Ehresmann’s connection
Consider a fibre bundle
with a fibred chart
where
are local coordinates on the base manifold
and
are coordinates along the fibres. If we have two fibred charts, then on their intersection domain we have
![]()
![]()
The chart
induces vector fields on the tangent space ![]()
![]()
![]()
with the transformation laws:
![]()
![]()
Therefore

and the inverse

Vector fields
span what is called the vertical subspace in
This subspace, consisting of vectors tangent to the fibers, is independent of the chart. There are no a priori distinguished `horizontal’ subspaces. The subspaces determined by vector fields
change when the charts change. A preferred distribution of horizontal subspaces is determined by what is called an Ehresmann connection. Once such a connection is given, vector fields
tangent to
can be lifted to horizontal vector fields tangent to ![]()
Remark: In principle we should use a different notation for vector fields
tangent to
and vector fields induced on
by a chart
Using the same notation for both can lead to misunderstandings when is not paying attention to the context.
Let us denote by
the horizontal lifts induced by an Ehresmann connection on
They can be written uniquely in the form:
![]()
Remark: In Finsler geometry instead of
one usually uses
so that the formula for the horizontal lift reads ![]()
The functions
may be called the coefficient functions of the Ehresmann connection with respect to the chart ![]()
If
is a vector field on
we denote its horizontal lift by
thus
![]()
Suppose now we have two charts,
and
Corresponding to these two charts we will have two sets of horizontal lifts of the same connection
and
Since both are supposed to describe the same horizontal distribution, they must be related by an invertible matrix
:
![]()
Substituting now the definitions we have
![]()
or
![]()
Comparing the terms we find that
![]()
and therefore
![]()
We can distinguish two special classes of transformations. First class consists of changes of coordinates on
without reparametrizing of the fibers. For these transformations
transforms like one–forms:
![]()
The second class consists of transformations of the form
For these transformations we have
![]()
{\bf Remark}: If
is a vector bundle, then the reparametrizations of the fibers compatible with the vector bundle structure are linear and of the form:
![]()
In this case the last formula reads:
![]()
Curvature
Given an Ehresmann connection represented by horizontal vector fields
we can calculate their commutator. As it happens their commutator is a vertical vector field that can be written as
![]()
where
![]()
More generally, for any two vector fields
on
one defines
![]()
If
are functions on
then
![]()
Under coordinate transformations
transforms like a tensor:
![]()
Under fiber reparametrization we have:
![]()
Connection form
It is convenient to code the connection given by a horizontal distribution in one geometrical object. This can be done by introducing the curvature form – a one-form on
with values in the vertical distribution. Given a vector tangent to
at
we decompose it into a horizontal and vertical part and define the connection form on this vector as the vertical part. It follows that the connection form is the identity map on vertical vectors. In coordinates we can uniquely write the connection form
as
![]()
The curvature form vanishes automatically on the horizontal vectors
therefore it easily follows that ![]()
W krzywizna zdefiniowanej jako komutator przy obliczaniu pojawiają mi się jeszcze dwa człony które nie widzę dlaczego powinny się kasować:

Można rozjaśnić?
A i jeszcze jest literówka w pierwszym transformation law:
[img]http://arkadiusz-jadczyk.eu/blog/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-5132c752c43f66d1799f89c1d276854e_l2.gif[/img]
We have
We use the following properties of the commutator
The first term gives:
The term
is zero.
Okay, but why your last equality is true? Namely, why
![Rendered by QuickLaTeX.com [\partial_\mu, \Gamma^a_\nu]\partial_a = \partial_\mu \Gamma^a_\nu \partial_a](https://arkadiusz-jadczyk.eu/blog/wp-content/ql-cache/quicklatex.com-86628f5cb12cb1c2e38cefffb403f3c0_l3.png)
? This would mean that term i posted before is 0.
We have two vector fields. Their commutator is also a vector field. Vector fields may be considered as acting on functions. So we act on an arbitrary function f(x,v)
Now use Leibniz’s rule when taking derivatives.
The second term will cancel with the minus term of the commutator, because partial derivatives commute. What remains is
Therefore
Now we skip
Ok, got it! Thanks
You are welcome.