I know one can formulate partial differential equations in terms of exterior derivatives, etc but I have been wondering for a while now how one might be able to use that formalism to extrapolate information about the solutions.
2026-04-12 09:31:55.1775986315
Can exterior calculus be used to solve differential equations?
495 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in ORDINARY-DIFFERENTIAL-EQUATIONS
- The Runge-Kutta method for a system of equations
- Analytical solution of a nonlinear ordinary differential equation
- Stability of system of ordinary nonlinear differential equations
- Maximal interval of existence of the IVP
- Power series solution of $y''+e^xy' - y=0$
- Change of variables in a differential equation
- Dimension of solution space of homogeneous differential equation, proof
- Solve the initial value problem $x^2y'+y(x-y)=0$
- Stability of system of parameters $\kappa, \lambda$ when there is a zero eigenvalue
- Derive an equation with Faraday's law
Related Questions in DIFFERENTIAL-FORMS
- Using the calculus of one forms prove this identity
- Relation between Fubini-Study metric and curvature
- Integration of one-form
- Time derivative of a pullback of a time-dependent 2-form
- Elliptic Curve and Differential Form Determine Weierstrass Equation
- I want the pullback of a non-closed 1-form to be closed. Is that possible?
- How to find 1-form for Stokes' Theorem?
- Verify the statement about external derivative.
- Understanding time-dependent forms
- form value on a vector field
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
I'll write a very quick motivation for de Rham cohomology.
Say we have some manifold $M$ (or open set $M \subset \mathbb R^n$ if you will) and that we want to solve the differential equation $$ du = v $$ on $M$, where $v$ is a $k$-form (so $k = 1$ has us searching for a function $u$ that solves the equation, higher $k$ have us searching for $(k-1)$-forms).
If this equation has a solution, then we necessarily have $$ dv = d^2 u = 0. $$ This gives a necessary condition for our problem to have a solution, but not a sufficient one, since there may be "obstructions" to finding a solution of $du = v$ even if $dv = 0$.
To get some sense of these obstructions, we form a quotient vector space $$ H^k(M,\mathbb R) := \{ \text{$k$-forms v} \mid dv = 0 \} / \{du \mid \text{$u$ is a $(k-1)$-form}\}. $$ This is the $k$-th de Rham cohomology group of the manifold $M$. If our problem $du = v$ is well-posed, that is if $d v = 0$ so it has a chance of having a solution, then $v$ defines an element $[v]$ in $H^k(M,\mathbb R)$. Our problem also has a solution if and only if $[v] = 0$ in this space. A remarkable and nontrivial fact is that these cohomology groups are finite-dimensional if the space $M$ is compact.
This may not seem very useful, since it is in general quite difficult to show that some specific $v$ defines a zero cohomology class on $M$. What makes this formalism useful is that in many cases one can use geometric properties of the manifold $M$ to prove that some or all of its nontrivial cohomology groups (those with $k > 0$) are zero, and thus that the differential equation that interests us has a solution.
These geometric properties come in two large categories; topological and differential-geometric. The first includes facts like that if $M$ is contractible, then all its cohomology groups are zero. The second is known as Hodge theory and rests on the Hodge isomorphism theorem, which says that if you pick a Riemannian metric on $M$, then the space of harmonic $k$-forms is isomorphic to $H^k(M,\mathbb R)$ (if $M$ is compact). Both can give valuable information about the cohomology groups and the geometry of $M$, and the second has extremely important connections to algebraic geometry.
In short, passing to cohomology replaces the problem of solving one particular differential equation with the problem of solving all differential equations on a manifold, which has connections to the geometry of the underlying space. Knowledge of the geometry can then perhaps help us to solve our original problem.
Since you asked for an explicit example of these calculations, we can consider the $1$-dimensional torus $S^1 = \mathbb R / \mathbb Z$. Actually I'll cheat and not do any explicit calculations at all, but leave them to you to figure out. The torus admits a flat Riemannian metric $g$, induced by the standard Euclidean metric on $\mathbb R$. Hodge theory will tell you that $$ H^1(S^1, \mathbb R) \cong \mathbb R, $$ and that and explicit isomorphism between the two is $\mathbb R \to H^1(S^1,\mathbb R)$, $\lambda \mapsto \lambda dx$, where $dx$ is the constant $1$-form on $\mathbb R$ (see Hodge isomorphism theorem).
Now let $dV$ be the volume form of the Riemannian metric $g$, which we'll suppose to be of volume 1. I claim that we cannot solve the differential equation $$ df = dV $$ on $S^1$. If we could, then Stokes' theorem would give us $$ \int_{S^1} dV = \int_{S^1} df = \int_{\partial S^1} f = 0 $$ because $S^1$ has no boundary. But by hypothesis $$ \int_{S^1} dV = \mathrm{Vol}(S^1,g) = 1, $$ which gives a contradiction.