• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

193 submissions , 152 unreviewed
4,820 questions , 2,008 unanswered
5,292 answers , 22,482 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
779 active unimported users
More ...

  2−conformal vector fields on Riemannian manifolds

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

A vector field $\zeta$ is conformal on a Riemannian manifold $(M,g)$ if $$\mathcal L_\zeta g=\rho g$$These vector fields have a well known geometrical interpretation. The flow of a conformal vector field consists of conformal transformations.  
I want to enlarge this class of conformal vector fields as follows. A vector field $\zeta$ is $2-$conformal on a Riemannian manifold $(M,g)$ if $$\mathcal L_\zeta \mathcal L_\zeta g=\rho g$$ It is clear that any conformal vector field is $2-$conformal and the converse need not be true. T. Operea, B. Unal and me  did the same think for $2-$Killing vector fields(see references blow).  

My question is:

What could be the physical and geometric interpretation of a $2-$conformal vector field?

In fact, I want to understand the left-hand side, is it a double consequent dragging of $g$ or some thing else? 

1. $2-$Killing vector fields on Riemannian manifolds (http://www.emis.de/journals/BJGA/v13n1/B13-1.htm)

2. $2-$Killing vector fields on warped product manifolds (http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0129167X15500652)

asked Jan 1, 2016 in Theoretical Physics by Sameh Shenawy (10 points) [ revision history ]
edited Jan 1, 2016 by Sameh Shenawy

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights