Abstract
We introduce q-deformed connections on the quantum 2-sphere and 3-sphere, satisfying a twisted Leibniz rule in analogy with q-deformed derivations. We show that such connections always exist on projective modules. Furthermore, a condition for metric compatibility is introduced, and an explicit formula is given, parametrizing all metric connections on a free module. On the quantum 3-sphere, a q-deformed torsion freeness condition is introduced and we derive explicit expressions for the Christoffel symbols of a Levi–Civita connection for a general class of metrics. We also give metric connections on a class of projective modules over the quantum 2-sphere. Finally, we outline a generalization to any Hopf algebra with a (left) covariant calculus and associated quantum tangent space.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
In recent years, a lot of progress has been made in understanding Riemannian aspects of noncommutative geometry. These are not only mathematically interesting, but also important in physics where noncommutative geometry is expected to play a key role, notably in a theory of quantum gravity. In Riemannian geometry the Levi–Civita connection and its curvature have a central role, and it turns out that there are several different ways of approaching these objects in the noncommutative setting (see e.g. [2, 4, 5, 7,8,9,10, 12, 14, 18, 21]).
From an algebraic perspective, the set of vector fields and the set of differential forms are (finitely generated projective) modules over the algebra of functions, a viewpoint which is also adopted in noncommutative geometry. However, considering vector fields as derivations does not immediately carry over to noncommutative geometry, since the set of derivations of a (noncommutative) algebra is in general not a module over the algebra but only a module over the center of the algebra. Therefore, one is led naturally to focus on differential forms and define a connection on a general module as taking values in the tensor product of the module with the module of differential forms. More precisely, let M be a (right) \(\mathcal {A}\)-module and let \(\Omega ^1(\mathcal {A})\) denote a module of differential forms together with a differential \(d:\mathcal {A}\rightarrow \Omega ^1(\mathcal {A})\). A connection on M is a linear map \(\nabla :M\rightarrow M\otimes \Omega ^1(\mathcal {A})\) satisfying a version of Leibniz rule
for \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) and \(m\in M\). In differential geometry, for a vector field X one obtains a covariant derivative \(\nabla _X:M\rightarrow M\), by pairing differential forms with X (as differential forms are dual to vector fields). In a noncommutative version of the above, there is in general no canonical way of obtaining a “covariant derivative” \(\nabla _X:M\rightarrow M\). In a derivation based approach to noncommutative geometry (see e.g. [13, 14]), one puts emphasis on the choice of a Lie algebra \(\mathfrak {g}\) of derivations of the algebra \(\mathcal {A}\). Given a (right) \(\mathcal {A}\)-module M one defines a connection as a map \(\nabla :\mathfrak {g}\times M\rightarrow M\), usually writing \(\nabla (\partial ,m) = \nabla _\partial m\) for \(\partial \in \mathfrak {g}\) and \(m\in M\), satisfying
for \(f\in \mathcal {A}\) and \(m\in M\), in parallel with (1.1). We stress that in general \(\mathfrak {g}\) is not a module over \(\mathcal {A}\) when \(\mathcal {A}\) is not commutative. Thus we do not require \(\mathcal {A}\)-linearity in the argument \(\partial \) of \(\nabla _{\partial }\). This is in contrast with the braided geometry framework [4, 6] where for a braided commutative algebra the braided Lie algebra of its braided derivations is a module over the algebra and such a \(\mathcal {A}\)-linearity on the connection can be stated. Braided commutativity of a Hopf algebra is a feature of its being cotriangular (and not just coquasitriangular).
For quantum groups, it turns out that natural analogues of vector fields are not quite derivations, but rather maps satisfying a twisted Leibniz rule. For instance, as we shall see, for the quantum 3-sphere \(S^{3}_{q}\) one defines maps \(X_a:S^{3}_{q}\rightarrow S^{3}_{q}\) satisfying
for \(f,g\in S^{3}_{q}\), and \(\sigma _a:S^{3}_{q}\rightarrow S^{3}_{q}\), for \(a=1,2,3\), are algebra morphisms. In this note we explore the possibility of introducing a corresponding q-affine connection on a (right) \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module M. Motivated by (1.2) we introduce a covariant derivative \(\nabla _{X_a}:M\rightarrow M\) such that
for \(f\in S^{3}_{q}\) and \(m\in M\). In the following, we make these ideas precise and prove that there exist q-affine connections on projective modules. Again, we will not ask for \(S^{3}_{q}\)-linearity in the argument X of \(\nabla _X\). Furthermore, we introduce a condition for metric compatibility, and in the particular case of a left covariant calculus over \(S^{3}_{q}\), we investigate a derivation based definition of torsion. Then we explicitly construct a Levi–Civita connection, that is a torsion free and metric compatible connection. Moreover, we construct metric connections on a class of projective modules over the quantum 2-sphere. We mention that the Riemannian geometry of quantum spheres was studied [7] from the point of view of a bimodule connection on differential forms satisfying (1.1) as well as a right Leibniz rule twisted by a braiding map. In a final section we sketch a way to generalise (some of) the constructions of the present paper to any Hopf algebra with a (left) covariant differential calculus and corresponding quantum tangent space of twisted derivations.
The present paper is an alternative and extended version of the paper [1] where the left module structure of differential forms was used to construct q-affine connections, rather than the right module structure considered in the following.
2 The Quantum 3-Sphere
In this section we recall a few basic properties of the quantum 3-sphere [22]. The algebra \(S^{3}_{q}\) is a unital \(*\)-algebra generated by \(a,a^*,c,c^*\) fulfilling
for a real parameter q. The identification of \(S^{3}_{q}\) with the quantum group \(SU_q(2)\) is via the Hopf algebra structure given by
with antipode and counit
We also need the dual quantum enveloping algebra \(\mathcal {U}_q(\text {su}(2))\), which is the \(*\)-algebra with generators \(E,F,K,K^{-1}\) satisfying
The corresponding Hopf algebra structure is given by the coproduct,
together with antipode and counit
We recall that there is a unique bilinear pairing between \(\mathcal {U}_q(\text {su}(2))\) and \(S^{3}_{q}\) given by
with the remaining pairings being zero.
The algebra \(S^{3}_{q}\) is a noncommutative algebra which is not quasi-commutative. This stems from the Hopf algebra \(SU_q(2)\) being coquasitriangular and not simply cotriangular. Dually, the Hopf algebra \(\mathcal {U}_q(\text {su}(2))\) is quasitriangular and not triangular [16, §8, §10].
The pairing above induces a \(\mathcal {U}_q(\text {su}(2))\)-bimodule structure (left and right actions) on \(S^{3}_{q}\):
for \(h\in \mathcal {U}_q(\text {su}(2))\) and \(f\in S^{3}_{q}\), with Sweedler’s notation \(\Delta (f)=f_{(1)}\otimes f_{(2)}\) (and implicit sum). The \(*\)-structure on \(\mathcal {U}_q(\text {su}(2))\), denoted here by \(\dag \) (to distinguish it from the \(*\)-structure of the algebra), is given by \((K^{\pm 1})^\dag = K^{\pm 1}\) and \(E^\dag = F\). The action of \(\mathcal {U}_q(\text {su}(2))\) is compatible with the \(*\)-algebra structures in the following sense
Let us for convenience list the left and right actions of the generators:
and
where \([n] = (q^n-q^{-n})/(q-q^{-1})\).
2.1 The Covariant Calculus and the Quantum Tangent Space
It is well known [22] that there is a left covariant (first order) differential calculus on \(S^{3}_{q}\), denoted by \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\), generated as a left \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module by
In fact, \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) is a free left module with a basis given by \(\{\omega _{+},\omega _{-},\omega _{z}\}\). Moreover, \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) is a bimodule with respect to the relations
and, furthermore, \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) is a \(*\)-bimodule with
satisfying \((f\omega g)^\dagger =g^*\omega ^\dag f^*\) for \(f,g\in S^{3}_{q}\) and \(\omega \in \Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\).
The differential \(d:S^{3}_{q}\rightarrow \Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) is computed using a dual basis \(\{X_{+},X_{-},X_{z}\}\) of twisted derivations (the corresponding quantum tangent space [16, §14.1.2]),
with explicitly,
Their twisted derivation properties are easily found. For \(f,g\in S^{3}_{q}\), and \(a=\pm , z\) one has,
(and similarly for the right action), with
Furthermore, these maps satisfy the following q-deformed commutation relations
As for the \(*\)-structures, one checks that \(X_{\pm }^\dagger = X_{\mp }\) and \(K^\dagger =K\). From this, using (2.2) one computes, for \(f \in S^{3}_{q}\), that
In the classical limit of \(q=1\), the above reduces to the Lie algebra of \(\text {su}(2)\) and the calculus is the usual calculus on the sphere \(S^3\) given in terms of left invariant one-forms.
3 q-Affine Connections
In differential geometry, a connection extends the action of derivatives to vector fields, and for \(S^{3}_{q}\) a natural set of (q-deformed) derivations is given by \(\{X_{+},X_{-},X_{z}\}\). In this section, we will introduce a framework extending the action of \(X_a\) to a connection on \(S^{3}_{q}\)-modules. Let us first define the set of q-deformed derivations we shall be interested in.
Definition 3.1
The quantum tangent space of \(S^{3}_{q}\) is defined as
that is the complex vector space generated by \(X_a\) for \(a=\pm , z\).
We point out that \(TS^{3}_{q}\) is not a module over \(S^{3}_{q}\).
Considering \(TS^{3}_{q}\) to be the analogue of a (complexified) tangent space of \(S^{3}_{q}\), we would like to introduce a covariant derivative \(\nabla _X\) on a (right) \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module M, for \(X\in TS^{3}_{q}\). Since the basis elements of \(TS^{3}_{q}\) act as q-deformed derivations, the connection should obey an analogous q-deformed Leibniz rule. The motivating example is when \(M=S^{3}_{q}\) and the action of \(TS^{3}_{q}\) is simply \(\nabla _{X}f = X< (f) = X(f)\) for \(X\in TS^{3}_{q}\) and \(f\in S^{3}_{q}\). (To lighten notation, in the following we shall drop the symbol < for the left action when there is no risk of ambiguities.)
In fact, let us be slightly more general and consider the action on a free module of rank n. Thus, we let M be a free right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module with basis \(\{e_i\}_{i=1}^n\), and write an arbitrary element \(m\in M\) as \(m=e_im^i\) for \(m^i\in S^{3}_{q}\), implicitly assuming a summation over i from 1 to n.
Let us define \(\nabla ^0:TS^{3}_{q}\times M\rightarrow M\) by setting
for \(m=e_im^i\in M\) (and extending it linearly to all of \(TS^{3}_{q}\)). Now, it is easy to check that
for \(f\in S^{3}_{q}\) and \(m\in M\). Let us generalize these concepts to arbitrary right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-modules.
Definition 3.2
Let M be a right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module. A right q-affine connection on M is a map \(\nabla :TS^{3}_{q}\times M\rightarrow M \) such that
-
(1)
\(\nabla _{X}(\lambda _1m_1+\lambda _2m_2) = \lambda _1 \nabla _X m_1 + \lambda _2\nabla _Xm_2\),
-
(2)
\(\nabla _{\lambda _1 X+\lambda _2Y}m = \lambda _1\nabla _Xm + \lambda _2\nabla _Ym\),
-
(3)
\(\nabla _{X_a}(mf) = (\nabla _{X_a}m)\sigma _a(f)+mX_a(f)\), \(a=\pm , z\),
for \(m,m_1,m_2\in M\), \(f\in S^{3}_{q}\), \(X\in TS^{3}_{q}\) and \(\lambda _1,\lambda _2\in \mathbb {C}\).
Remark 3.3
As mentioned previously, the space \(TS^{3}_{q}\) is not a module over \(S^{3}_{q}\). Thus we are not requiring \(S^{3}_{q}\)-linearity ‘in the first argument’, that is we are not requiring the connection to satisfy the relation \(\nabla _{X f} \, m = (\nabla _X \, m) f)\) for \(f\in S^{3}_{q}\). This is in contrast with what happens in braided geometry [4, 6] where for a braided commutative algebra the braided Lie algebra of its braided derivations is a module over the algebra and such a relation on the connection can be stated. Braided commutativity of a Hopf algebra is a feature of its being cotriangular.
Definition 3.4
A Hermitian form on a right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module M is a map \(h:M\times M\rightarrow S^{3}_{q}\) such that
for \(f\in S^{3}_{q}\) and \(m_1,m_2,m_3\in M\). Moreover, h is said to be invertible if the induced map \(\hat{h}:M\rightarrow M^*\), defined by \(\hat{h}(m_1)(m_2)=h(m_1,m_2)\), is bijective.
On a free module with basis \(\{e_i\}_{i=1}^n\), a Hermitian form is given by \(h_{ij}=h_{ji}^*\in S^{3}_{q}\) by setting
for \(m_1=e_im_1^i\in (S^{3}_{q})^n\) and \(m_2=e_im_2^i\in (S^{3}_{q})^n\). Moreover, if h is invertible, then there exist \(h^{ij}\in S^{3}_{q}\) such that \(h^{ij}h_{jk}=\delta ^i_k\mathbb {1}\). In case the module is projective (but not necessarily free) and generated by \(\{e_i\}_{i=1}^n\), one can find \(h^{ij}\in S^{3}_{q}\) such that \(e_ih^{ij}h_{jk}=e_k\) if the Hermitian form is invertible (see e.g. [3]).
Next, we will introduce a notion of compatibility between a q-affine connection and a Hermitian form. To motivate Definition 3.5, let us study the case of free modules. For the q-affine connection \(\nabla ^0\) in (3.1), one finds that
For the connection \(\nabla ^0\), a natural requirement for the compatibility with h is to demand that \(X_{+}(h_{ij})=0\). Then, from (2.7) \(X_{+}(f^*)=-(K^{-2}X_{-}(f))^*= -K^{2}(X_{-}(f))^*\), and one has,
Corresponding formulas are easily worked out for \(\nabla ^0_{X_{-}},\nabla ^0_{X_{z}}\), and we shall take this as a motivation for the following definition.
Definition 3.5
A q-affine connection \(\nabla \) on a right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module M is compatible with the Hermitian form \(h:M\times M\rightarrow S^{3}_{q}\) if
for \(m_1,m_2\in M\).
Note that (3.2) and (3.3) are equivalent since
In the case of a q-affine connection on a free module, one can derive a convenient parametrization of all connections that are compatible with a given Hermitian form. To this end, let us introduce some notation. Let \((S^{3}_{q})^n\) be a free right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module with basis \(\{e_i\}_{i=1}^n\). A q-affine connection \(\nabla \) on \((S^{3}_{q})^n\) can be determined by specifying the Christoffel symbols
with \(\Gamma _{ai}^j\in S^{3}_{q}\) for \(a=\pm , z\) and \(i,j=1,\ldots ,n\), and setting
The next result gives the form of the Christoffel symbols for a q-affine connection compatible with an invertible Hermitian form on a free module.
Proposition 3.6
Let \((S^{3}_{q})^n\) be a free right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module with a basis \(\{e_i\}_{i=1}^n\) and let \(\nabla \) be a q-affine connection on \((S^{3}_{q})^n\) given by the Christoffel symbols \(\nabla _ae_i = e_j\Gamma _{ai}^j\). Furthermore, assume that h is an invertible Hermitian form on \((S^{3}_{q})^n\) and set \(h_{ij}=h(e_i,e_j)\). Then \(\nabla \) is compatible with h if and only if there exist \(\gamma _{ij},\rho _{ij}\in S^{3}_{q}\) such that \(\rho _{ij}^*=\rho _{ji}\) and
Proof
Let us start by showing that if (3.2)–(3.4) in Definition 3.5 hold for a set of generators of the module, then the equations hold for all elements of the module. Thus, for \(m_1=e_im_1^i\) and \(m_2=e_jm_2^j\), one computes
and using that \(\sigma _{+}=\sigma _{-}=K^2\), \(K(f)^*=K^{-1}(f^*)\) and \(X_{-}(f)^*=-K^{-2}X_{+}(f^*)\) one may rewrite the above expression as
Now, assuming that (3.2) holds for \(m_1=e_i\) and \(m_2=e_j\), i.e.
one obtains
by using that \(fX_{+}(g)+X_{+}(f)\sigma _{+}(g)=X_{+}(fg)\). An analogous computation corresponding to (3.4) shows that one indeed only needs to check (3.2)–(3.4) for a set of generators.
It is then straight forward to check that the q-affine connection \(\nabla \), defined by
with \(\Gamma ^j_{+i},\Gamma ^j_{-i},\Gamma ^j_{zi}\) given by (3.5)–(3.7) defines a connection compatible with h. For instance,
Conversely, assume that the connection \(\nabla \) is compatible with h, and write \(\nabla _{X_a}e_i=e_j\Gamma ^j_{ai}\). From the compatibility condition (3.2) one finds that the Christoffel symbols satisfy
with \(\Gamma _{a,ij}=h_{ik}\Gamma ^k_{aj}\), which can be written as
Defining
it follows immediately that \(\Gamma _{-,ij} = \tfrac{1}{2}X_{-}(h_{ij}) + K(\gamma _{ji}^*)\), and (3.8) implies that
giving (3.5) and (3.6) via \(\Gamma ^i_{aj}=h^{ik}\Gamma _{a,kj}\). Similarly, (3.4) implies that
and defining
it follows immediately that \(\Gamma _{z,ij} = \tfrac{1}{2}X_{z}(h_{ij})+K^2(\rho _{ij})\), and (3.9) implies that \(\rho _{ij}=\rho _{ji}^*\). \(\square \)
Thus the previous proposition gives the general class of q-affine connections which are compatible with an invertible Hermitian form on a free right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module. Later on in Sect. 4, on the right free \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) we shall select a subclass of these that are also torsion free.
3.1 q-Affine Connections on Projective Modules
As expected, one can construct q-affine connections on projective modules. More precisely, one proves the following result.
Proposition 3.7
Let M be a right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module and let \(\nabla \) be a q-affine connection on M. Given a projection on M, i.e. an endomorphism \(p:M\rightarrow M\) such that \(p^2=p,\) then \(p\circ \nabla \) is a q-affine connection on the right \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module p(M).
Proof
Since \(\nabla \) is a q-affine connection and p is an endomorphism, it is immediate that \(\widetilde{\nabla }=p\circ \nabla \) satisfies properties (3.2) and (3.2) in Definition 3.2. Moreover, for \(m\in p(M)\)
since \(p(m)=m\) when \(m\in p(M)\). We conclude that \(\widetilde{\nabla }\) is a q-affine connection on p(M). \(\square \)
Since we have shown in the previous section that q-affine connections exist on free modules, Proposition 3.7 implies that every projective \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module can be equipped with a q-affine connection. Moreover, let \(\nabla \) and \(\widetilde{\nabla }\) be q-affine connections on a \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module M and define
Then \(\alpha :TS^{3}_{q}\times M\rightarrow M\) satisfies
for \(m_1,m_2\in M\), \(X,Y\in TS^{3}_{q}\), \(f,g\in S^{3}_{q}\) and \(\lambda ,\mu \in \mathbb {C}\). Conversely, every q-affine connection on a projective module M can be written as
where \(\nabla ^0\) is the connection defined in (3.1) and \(\alpha :TS^{3}_{q}\times M\rightarrow M\) is an arbitrary map satisfying (3.10) and (3.11). Next, let us show that a connection on a projective module is compatible with the restricted metric if the projection is orthogonal.
Proposition 3.8
Let \(\nabla \) be a q-affine connection on the \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module M and assume furthermore that \(\nabla \) is compatible with a Hermitian form h on M. If \(p:M\rightarrow M\) is an orthogonal projection, i.e. p is a projection such that, for all \(m_1,m_2\in M,\)
then \(\widetilde{\nabla }=p\circ \nabla \) is a q-affine connection on p(M) that is compatible with h restricted to p(M).
Proof
First of all, it follows from Proposition 3.7 that \(\widetilde{\nabla }=p\circ \nabla \) is a q-affine connection on p(M). Since p is an orthogonal projection, one finds that for \(m_1,m_2\in p(M)\)
by using that \(\nabla \) is compatible with h. A similar computation shows that
from which we conclude that \(\widetilde{\nabla }\) is compatible with h restricted to p(M). \(\square \)
4 A q-Affine Levi–Civita Connection on \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\)
In this section we shall construct a q-affine connection on \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\), compatible with an invertible Hermitian form h and satisfying a certain torsion freeness condition. The module \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) is a free \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module of rank 3 with basis \(\omega _{+},\omega _{-},\omega _{z}\) which implies that the results of Proposition 3.6 may be used. Although \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) has a bimodule structure, we shall only consider the right module structure of \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) in what follows. In the case of a q-affine connection on \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\), there is a natural definition of torsion freeness, suggested by the relations (2.4)–(2.6).
We have already mentioned that those relations reduce to the Lie algebra of \(\text {su}(2)\) in the classical limit of \(q=1\). These relations are reflected in the notion of the torsion T. For instance one would have \(T(X_-,X_+):=\nabla _{-}X_{+}- \nabla _{+}X_{-}- [X_{-}, X_{+}]\) and its vanishing is just the condition \(\nabla _{-}X_{+}- \nabla _{+}X_{-}= [X_{-}, X_{+}] = X_{z}\); for dual forms this translates into \(\nabla _{-}\omega _{+}- \nabla _{+}\omega _{-}= \omega _{z}\). There are similar expressions the other two cases. Given the duality between the derivations \(X_a\) and the basis forms \(\omega _a\), for \(a=\pm , z\), we propose the following definition for a torsion freeness condition on the connection.
Definition 4.1
A q-affine connection \(\nabla \) on \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) is torsion free if
In the following, we will construct a torsion free q-affine connection on \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) that is compatible with a Hermitian form. We call a connection satisfying these conditions a q-affine Levi–Civita connection. As it turns out, for such connections to exist, the Hermitian form needs to satisfy a compatibility condition.
Deriving a family of metric and torsion free connections under some conditions undermines in general the classical uniqueness result for such a (Levi–Civita) connection. This seems to be a common feature of the study of linear connections in the framework of truly non commutative algebras (and not just braided-commutative). It is however interesting to see when and why metric and torsion free connections are unique or not. A natural question would then be under which additional ‘natural’ conditions is it possible to single out a canonical connection. This problem will be addressed elsewhere.
Proposition 4.2
Let h be an invertible Hermitian form on the (right) \(S^{3}_{q}\)-module \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) and write \(h_{ab}=h(\omega _a,\omega _b)\). A q-affine Levi–Civita connection on \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) exists if and only if
Proof
Assume that h is an invertible Hermitian form on \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) and write \(h_{ab}=h(\omega _a,\omega _b)\) with inverse \(h^{ab}\). Furthermore, we write \(\nabla _a=\nabla _{X_a}\) and
for \(a,b=\pm , z\). In terms of \(\Gamma _{a,bc}=h_{bp}\Gamma ^p_{ac}\) the torsion free equations (4.1)–(4.3) become
Since \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) is a free (right) module, one can apply the results of Proposition 3.6 to obtain
for “parameters” \((\gamma _{ab}, \rho _{ab}=\rho _{ba}^*)\) in \(S^{3}_{q}\), giving all q-affine connections compatible with h.
Inserting the above expressions into (4.5)–(4.7) gives
Note that the right hand sides \(A_a\), \(B_a\) and \(C_a\) only depend on the metric components \(h_{ab}\).
The above nine equations can be grouped into three independent sets:
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
where for notational convenience we denoted \(\tilde{\rho }_{ab}=K(\rho _{ab})\).
The equations in Group 1 can be solved as
and the equations in Group 2 can be solved as
Note that the condition \(\rho _{ab}^*=\rho _{ba}\) will not pose a problem here, since neither \(\rho _{-z}\) nor \(\rho _{+z}\) appear in any other equation, and may simply be defined as \(\rho _{-z}=\rho _{z-}^*\) and \(\rho _{+z}=\rho _{z+}^*\).
For the equations in Group 3, the fact that we require \(\rho _{++}^*=\rho _{++}\) and \(\rho _{--}=\rho _{--}^*\) gives a non-trivial condition for solutions to exist. From (G3.2) and (G3.3) one obtains
and inserted into (G3.1) this gives
A necessary (and sufficient) condition for solutions to exist, is that the right hand side of the above equation is Hermitian. From
one obtains
by using that \(X_{z}=(1-K^4)/(1-q^{-2})\).
Since \(\rho _{--}\) and \(h_{zz}\), as well as \(K^2(h_{--})+K^{-2}(h_{--})\) and \(K^2(h_{++})+K^{-2}(h_{++})\), are Hermitian, the non-Hermitian terms of (4.16), which we denote by S, become
Thus, a necessary and sufficient condition for \(\rho _{++}\) to be Hermitian is that
By using that \(X_z=(1-K^4) (1-q^{-2})^{-1}\), the above condition can be written as
which is equivalent to (4.4). Hence, assuming the above relation to hold true, a solution to the torsion free equations, which is also compatible with h, is given by (4.8)–(4.16). The free parameters in this solution are \(\gamma _{+-}, \, \gamma _{-+}, \, \gamma _{zz}, \, \rho _{+-}\) and \(\rho _{--}^*=\rho _{--}, \, \rho _{++}^*=\rho _{++}\). \(\square \)
Although the general q-affine Levi–Civita connection on \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) may be written down, the expressions are rather lengthy and not particularly illuminating. However, let us explicitly write down a Levi–Civita connection in the particular case of a diagonal metric of the form
with h and \(h_z\) invertible elements of \(S^{3}_{q}\); note that this choice clearly satisfies (4.4) in Proposition 4.2. Using the solution given by (4.8)–(4.16) in the proof of Proposition 4.4 one finds
with
and
Furthermore, setting \(\gamma _{+-}=\rho _{-+}=\gamma _{zz}= \rho _{--}=0\) one obtains
giving a q-affine Levi–Civita connection on \(\Omega ^1(S^{3}_{q})\) with respect to the Hermitian form h.
5 The Quantum 2-Sphere
The noncommutative (standard) Podleś sphere \(S^2_q\) [20] can be considered as a subalgebra of \(S^{3}_{q}\) by identifying the generators \(B_0,B_+,B_-\) of \(S^{2}_{q}\) as
satisfying then the relations
These elements generate the fix-point algebra of the right U(1)-action
for \(z\in U(1)\) and \(a\in S^{3}_{q}\), related to the U(1)-Hopf-fibration \(S^{2}_{q}\hookrightarrow S^{3}_{q}\). Equivalently, the sphere \(S^{2}_{q}\) is the invariant subalgebra of \(S^{3}_{q}\) for the left action of K: \(S^{2}_{q}= \{f \in S^{3}_{q}, \, K \triangleright f = f \}\). Then, the left action of the \(X_a\) does not preserve the algebra \(S^{2}_{q}\) (since their left action does not commute with that of K): one readily computes,
Note, however, that the right action of \(X_a\) leaves \(S^{2}_{q}\) invariant; i.e. \(f\triangleleft X_a\in S^{2}_{q}\) for \(f\in S^{2}_{q}\) and \(a=\pm ,z\). This is shown explicitly in Eq. (A.1) in the “Appendix”.
5.1 A Left Covariant Calculus
Since the element \(X_{z}\) acts trivially (on the left) on \(S^{2}_{q}\), the differential (2.3) when restricted to \(f\in S^{2}_{q}\) becomes
Moreover, when acting on \(S^{2}_{q}\) both \(X_{+}\) and \(X_{-}\) are usual derivations since K and then \(\sigma _z\) are the identity on \(S^{2}_{q}\). Classically, the form (5.2) of the differential that uses left invariant vector fields and forms can be seen as identifying the cotangent bundle of \(S^2\) with the direct sum of the line bundles of ‘charge’ \(\pm 2\), that is \(\Omega ^{1}(S^2) \simeq \mathcal {L}_{-2} \omega _{-} \oplus \mathcal {L}_{+2} \omega _{+}\). This identification can be used also for the quantum sphere \(S^{2}_{q}\) with the line bundles defined as in (5.4).
In particular from (5.2) one finds
which can be inverted to yield
implying that the differential in (5.2) can be expressed as
In spite of the fact that \(X_{\pm }\triangleright f \notin S^{2}_{q}\), from the commutation relations \(K X_{\pm }= q^{\mp } X_{\mp }K\) one infer that all coefficients are in \(S^{2}_{q}\). For instance: \(K \triangleleft \big ((X_{+}\triangleright f) \, a^2\big ) = \big ((K X_{+}\triangleright f) \, K \triangleleft a^2\big ) = ( q X_{+}\triangleright f) \, q^{-1} \triangleleft a^2 = (X_{+}\triangleright f) \, a^2\), and similarly for the other terms.
5.2 Connections on Projective Modules over \(S^{2}_{q}\)
The definition of q-affine connections applies equally well to the subalgebra \(S^{2}_{q}\). The right actions of \(X_{\pm },X_{z}\) preserve \(S^{2}_{q}\) [cf. (A.1) in the “Appendix”], and thus restrict to twisted derivations on \(S^{2}_{q}\). However, even classically it is not possible to find two vector fields that span the tangent space of \(S^2\) at each point. This is a consequence of the fact that the module of vector fields on \(S^2\) is not a free module and one needs at least three vector fields to generate the module of vector fields. Analogously, for the quantum 2-sphere, even though the right actions of \(X_{\pm },X_{z}\) are related, as shown in (A.2), there is no global way of writing e.g \(X_{z}\) as a \(S^{2}_{q}\)-linear combination of \(X_\pm \). Hence, for a q-affine connection \(\nabla \) on a \(S^{2}_{q}\)-module M we still need three operators, that is a map
satisfying the conditions of Definition 3.2. Moreover, even if a q-affine connection is not \(S^{2}_{q}\)-linear in its first argument, one expects a relation among the covariant derivatives, although this needs not be immediately implied by the relation (A.2) on the derivations. In this section, we construct q-affine connections on a class of projective modules over \(S^{2}_{q}\).
The quantum Peter–Weyl theorem for \(S^{3}_{q}\) results into an explicit (vector space) decomposition of the algebra \(S^{3}_{q}\), that is \(S^{3}_{q}= \oplus _{n\in \mathbb {Z}}\mathcal {L}_n\), with
for the U(1) action \(\alpha _z\) in (5.1). Equivalently, \(\mathcal {L}_n =\left\{ f \in S^{3}_{q}\, , \, K \triangleright f = q^{-\frac{n}{2}}f\right\} \). It follows that \(\mathcal {L}_0 = S^{2}_{q}\), as well as \(\mathcal {L}_n\mathcal {L}_m\subseteq \mathcal {L}_{n+m}\). Clearly, the right action of \(\mathcal {U}_q(\text {su}(2))\) leaves each \(\mathcal {L}_n\) invariant. On the other hand, for the left action one has \(X_\pm \triangleright \mathcal {L}_n \subset \mathcal {L}_{n \mp 2}\).
It is easy to see that \(\mathcal {L}_n\) is a \(S^{2}_{q}\)-bimodule. For \(f, g \in S^{2}_{q}\) and \(\psi _n\in \mathcal {L}_n\),
which says that \(\mathcal {L}_n\) is a \(S^{2}_{q}\)-bimodule. As a right (or equivalently left) module, each \(\mathcal {L}_n\) can be realised as a finitely generated projective \(S^{2}_{q}\)-module as we now briefly recall (cf. [11, 15, 17]).
For \(n\ge 0\) and \(\mu =0,1,\ldots ,n\), let \((\Psi _n)_\mu ,(\Phi _n)_\mu \in S^{3}_{q}\) be given as
with
It is straight-forward to check that
implying that
satisfy \(p_n^2=p_n\) and \(p_{-n}^2=p_{-n}\). Moreover, it is easy to see that the entries \({(p_{n})^{\mu }}_{\nu }\) and \({(p_{-n})^{\mu }}_{\nu }\in S^{2}_{q}\), which implies that one has finitely generated projective \(S^{2}_{q}\)-modules
These modules \(M_n\) are isomorphic as right \(S^{2}_{q}\)-modules to \(\mathcal {L}_n\) for each \(n\in \mathbb {Z}\).
Now, let \(\{e_\mu \}_{\mu =0}^n\) be a basis of \((S^{2}_{q})^{n+1}\). Given an invertible Hermitian form h on \((S^2_q)^{n+1}\), the proof of Proposition 3.6 (repeated verbatimly for the algebra \(S^{2}_{q}\)), gives a q-affine connection on \((S^{2}_{q})^{n+1}\) compatible with h as
for arbitrary \(a_{\mu \nu },b_{\mu \nu }\in S^{2}_{q}\) such that \(b_{\mu \nu }^*=b_{\nu \mu }\). If \(n\ge 0\) then \(\hat{e}_\mu =e_{\nu }{(p_n)^\nu _\mu }\) are generators of \(M_n=p_n(S^{2}_{q})^{n+1}\) and Proposition 3.7 applied (mutatis mutandis) to \(S^2_q\) implies that \(\nabla =p_n\circ \widetilde{\nabla }\) is a q-affine connection on \(M_n\) with
using that \({(p_n)^\mu }_{\nu }\triangleleft K=q^{\nu -\mu }{(p_n)^\mu }_{\nu }\). Moreover, if \(p_n\) is orthogonal with respect to h, then \(\nabla \) is compatible with the restriction of h to \(M_n\). A similar construction goes for \(n<0\).
6 Further Comments: Sketching a Generalization
As final section of comments we sketch a way to generalise (some of) the constructions above for any Hopf algebra with a left covariant differential calculus and corresponding quantum tangent space [23]. While referring to [16, 14.1] for details, we recall that a first order differential calculus \((\Gamma , d)\) over the Hopf algebra \((H, \Delta , S, \varepsilon )\) is called left-covariant if there is a linear map \(\Delta _\Gamma : \Gamma \rightarrow H \otimes \Gamma \) such that, for all \(f,g \in H\) it holds that
An element \(\rho \in \Gamma \) is called left-invariant if \(\Delta _\Gamma (\rho ) = 1 \otimes \rho \) and we let \({}_\mathrm{inv}\Gamma \) denote the vector space of invariant elements. There is then a corresponding quantum tangent space \(T_\Gamma \subset H^{\circ }\) (the dual Hopf algebra) with a unique bilinear form \(\left\langle \cdot , \cdot \right\rangle : T_\Gamma \times \Gamma \rightarrow \mathbb {C}\) such that
for \(g, f \in H\), and \(X\in T_\Gamma \). The vector spaces \({}_\mathrm{inv}\Gamma \) and \(T_\Gamma \) form a non-degenerate dual pair with respect to this bilinear form. Also, the pairing induces a left action as in (2.1),
for \(X\in T_\Gamma \) and \(f\in H\). Furthermore, one has dual bases \(\{X_a, \, a = 1, 2, \dots , n \}\) of \(T_\Gamma \) and \(\{\omega _a, \, a = 1, 2, \dots , n\}\) of \({}_\mathrm{inv}\Gamma \) and a family of functionals \(\{\sigma ^a_b, \, a, b = 1, 2, \dots , n \}\) such that
In the dual Hopf algebra \(H^{\circ }\) we have
With compatible \(*\)-structures, using the second expression and requiring (2.2) one computes:
By way of illustration let us consider the trivial right module \(M=H\) with Hermitian form \(h(m_1, m_2) = m_1^* m_2\). The analogue of the condition (3.2) in Definition 3.2 is read from (6.1) as
In turn, the compatibility with the Hermitian form reads:
Indeed, using (6.1) and (6.2), we compute
from which (6.4) follows.
Equations (6.3) and (6.4) can be the starting point for a theory of affine connections on a quantum group with a quantum tangent space. For a torsion freeness condition one would need (twisted) commutation relations among the elements of \(T_\Gamma \). In general these commutation relations could be involved; in particular they do not need to be quadratic as in the classical case or in the example in (2.6)–(2.4). Details should await a different time.
References
Arnlind, J., Ilwale, K., Landi, G.: On \(q\)-deformed Levi–Civita connections. arXiv:2005.02603
Arnlind, J., Wilson, M.: Riemannian curvature of the noncommutative 3-sphere. J. Noncommut. Geom. 11(2), 507–536 (2017)
Arnlind, J.: Levi–Civita connections for a class of noncommutative minimal surfaces. Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219887821501942
Aschieri, P.: Cartan structure equations and Levi–Civita connection in braided geometry. arXiv:2006.02761
Aschieri, P., Castellani, L.: Noncommutative gravity solutions. J. Geom. Phys. 60(3), 375–393 (2010)
Aschieri, P., Landi, G., Pagani, C.: Braided Hopf algebras and gauge transformations. arXiv:2203.13811
Beggs, E.J., Majid, S.: \(*\)-Compatible connections in noncommutative Riemannian geometry. J. Geom. Phys. 61(1), 95–124 (2011)
Bhowmick, J., Goswami, D., Mukhopadhyay, S.: Levi–Civita connections for a class of spectral triples. Lett. Math. Phys. 110, 835–884 (2019)
Bhowmick, J., Goswami, D., Landi, G.: On the Koszul formula in noncommutative geometry. Rev. Math. Phys. 32, 2050032 (2020)
Bhowmick, J., Goswami, D., Landi, G.: Levi–Civita connections and vector fields for noncommutative differential calculi. Int. J. Math. 31, 2050065 (2020)
Brzeziński, T., Majid, S.: Line bundles on quantum spheres. In: Particles, fields, and gravitation (Lódź, 1998). AIP Conf. Proc. 453, 3–8 (1998)
Chamseddine, A.H., Felder, G., Fröhlich, J.: Gravity in noncommutative geometry. Commun. Math. Phys. 155(1), 205–217 (1993)
Dubois-Violette, M.: Dérivations et calcul différentiel non commutatif. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris I 307(8), 403–408 (1988)
Dubois-Violette, M., Madore, J., Masson, T., Mourad, J.: On curvature in noncommutative geometry. J. Math. Phys. 37(8), 4089–4102 (1996)
Hajac, P.M., Majid, S.: Projective module description of the \(q\)-monopole. Commun. Math. Phys. 206(2), 247–264 (1999)
Klimyk, A., Schmüdgen, K.: Quantum Groups and Their Representations. Springer, Berlin (1997)
Landi, G.: Twisted sigma-model solitons on the quantum projective line. Lett. Math. Phys. 108(8), 1955–1983 (2018)
Majid, S.: Noncommutative Riemannian and spin geometry of the standard \(q\)-sphere. Commun. Math. Phys. 256(2), 255–285 (2005)
Masuda, T., Nakagami, Y., Watanabe, J.: Noncommutative differential geometry on the quantum two sphere of Podleś. I. An algebraic viewpoint. K-Theory 5(2), 151–175 (1991)
Podleś, P.: Quantum spheres. Lett. Math. Phys. 14(3), 193–202 (1987)
Rosenberg, J.: Levi–Civita’s theorem for noncommutative tori. SIGMA 9, 071 (2013)
Woronowicz, S.L.: Twisted \({\rm SU}(2)\) group. An example of a noncommutative differential calculus. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 23(1), 117–181 (1987)
Woronowicz, S.L.: Differential calculus on compact matrix pseudogroups (quantum groups). Commun. Math. Phys. 122(1), 125–170 (1989)
Acknowledgements
The paper is partially supported by INFN-Trieste. JA is supported by Grant 2017-03710 from the Swedish Research Council. Furthermore, JA would like to thank the Department of Mathematics and Geosciences, University of Trieste for hospitality. GL is supported by INFN, Iniziativa Specifica GAST, by INDAM-GNSAGA and by the INDAM-CNRS IRL-LYSM.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Linköping University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflict of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Appendix A: The Calculus on the Sphere \(S^2_q\) via the Right Action
Appendix A: The Calculus on the Sphere \(S^2_q\) via the Right Action
As we have seen in Sect. 5 the left action of the \(X_a\) does not preserve the algebra \(S^{2}_{q}\), since their left action does not commute with that of K defining the fibration. On the other hand, the right action of \(X_a\) does preserve the algebra \(S^{2}_{q}\) since the action does commute with the left one of K. Let us denote \(Y_a=X_a\) for the right action. Then, it is easy to check that
Note that when restricted to \(S^{2}_{q}\) the \(Y_a\) are not independent. A long but straightforward computation shows that they are indeed related as
for \(f\in S^{2}_{q}\). This is checked on a vector space basis for the algebra \(S^{2}_{q}\), a basis which can be taken as \(X(m) (B_0)^n\) for \(m\in \mathbb {Z}\), \(n \in \mathbb {N}\) with \(X(m) = (B_+)^m\) for \(m\ge 0\) and \(X(m) = (B_-)^{-m}\) for \(m < 0\) (cf. [19]). From the expression in (5.3) one writes the differential d on \(S^{2}_{q}\) in terms of the right acting operators \(Y_a\).
Lemma A.1
For \(f\in S^{2}_{q},\) the differential in (5.2) can be written as
where
Proof
By acting on the vector space basis \(X(m)(B_0)^n\) (as introduced previously), one explicitly checks the equality of (5.2) and (A.3) via a tedious but straightforward computation. \(\square \)
Remark A.2
When \(q=1\) the derivative (A.3) reduces to
Classically, the vector field \(X_a\) are the left invariant vector fields on \(S^3 = SU(2)\) with dual left invariant forms \(\omega _a\). Thus they do not project to vector fields on the base space \(S^2\) with commuting coordinates \((B_+, B_-, B_0)\) and relation \(B_+B_-= B_0(1-B_0)\): \(X_a \triangleright f \) is not a function on \(S^2\) even when f is. On the other hand, the vector fields \(Y_a\) are the right invariant vector fields on SU(2) and thus they project to vector fields on \(S^2\), where they are not independent any longer and are related by
which is just the relation to which (A.2) reduces when \(q=1\).
By changing coordinates \(B_0 = \tfrac{1}{2}(1-x)\) so that the radius condition for \(S^2\) is written as \(r^2 = 4 B_+B_-+ x^2\), the exterior derivative operator in (A.4) becomes
where \(\Delta = x \, \partial _x + B_+\, \partial _+ + B_-\, \partial _-\) is the Euler (dilatation) vector field. One then computes \(d r^2 = 2 ( 1 - r^2 ) ( x\, dx + 2 B_-\, dB_++ 2 B_+\, d B_-)\), which vanishes when restricting to \(S^2\): \(r^2-1=0\).
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Arnlind, J., Ilwale, K. & Landi, G. Levi–Civita Connections on Quantum Spheres. Math Phys Anal Geom 25, 19 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11040-022-09431-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11040-022-09431-8