it preserves the metric, i.e., . This condition means that the inner product of two vectors remains constant when they are parallel transported. On the other hand, remember that a vector bundle connection induces (and indeed is uniquely determined by) a principal connection on the frame bundle (see this). Well, the condition means that this vector bundle connection induces a principal connection also on the orthonormal frame bundle. In addition, this condition implies antisymmetry for the connection matrix (see below).
From another point of view, given a manifold with an arbitrary metric and an arbitrary connection , we have that provides a notion of "shortest curves" (geodesics), and provides a notion of straight curve (autoparallel). The condition to ensure that they are the same is precisely (according to Schuller GR video 10.)
In a local chart we have a local chart frame, and we can express the Levi-Civita connection as a matrix of 1-forms (see here). This gives rise to the Christoffel symbols.
In a orthonormal frame: the matrix of connection 1-form
Here appears an algorithmic way to compute the connection 1-form, and the curvature, from a coframe. Basically, it uses Cartan's first structural equation and these two properties:
Is antisymmetric. The covariant derivative satisfies the Leibniz rule:
In an orthonormal frame , the metric is simple: , where is the Kronecker delta.
The connection 1-forms are defined by the covariant derivative:
We want to show that for all and .
To do this, consider the formula (1) in the orthonormal basis, setting , , , we have:
for every . Hence, we find .
We have
Since the connection is torsion-free we have
You can't use 'macro parameter character #' in math modeand we have the result. $\blacksquare$ We show two examples: **Example 1**: connection form for LC in a surface. **Example 2**: connection form for LC in R3 # Uniqueness of the metric? Two metrics can have the same Levi-Civita connection and hence the same geodesics, but differ in other properties like volumes, angles, etc. In more formal terms, this question involves projective equivalence of Riemannian metrics, a topic studied in differential geometry. Two metrics are projectively equivalent if they have the same unparametrized geodesics. There are nontrivial examples of projectively equivalent but distinct Riemannian metrics, even in dimension 2. See also the discusion here. # Old stuff (see malament) (Here we are going to use Penrose abstract index notation) Derivative operators (in the sense of particular vector bundle connection on $TM$) and Riemannian metrics give two different ways to check the constancy of a field along a curve. Given $g_{ab}$ and $\nabla$, in principle not related, and a field $\lambda^a$ we could establish that it is constant, as we know, with the expression:
\xi ^ { n } \nabla _ { n } \lambda ^ { a } = 0
\xi ^ { n } \nabla _ { n } \left( g _ { a b } \lambda ^ { a } \lambda ^ { b } \right) = 0