Lably
Skip to content

Frobenius theorem (differential topology)

On finding a maximal set of solutions of a system of first-order homogeneous linear PDEs

  • 13 min read
  • 5 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Mathematics, Necessity and sufficiency and Rank (linear algebra)

Contact geometry studies 1-forms that maximally violate the assumptions of Frobenius' theorem. An example is shown on the right.

Introduction

One-form version

Suppose we are to find the trajectory of a particle in a subset of 3D space, but we do not know its trajectory formula. Instead, we know only that its trajectory satisfies adx+bdy+cdz=0, where a,b,c are smooth functions of (x,y,z). Thus, our only certainty is that if at some moment in time the particle is at location (x0,y0,z0), then its velocity at that moment is restricted within the plane with equation a(x0,y0,z0)[x−x0]+b(x0,y0,z0)[y−y0]+c(x0,y0,z0)[z−z0]=0

In other words, we can draw a "local plane" at each point in 3D space, and we know that the particle's trajectory must be tangent to the local plane at all times.

If we have two equations{adx+bdy+cdz=0a′dx+b′dy+c′dz=0then we can draw two local planes at each point, and their intersection is generically a line, allowing us to uniquely solve for the curve starting at any point. In other words, with two 1-forms, we can foliate the domain into curves.

If we have only one equation adx+bdy+cdz=0, then we might be able to foliate R3 into surfaces, in which case, we can be sure that a curve starting at a certain surface must be restricted to wander within that surface. If not, then a curve starting at any point might end up at any other point in R3.

One can imagine starting with a cloud of little planes, and quilting them together to form a full surface. The main danger is that, if we quilt the little planes two at a time, we might go on a cycle and return to where we began, but shifted by a small amount. If this happens, then we would not get a 2-dimensional surface, but a 3-dimensional blob. An example is shown in the diagram on the right.

If the one-form is integrable, then loops exactly close upon themselves, and each surface would be 2-dimensional. Frobenius' theorem states that this happens precisely when ω∧dω=0 over all of the domain, where ω:=adx+bdy+cdz. The notation is defined in the article on one-forms.

During his development of axiomatic thermodynamics, Carathéodory proved that if ω is an integrable one-form on an open subset of Rn, then ω=fdg for some scalar functions f,g on the subset. This is usually called Carathéodory's theorem in axiomatic thermodynamics. One can prove this intuitively by first constructing the little planes according to ω, quilting them together into a foliation, then assigning each surface in the foliation with a scalar label. Now for each point p, define g(p) to be the scalar label of the surface containing point p.

Now, dg is a one-form that has exactly the same planes as ω. However, it has "even thickness" everywhere, while ω might have "uneven thickness". This can be fixed by a scalar scaling by f, giving ω=fdg. This is illustrated on the right.

Multiple one-forms

In its most elementary form, the theorem addresses the problem of finding a maximal set of independent solutions of a regular system of first-order linear homogeneous partial differential equations. Let

{fki:Rn→R:1≤i≤n,1≤k≤r}

be a collection of C1 functions, with r < n, and such that the matrix ( f i
k ) has rank r when evaluated at any point of Rn. Consider the following system of partial differential equations for a C2 function u : Rn → R:

(1){L1u=def∑if1i(x)∂u∂xi=f→1⋅∇u=0L2u=def∑if2i(x)∂u∂xi=f→2⋅∇u=0⋯Lru=def∑ifri(x)∂u∂xi=f→r⋅∇u=0

One seeks conditions on the existence of a collection of solutions u1, ..., un−r such that the gradients ∇u1, ..., ∇un−r are linearly independent.

The Frobenius theorem asserts that this problem admits a solution locally if, and only if, the operators Lk satisfy a certain integrability condition known as involutivity. Specifically, they must satisfy relations of the form

LiLju(x)−LjLiu(x)=∑kcijk(x)Lku(x)

for 1 ≤ i, j ≤ r, and all C2 functions u, and for some coefficients ckij(x) that are allowed to depend on x. In other words, the commutators [Li, Lj] must lie in the linear span of the Lk at every point. The involutivity condition is a generalization of the commutativity of partial derivatives. In fact, the strategy of proof of the Frobenius theorem is to form linear combinations among the operators Li so that the resulting operators do commute, and then to show that there is a coordinate system yi for which these are precisely the partial derivatives with respect to y1, ..., yr.

From analysis to geometry

Even though the system is overdetermined there are typically infinitely many solutions. For example, the system of differential equations

{∂f∂x+∂f∂y=0∂f∂y+∂f∂z=0

clearly permits multiple solutions. Nevertheless, these solutions still have enough structure that they may be completely described. The first observation is that, even if f1 and f2 are two different solutions, the level surfaces of f1 and f2 must overlap. In fact, the level surfaces for this system are all planes in R3 of the form x − y + z = C, for C a constant. The second observation is that, once the level surfaces are known, all solutions can then be given in terms of an arbitrary function. Since the value of a solution f on a level surface is constant by definition, define a function C(t) by:

f(x,y,z)=C(t) whenever x−y+z=t.

Conversely, if a function C(t) is given, then each function f given by this expression is a solution of the original equation. Thus, because of the existence of a family of level surfaces, solutions of the original equation are in a one-to-one correspondence with arbitrary functions of one variable.

Frobenius' theorem allows one to establish a similar such correspondence for the more general case of solutions of (1). Suppose that u1, ..., un−r are solutions of the problem (1) satisfying the independence condition on the gradients. Consider the level sets of (u1, ..., un−r) as functions with values in Rn−r. If v1, ..., vn−r is another such collection of solutions, one can show (using some linear algebra and the mean value theorem) that this has the same family of level sets but with a possibly different choice of constants for each set. Thus, even though the independent solutions of (1) are not unique, the equation (1) nonetheless determines a unique family of level sets. Just as in the case of the example, general solutions u of (1) are in a one-to-one correspondence with (continuously differentiable) functions on the family of level sets.

The level sets corresponding to the maximal independent solution sets of (1) are called the integral manifolds because functions on the collection of all integral manifolds correspond in some sense to constants of integration. Once one of these constants of integration is known, then the corresponding solution is also known.

Sign in to keep reading

4 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Topics in mathematics