Let $\dfrac{xdy-ydx}{x^2+y^2}$ be a 1-form defined in $\mathbb{R}^2\backslash\{0\}$. Where can I find a detailed proof that it is not exact? I would prefer a proof that doesn't use results about conservative vector fields (I know that way). I have searched Jefree Lee, Do Carmo & some others, but they all skip this part. Thanks a lot.
Classic example of a non exact form
3.4k Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail AtThere are 4 best solutions below
On
I'm not sure whether this is acceptable or not, but the simplest thing to do (since the form is closed) is to attempt to integrate it to find supposed $\phi$ such that your form $\omega$ is $\mathrm d \phi$.
One can derive a contradiction most straightforwardly by going around a circle, say $x^2+y^2=1$. We use the path $x(t)=\cos t,y(t)=\sin t$. $$\int_0^{2\pi} \omega = \int_0^{2\pi} \frac{\cos^2 t +\sin^2 t}{1}\mathrm d t = 2\pi$$
But if $\omega=\mathrm d \phi$ then the expression on the left is $\phi((1,0))-\phi((1,0))=0$, a contradiction.
In response to your complaints about this method: The definition of exact is that $\omega=\mathrm d \phi$ for some $\phi$. The only result we've used is that integrals of derivatives are given by boundary values (a very mini version of Stokes's theorem), i.e. $$\int_{\mathbf x}^{\mathbf y} \mathrm d \phi = \left[\int_{t_x}^{t_y} \frac{\mathrm d \phi}{\mathrm d t} \mathrm d t = \right]\phi({\mathbf y})-\phi({\mathbf x})$$ which I don't think is really a mysterious result. If there's something you're not happy with do just say.
On
Yes, everyone's doing the standard FTC proof we all know. Instead, let's try to integrate to find a potential function $f$. In the right half-plane you get $f(x,y) = \arctan(y/x)$. Now, to get a continuous continuation of this into the upper left half-plane, we need to use $g(x,y) = \arctan(x/y)+\pi/2$. To continue this into the lower left half-plane, we need $h(x,y) = \arctan(y/x)+\pi$, and, finally, into the lower right half-plane, we need $k(x,y)=\arctan(x,y)+3\pi/2$. So, piecing, these together, we have a continuous potential function defined on $\mathbb R^2 - \{(x,0): x>0\}$. But $f(1,0) = 0$ and $\lim_{(x,y)\to (1,0)} k(x,y) = 2\pi$, so there's no continuous potential function on $\mathbb R^2-\{(0,0)\}$.
Of course, this $2\pi$ is the same thing we got by integrating the closed $1$-form around the circle. It represents the fact that the polar angle has made one full revolution.
Now, how do I know my construction is essentially unique and that there is no cleverer way around it? Potential functions on a connected set are unique up to constants. So, up to shifting by a constant, my attempt is the only possible function.
On
You can prove this using the Green's function for the vector derivative.
There exists a Green's function $G$ for the vector derivative $\partial$:
$$\partial \cdot G = \delta \implies G(r) = \frac{r}{2\pi |r|^2}$$
The Hodge dual of this field is what you're looking for.
$$\partial \cdot G = \delta \implies \partial \wedge (Gi) = i \delta$$
All we have to do then is compute the Hodge dual $Gi$:
$$\omega = Gi = \frac{ri}{2\pi |r|^2} = \frac{x \sigma^y - y \sigma^x}{2 \pi |r|^2}$$
where $\sigma^x, \sigma^y$ are basis covectors. Thus, $\partial \wedge \omega = i\delta$, the (dual of the) Dirac delta function, and $\omega$ is therefore not exact.
If you integrate it along a circle containing the origin in its interior, you get a nonzero value (try it! put $x=\cos \theta, y = \sin \theta$). If the form were exact, the integral would vanish.
I don't know if that's what you mean by a "conservative result", but this is really the reason why this form isn't exact.