chapter 5 riemannian manifolds and connections

Chapter 5

Riemannian Manifolds andConnections

5.1 Riemannian Metrics

Fortunately, the rich theory of vector spaces endowed witha Euclidean inner product can, to a great extent, be liftedto various bundles associated with a manifold.

The notion of local (and global) frame plays an importanttechnical role.

Definition 5.1. Let M be an n-dimensional smoothmanifold. For any open subset, U ✓ M , an n-tuple ofvector fields, (X

1

, . . . , Xn), over U is called a frame overU i↵ (X

1

(p), . . . , Xn(p)) is a basis of the tangent space,TpM , for every p 2 U . If U = M , then the Xi are globalsections and (X

1

, . . . , Xn) is called a frame (of M).

477

478 CHAPTER 5. RIEMANNIAN MANIFOLDS AND CONNECTIONS

The notion of a frame is due to Elie Cartan who (afterDarboux) made extensive use of them under the name ofmoving frame (and the moving frame method).

Cartan’s terminology is intuitively clear: As a point, p,moves in U , the frame, (X

1

(p), . . . , Xn(p)), moves fromfibre to fibre. Physicists refer to a frame as a choice oflocal gauge .

If dim(M) = n, then for every chart, (U, '), sinced'�1

'(p)

: Rn ! TpM is a bijection for every p 2 U , then-tuple of vector fields, (X

1

, . . . , Xn), withXi(p) = d'�1

'(p)

(ei), is a frame of TM over U , where(e

1

, . . . , en) is the canonical basis of Rn.

The following proposition tells us when the tangent bun-dle is trivial (that is, isomorphic to the product, M ⇥Rn):

5.1. RIEMANNIAN METRICS 479

Proposition 5.1.The tangent bundle, TM , of a smoothn-dimensional manifold, M , is trivial i↵ it possessesa frame of global sections (vector fields defined on M).

As an illustration of Proposition 5.1 we can prove thatthe tangent bundle, TS1, of the circle, is trivial.

Indeed, we can find a section that is everywhere nonzero,i.e. a non-vanishing vector field, namely

X(cos ✓, sin ✓) = (� sin ✓, cos ✓).

The reader should try proving that TS3 is also trivial (usethe quaternions).

However, TS2 is nontrivial, although this not so easy toprove.

More generally, it can be shown that TSn is nontrivialfor all even n � 2. It can even be shown that S1, S3 andS7 are the only spheres whose tangent bundle is trivial.This is a rather deep theorem and its proof is hard.


Remark: A manifold, M , such that its tangent bundle,TM , is trivial is called parallelizable .

We now define Riemannian metrics and Riemannian man-ifolds.

Definition 5.2. Given a smooth n-dimensional mani-fold, M , a Riemannian metric on M (or TM) is afamily, (h�, �ip)p2M , of inner products on each tangentspace, TpM , such that h�, �ip depends smoothly on p,which means that for every chart, '↵ : U↵ ! Rn, forevery frame, (X

1

, . . . , Xn), on U↵, the maps

p 7! hXi(p), Xj(p)ip, p 2 U↵, 1 i, j n

are smooth. A smooth manifold, M , with a Riemannianmetric is called a Riemannian manifold .


If dim(M) = n, then for every chart, (U, '), we have theframe, (X

1

, . . . , Xn), over U , with Xi(p) = d'�1

'(p)

(ei),where (e

1

, . . . , en) is the canonical basis of Rn. Since ev-ery vector field over U is a linear combination,

Pni=1

fiXi,for some smooth functions, fi : U ! R, the condition ofDefinition 5.2 is equivalent to the fact that the maps,

p 7! hd'�1

'(p)

(ei), d'�1

'(p)

(ej)ip, p 2 U, 1 i, j n,

are smooth. If we let x = '(p), the above condition saysthat the maps,

x 7! hd'�1

x (ei), d'�1

x (ej)i'�1

(x)

, x 2 '(U), 1 i, j n,

are smooth.

IfM is a Riemannian manifold, the metric on TM is oftendenoted g = (gp)p2M . In a chart, using local coordinates,we often use the notation g =

Pij gijdxi ⌦dxj or simply

g =P

ij gijdxidxj, where

gij(p) =

*✓@

@xi

◆

p

,

✓@

@xj

◆

p

+

p

.


For every p 2 U , the matrix, (gij(p)), is symmetric, pos-itive definite.

The standard Euclidean metric on Rn, namely,

g = dx2

1

+ · · · + dx2

n,

makes Rn into a Riemannian manifold.

Then, every submanifold, M , of Rn inherits a metric byrestricting the Euclidean metric to M .

For example, the sphere, Sn�1, inherits a metric thatmakes Sn�1 into a Riemannian manifold. It is a goodexercise to find the local expression of this metric for S2

in polar coordinates.

A nontrivial example of a Riemannian manifold is thePoincare upper half-space , namely, the setH = {(x, y) 2 R2 | y > 0} equipped with the metric

g =dx2 + dy2

y2

.


A way to obtain a metric on a manifold, N , is to pull-back the metric, g, on another manifold, M , along a localdi↵eomorphism, ' : N ! M .

Recall that ' is a local di↵eomorphism i↵

d'p : TpN ! T'(p)

M

is a bijective linear map for every p 2 N .

Given any metric g on M , if ' is a local di↵eomorphism,we define the pull-back metric, '⇤g, on N induced by gas follows: For all p 2 N , for all u, v 2 TpN ,

('⇤g)p(u, v) = g'(p)

(d'p(u), d'p(v)).

We need to check that ('⇤g)p is an inner product, whichis very easy since d'p is a linear isomorphism.

Our map, ', between the two Riemannian manifolds(N, '⇤g) and (M, g) is a local isometry, as defined be-low.


Definition 5.3. Given two Riemannian manifolds,(M

1

, g1

) and (M2

, g2

), a local isometry is a smooth map,' : M

1

! M2

, such that d'p : TpM1

! T'(p)

M2

is anisometry between the Euclidean spaces (TpM1

, (g1

)p) and(T'(p)

M2

, (g2

)'(p)

), for every p 2 M1

, that is,

(g1

)p(u, v) = (g2

)'(p)

(d'p(u), d'p(v)),

for all u, v 2 TpM1

or, equivalently, '⇤g2

= g1

. More-over, ' is an isometry i↵ it is a local isometry and adi↵eomorphism.

The isometries of a Riemannian manifold, (M, g), form agroup, Isom(M, g), called the isometry group of (M, g).

An important theorem of Myers and Steenrod asserts thatthe isometry group, Isom(M, g), is a Lie group.


Given a map, ' : M1

! M2

, and a metric g1

on M1

, ingeneral, ' does not induce any metric on M

2

.

However, if ' has some extra properties, it does induce ametric on M

2

. This is the case when M2

arises from M1

as a quotient induced by some group of isometries of M1

.For more on this, see Gallot, Hulin and Lafontaine [17],Chapter 2, Section 2.A.

Now, because a manifold is paracompact (see Section3.6), a Riemannian metric always exists on M . This isa consequence of the existence of partitions of unity (seeTheorem 3.32).

Theorem 5.2. Every smooth manifold admits a Rie-mannian metric.


5.2 Connections on Manifolds

Given a manifold, M , in general, for any two points,p, q 2 M , there is no “natural” isomorphism betweenthe tangent spaces TpM and TqM .

Given a curve, c : [0, 1] ! M , on M as c(t) moves onM , how does the tangent space, Tc(t)M change as c(t)moves?

If M = Rn, then the spaces, Tc(t)Rn, are canonicallyisomorphic to Rn and any vector, v 2 Tc(0)

Rn ⇠= Rn, issimply moved along c by parallel transport , that is, atc(t), the tangent vector, v, also belongs to Tc(t)Rn.

However, if M is curved, for example, a sphere, then it isnot obvious how to “parallel transport” a tangent vectorat c(0) along a curve c.

5.2. CONNECTIONS ON MANIFOLDS 487

A way to achieve this is to define the notion of parallelvector field along a curve and this, in turn, can be definedin terms of the notion of covariant derivative of a vectorfield.

Assume for simplicity that M is a surface in R3. Givenany two vector fields, X and Y defined on some open sub-set, U ✓ R3, for every p 2 U , the directional derivative,DXY (p), of Y with respect to X is defined by

DXY (p) = limt!0

Y (p + tX(p)) � Y (p)

t.

If f : U ! R is a di↵erentiable function on U , for everyp 2 U , the directional derivative, X [f ](p) (or X(f )(p)),of f with respect to X is defined by

X [f ](p) = limt!0

f (p + tX(p)) � f (p)

t.

We know that X [f ](p) = dfp(X(p)).


It is easily shown that DXY (p) is R-bilinear in X and Y ,is C1(U)-linear in X and satisfies the Leibniz derivationrule with respect to Y , that is:

Proposition 5.3.The directional derivative of vectorfields satisfies the following properties:

DX1

+X2

Y (p) = DX1

Y (p) + DX2

Y (p)

DfXY (p) = fDXY (p)

DX(Y1

+ Y2

)(p) = DXY1

(p) + DXY2

(p)

DX(fY )(p) = X [f ](p)Y (p) + f (p)DXY (p),

for all X, X1

, X2

, Y, Y1

, Y2

2 X(U) and all f 2 C1(U).

Now, if p 2 U where U ✓ M is an open subset of M , forany vector field, Y , defined on U (Y (p) 2 TpM , for allp 2 U), for every X 2 TpM , the directional derivative,DXY (p), makes sense and it has an orthogonal decom-position,

DXY (p) = rXY (p) + (Dn)XY (p),

where its horizontal (or tangential) component isrXY (p) 2 TpM and its normal component is (Dn)XY (p).


The component, rXY (p), is the covariant derivative ofY with respect to X 2 TpM and it allows us to definethe covariant derivative of a vector field, Y 2 X(U), withrespect to a vector field, X 2 X(M), on M .

We easily check that rXY satisfies the four equations ofProposition 5.3.

In particular, Y , may be a vector field associated with acurve, c : [0, 1] ! M .

A vector field along a curve, c, is a vector field, Y , suchthat Y (c(t)) 2 Tc(t)M , for all t 2 [0, 1]. We also writeY (t) for Y (c(t)).

Then, we say that Y is parallel along c i↵ rc0(t)Y = 0along c.


The notion of parallel transport on a surface can be de-fined using parallel vector fields along curves. Let p, q beany two points on the surface M and assume there is acurve, c : [0, 1] ! M , joining p = c(0) to q = c(1).

Then, using the uniqueness and existence theorem forordinary di↵erential equations, it can be shown that forany initial tangent vector, Y

0

2 TpM , there is a uniqueparallel vector field, Y , along c, with Y (0) = Y

0

.

If we set Y1

= Y (1), we obtain a linear map, Y0

7! Y1

,from TpM to TqM which is also an isometry.

As a summary, given a surface, M , if we can define a no-tion of covariant derivative, r : X(M)⇥X(M) ! X(M),satisfying the properties of Proposition 5.3, then we candefine the notion of parallel vector field along a curve andthe notion of parallel transport, which yields a naturalway of relating two tangent spaces, TpM and TqM , usingcurves joining p and q.


This can be generalized to manifolds using the notion ofconnection. We will see that the notion of connectioninduces the notion of curvature. Moreover, if M has aRiemannian metric, we will see that this metric inducesa unique connection with two extra properties (the Levi-Civita connection).

Definition 5.4. Let M be a smooth manifold.A connection on M is a R-bilinear map,

r : X(M) ⇥ X(M) ! X(M),

where we write rXY for r(X, Y ), such that the follow-ing two conditions hold:

rfXY = frXY

rX(fY ) = X [f ]Y + frXY,

for all X, Y 2 X(M) and all f 2 C1(M). The vectorfield, rXY , is called the covariant derivative of Y withrespect to X .

A connection on M is also known as an a�ne connectionon M .


A basic property of r is that it is a local operator .

Proposition 5.4. Let M be a smooth manifold andlet r be a connection on M . For every open subset,U ✓ M , for every vector field, Y 2 X(M), ifY ⌘ 0 on U , then rXY ⌘ 0 on U for all X 2 X(M),that is, r is a local operator.

Proposition 5.4 implies that a connection, r, on M , re-stricts to a connection, r � U , on every open subset,U ✓ M .

It can also be shown that (rXY )(p) only depends onX(p), that is, for any two vector fields, X, Y 2 X(M), ifX(p) = Y (p) for some p 2 M , then

(rXZ)(p) = (rY Z)(p) for every Z 2 X(M).

Consequently, for any p 2 M , the covariant derivative,(ruY )(p), is well defined for any tangent vector,u 2 TpM , and any vector field, Y , defined on some opensubset, U ✓ M , with p 2 U .


Observe that on U , the n-tuple of vector fields,⇣@

@x1

, . . . , @@xn

⌘, is a local frame.

We can write

r @@xi

✓@

@xj

◆=

nX

k=1

�kij

@

@xk,

for some unique smooth functions, �kij, defined on U ,

called the Christo↵el symbols .

We say that a connection, r, is flat on U i↵

rX

✓@

@xi

◆= 0, for all X 2 X(U), 1 i n.


Proposition 5.5. Every smooth manifold, M , pos-sesses a connection.

Proof. We can find a family of charts, (U↵, '↵), such that{U↵}↵ is a locally finite open cover of M . If (f↵) is apartition of unity subordinate to the cover {U↵}↵ and ifr↵ is the flat connection on U↵, then it is immediatelyverified that

r =X

↵

f↵r↵

is a connection on M .

Remark: A connection on TM can be viewed as a lin-ear map,

r : X(M) �! HomC1(M)

(X(M), (X(M)),

such that, for any fixed Y 2 X (M), the map,rY : X 7! rXY , is C1(M)-linear, which implies thatrY is a (1, 1) tensor.

5.3. PARALLEL TRANSPORT 495

5.3 Parallel Transport

The notion of connection yields the notion of paralleltransport. First, we need to define the covariant deriva-tive of a vector field along a curve.

Definition 5.5. Let M be a smooth manifold and let� : [a, b] ! M be a smooth curve in M . A smooth vectorfield along the curve � is a smooth map,X : [a, b] ! TM , such that ⇡(X(t)) = �(t), for allt 2 [a, b] (X(t) 2 T�(t)M).

Recall that the curve, � : [a, b] ! M , is smooth i↵ � isthe restriction to [a, b] of a smooth curve on some openinterval containing [a, b].

Since a vector X field along a curve � does not neces-sarily extend to an open subset of M (for example, ifthe image of � is dense in M), the covariant derivative(r�0

(t0

)

X)�(t0

)

may not be defined, so we need a propo-sition showing that the covariant derivative of a vectorfield along a curve makes sense.


Proposition 5.6. Let M be a smooth manifold, let rbe a connection on M and � : [a, b] ! M be a smoothcurve in M . There is a R-linear map, D/dt, definedon the vector space of smooth vector fields, X, along�, which satisfies the following conditions:

(1) For any smooth function, f : [a, b] ! R,

D(fX)

dt=

df

dtX + f

DX

dt

(2) If X is induced by a vector field, Z 2 X(M),that is, X(t

0

) = Z(�(t0

)) for all t0

2 [a, b], thenDX

dt(t

0

) = (r�0(t

0

)

Z)�(t0

)

.


Proof. Since �([a, b]) is compact, it can be covered by afinite number of open subsets, U↵, such that (U↵, '↵) is achart. Thus, we may assume that � : [a, b] ! U for somechart, (U, '). As ' � � : [a, b] ! Rn, we can write

' � �(t) = (u1

(t), . . . , un(t)),

where each ui = pri � ' � � is smooth. Now, it is easy tosee that

�0(t0

) =nX

i=1

dui

dt

✓@

@xi

◆

�(t0

)

.

If (s1

, . . . , sn) is a frame over U , we can write

X(t) =nX

i=1

Xi(t)si(�(t)),

for some smooth functions, Xi.


Then, conditions (1) and (2) imply that

DX

dt=

nX

j=1

✓dXj

dtsj(�(t)) + Xj(t)r�0

(t)(sj(�(t)))

◆

and since

�0(t) =nX

i=1

dui

dt

✓@

@xi

◆

�(t)

,

there exist some smooth functions, �kij, so that

r�0(t)(sj(�(t))) =

nX

i=1

dui

dtr @

@xi

(sj(�(t)))

=X

i,k

dui

dt�k

ijsk(�(t)).

It follows that

DX

dt=

nX

k=1

0

@dXk

dt+X

ij

�kij

dui

dtXj

1

A sk(�(t)).

Conversely, the above expression defines a linear operator,D/dt, and it is easy to check that it satisfies (1) and(2).


The operator, D/dt is often called covariant derivativealong � and it is also denoted by r�0

(t) or simply r�0.

Definition 5.6. Let M be a smooth manifold and let rbe a connection on M . For every curve, � : [a, b] ! M ,in M , a vector field, X , along � is parallel (along �) i↵

DX

dt(s) = 0 for all s 2 [a, b].

If M was embedded in Rd, for some d, then to say thatX is parallel along � would mean that the directionalderivative, (D�0X)(�(t)), is normal to T�(t)M .

The following proposition can be shown using the exis-tence and uniqueness of solutions of ODE’s (in our case,linear ODE’s) and its proof is omitted:


Proposition 5.7. Let M be a smooth manifold andlet r be a connection on M . For every C1 curve,� : [a, b] ! M , in M , for every t 2 [a, b] and everyv 2 T�(t)M , there is a unique parallel vector field, X,along � such that X(t) = v.

For the proof of Proposition 5.7 it is su�cient to considerthe portions of the curve � contained in some chart. Insuch a chart, (U, '), as in the proof of Proposition 5.6,using a local frame, (s

1

, . . . , sn), over U , we have

DX

dt=

nX

k=1

0

@dXk

dt+X

ij

�kij

dui

dtXj

1

A sk(�(t)),

with ui = pri � ' � �. Consequently, X is parallel alongour portion of � i↵ the system of linear ODE’s in theunknowns, Xk,

dXk

dt+X

ij

�kij

dui

dtXj = 0, k = 1, . . . , n,

is satisfied.


Remark: Proposition 5.7 can be extended to piecewiseC1 curves.

Definition 5.7. Let M be a smooth manifold and letr be a connection on M . For every curve,� : [a, b] ! M , in M , for every t 2 [a, b], the paral-lel transport from �(a) to �(t) along � is the linearmap from T�(a)

M to T�(t)M , which associates to anyv 2 T�(a)

M the vector, Xv(t) 2 T�(t)M , where Xv isthe unique parallel vector field along � with Xv(a) = v.

The following proposition is an immediate consequenceof properties of linear ODE’s:

Proposition 5.8. Let M be a smooth manifold andlet r be a connection on M . For every C1 curve,� : [a, b] ! M , in M , the parallel transport along �defines for every t 2 [a, b] a linear isomorphism,P� : T�(a)

M ! T�(t)M , between the tangent spaces,T�(a)

M and T�(t)M .


In particular, if � is a closed curve, that is, if�(a) = �(b) = p, we obtain a linear isomorphism, P�, ofthe tangent space, TpM , called the holonomy of �. Theholonomy group of r based at p, denoted Holp(r), isthe subgroup of GL(n,R) (where n is the dimension ofthe manifold M) given by

Holp(r) = {P� 2 GL(n,R) |� is a closed curve based at p}.

If M is connected, then Holp(r) depends on the base-point p 2 M up to conjugation and so Holp(r) andHolq(r) are isomorphic for all p, q 2 M . In this case, itmakes sense to talk about the holonomy group of r. Byabuse of language, we call Holp(r) the holonomy groupof M .

5.4. CONNECTIONS COMPATIBLE WITH A METRIC 503

5.4 Connections Compatible with a Metric;Levi-Civita Connections

If a Riemannian manifold, M , has a metric, then it is nat-ural to define when a connection, r, on M is compatiblewith the metric.

Given any two vector fields, Y, Z 2 X(M), the smoothfunction hY, Zi is defined by

hY, Zi(p) = hYp, Zpip,

for all p 2 M .

Definition 5.8. Given any metric, h�, �i, on a smoothmanifold, M , a connection, r, on M is compatible withthe metric, for short, a metric connection i↵

X(hY, Zi) = hrXY, Zi + hY, rXZi,for all vector fields, X, Y, Z 2 X(M).


Proposition 5.9. Let M be a Riemannian manifoldwith a metric, h�, �i. Then, M , possesses metricconnections.

Proof. For every chart, (U↵, '↵), we use the Gram-Schmidtprocedure to obtain an orthonormal frame over U↵ andwe let r↵ be the trivial connection over U↵. By con-struction, r↵ is compatible with the metric. We finishthe argumemt by using a partition of unity, leaving thedetails to the reader.

We know from Proposition 5.9 that metric connections onTM exist. However, there are many metric connectionson TM and none of them seems more relevant than theothers.

It is remarkable that if we require a certain kind of sym-metry on a metric connection, then it is uniquely deter-mined.


Such a connection is known as the Levi-Civita connec-tion . The Levi-Civita connection can be characterizedin several equivalent ways, a rather simple way involvingthe notion of torsion of a connection.

There are two error terms associated with a connection.The first one is the curvature ,

R(X, Y ) = r[X,Y ]

+ rY rX � rXrY .

The second natural error term is the torsion , T (X, Y ),of the connection, r, given by

T (X, Y ) = rXY � rY X � [X, Y ],

which measures the failure of the connection to behavelike the Lie bracket.


Proposition 5.10. (Levi-Civita, Version 1) Let M beany Riemannian manifold. There is a unique, metric,torsion-free connection, r, on M , that is, a connec-tion satisfying the conditions

X(hY, Zi) = hrXY, Zi + hY, rXZirXY � rY X = [X, Y ],

for all vector fields, X, Y, Z 2 X(M). This connec-tion is called the Levi-Civita connection (or canoni-cal connection) on M . Furthermore, this connectionis determined by the Koszul formula

2hrXY, Zi = X(hY, Zi) + Y (hX, Zi) � Z(hX, Y i)� hY, [X, Z]i � hX, [Y, Z]i � hZ, [Y, X ]i.


Proof. First, we prove uniqueness. Since our metric isa non-degenerate bilinear form, it su�ces to prove theKoszul formula. As our connection is compatible withthe metric, we have

X(hY, Zi) = hrXY, Zi + hY, rXZiY (hX, Zi) = hrY X, Zi + hX, rY Zi

�Z(hX, Y i) = �hrZX, Y i � hX, rZY iand by adding up the above equations, we get

X(hY, Zi) + Y (hX, Z)i � Z(hX, Y i) =hY, rXZ � rZXi+ hX, rY Z � rZY i+ hZ, rXY + rY Xi.

Then, using the fact that the torsion is zero, we get

X(hY, Zi) + Y (hX, Zi) � Z(hX, Y i) =hY, [X, Z]i + hX, [Y, Z]i+ hZ, [Y, X ]i + 2hZ, rXY i

which yields the Koszul formula.

We will not prove existence here. The reader should con-sult the standard texts for a proof.


Remark: In a chart, (U, '), if we set

@kgij =@

@xk(gij)

then it can be shown that the Christo↵el symbols aregiven by

�kij =

1

2

nX

l=1

gkl(@igjl + @jgil � @lgij),

where (gkl) is the inverse of the matrix (gkl).

It can be shown that a connection is torsion-free i↵

�kij = �k

ji, for all i, j, k.

We conclude this section with various useful facts abouttorsion-free or metric connections.

First, there is a nice characterization for the Levi-Civitaconnection induced by a Riemannian manifold over a sub-manifold.


Proposition 5.11. Let M be any Riemannian mani-fold and let N be any submanifold of M equipped withthe induced metric. If rM and rN are the Levi-Civitaconnections on M and N , respectively, induced by themetric on M , then for any two vector fields, X andY in X(M) with X(p), Y (p) 2 TpN , for all p 2 N , wehave

rNXY = (rM

X Y )k,

where (rMX Y )k(p) is the orthogonal projection of

rMX Y (p) onto TpN , for every p 2 N .

In particular, if � is a curve on a surface, M ✓ R3, thena vector field, X(t), along � is parallel i↵ X 0(t) is normalto the tangent plane, T�(t)M .

If r is a metric connection, then we can say more aboutthe parallel transport along a curve. Recall from Section5.3, Definition 5.6, that a vector field, X , along a curve,�, is parallel i↵

DX

dt= 0.


Proposition 5.12.Given any Riemannian manifold,M , and any metric connection, r, on M , for everycurve, � : [a, b] ! M , on M , if X and Y are twovector fields along �, then

d

dthX(t), Y (t)i =

⌧DX

dt, Y

�+

⌧X,

DY

dt

�.

Using Proposition 5.12 we get

Proposition 5.13.Given any Riemannian manifold,M , and any metric connection, r, on M , for everycurve, � : [a, b] ! M , on M , if X and Y are twovector fields along � that are parallel, then

hX, Y i = C,

for some constant, C. In particular, kX(t)k is con-stant. Furthermore, the linear isomorphism,P� : T�(a)

! T�(b), is an isometry.

In particular, Proposition 5.13 shows that the holonomygroup, Holp(r), based at p, is a subgroup of O(n).

chapter 5 riemannian manifolds and connections

Documents