmann, S., 2005, 230 S.
ISBN 3-7983-1923-5

[35] Untersuchungen zum Einflu der Geologie im Groraum Kln 25,00
auf die Form elastischer Beschleunigungsantwortspektren
Rhner, J., 2005, 60 S. + Anlagen
ISBN 3-7983-1925-1

[36] Qualittsverbesserung von Schlitzwand- und Dsenstrahlarbeiten 16,50
unter besonderer Bercksichtigung der Baugrundverhltnisse im
Zentralen Bereich Berlins
Windelschmidt, B., 2003, 290 S.
ISBN 3-7983-1928-6

[37] Untersuchung des Setzungsverhaltens von Bahnschotter und der 18,00
Hohllagenentwicklung auf Schotterfahrbahnen
Holtzendorff, K., 2004, 142 S.
ISBN 3-7983-1936-7

[38] Vortrge zum 1. Hans Lorenz Symposium, Berlin 2005 45,00
ISBN 3-7983-1993-6

[39] Vortrge zum Spundwandseminar 2006, Berlin 2006 45,00
ISBN 3-7983-2012-8

ISBN 3-7983-2024-1

ISBN 3-7983-2063-5

SHAKER Verlag
ISBN 978-3-8322-7597-6

[43] Vortrge zum Spundwandseminar 2009, Berlin 2009 48,80
SHAKER Verlag
ISBN 978-3-8322-8035-2

Weitere Verffentlichungen des Grundbauinstituts

Empfehlungen des Arbeitskreises "Baugrunddynamik" 15,00
Herausgegeben von der DGGT, 2003, 67 S.
ISBN 3-7983-1909-X

Grundbauseminar 25,00
Vorstellung der neuen EAB mit dem Teilsicherheitskonzept, 2007, 236 S

DIN 1054 Seminar 25,00
Neues Sicherheitskonzept in der Geotechnik, 2009, 156 S.

Aubram Daniel 44

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aubram Daniel 44

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VERFFENTLICHUNGEN

pullback, pushforward by a map

v linear form applied to a vector v

in 2.1.10 have an expression in the

that keeps the vector xed. In this case, (B

P. It becomes clear that

O, then in the primed frame the coordinates of

P. Apply 2.2.8 to get

by 2.2.8, i.e. the position of P

OP) is called the pushforward of

OP) = Q(QP) and the assertion follows.

with respect to the g

are the components of the translation vector

= (O) (gure 3.5).

are the components of the translation vector

has the same coordinates with respect to the

, shortly: objective. The transforma-

OP) and keeping the Euclidian frame xed. In this case,

are the ane coordinates of (P) in

are the components of

O. Another way to dene

v = Iv as in 2.2.9. In this case, x

,= an overlap and (|, x), (|

) A(/) the chart transition x

are constants and do not depend on the point,

is independent of the origin and no coordinate system is involved. Therefore, v = v

according to the rule

transforms the derivations of the parameterized coordinates s

transforms the derivations of f with respect to

is the dual space of 1, as it is used in linear algebra. Using

denote the Jacobian matrix and its inverse, respec-

)] is a function of the determinant of the inverse Jacobian matrix.

)(v) is a vector on /, where the last

) is a dieomorphism, then T(x

c has the same bres as c, that is,

has the inverse T

f arises from the pushforward of f, then the pullback

: / T^ are not proper vector elds on / (or ^).

also is, and thus x

t on the subset x(1)

/, thus Alt(Alt T) = Alt T by

, the local representative of = (Alt ) (Alt ) is

/ denote the sections of the cotangent bundle

/ of a manifold /, then a k-form eld is dened as a section of the k-th exterior

/) is a 1-form, then dene

) be regular charts on /, and x

) the chart transition map, then dene

on / such that for t T

), i.e. the exterior deriva-

, are equivalent, if there is some f : / R

= f. The equivalence classes [] and [] of volume forms

= f is a linear combination of the basis

[], and if f < 0, then

has been already dened in a similar form to

is an isomorphism on each bre of

|, so the inverse map x

), whose components are a

= by 3.4.30, so it is left proving

) is not a proper scalar function in general, i.e. it is not coordinate-

1. 1-densities (or just densites)

/) be a twisted n-form and

) the chart transition map, then 3.7.22 carries

, called the Jacobian of , is a proper scalar.

has been used, it is