Remarks on the geometric structure of port-Hamiltonian systems

The isotropy condition (ii) of Definition 2.5 is evidently equivalent to (3.1). It remains to show the equivalence of the conditions (3.1) and (3.1) and the conditions (iii) and (iv) of Definition 2.5.

“\implies” Let \varphi be a classical Courant algebroid morphism. We show (3.1). Let f,g\in\Gamma(E_1). Since \varphi is a vector bundle morphism over the identity, \varphi\circ f,\varphi\circ g\in\Gamma(E_2). Put \widehat{f} := (p_1^*f,p_2^*(\varphi\circ f)) and \widehat{g} := (p_1^*g,p_2^*(\varphi\circ g)). By construction, we have \widehat{f},\widehat{g}\in\Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi). Hence, involutivity of \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi yields in view of the definition of the Courant-Dorfman bracket for E_1\times \overline{E_2} that

and hence \varphi\circ [\![f,g]\!]_1(x) = [\![\varphi\circ f,\varphi\circ g]\!]_2(x) for all x\in M. This shows that \varphi fulfils (3.1). It remains to show (3.1). Unless the rank of E_2 is zero, we have \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi\neq E_1\times E_2\vert_{\delta_M(M)}, where \delta_M:M\hookrightarrow M\times M denotes the diagonal embedding so that \delta_M(M) = \mathrm{graph}\,\mathrm{id}_M, and hence [Vyso20, Proposition 2.16] yields that \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi is compatible with the anchor \rho. In the former case, however, injectivity of \varphi (which holds by (3.1)) implies the rank of E_1 to be zero and hence \rho = 0, which is compatible which every subvector bundle supported on any submanifold. Hence [Vyso20, Lemma 4.2] implies (3.1).

“\impliedby” We show involutivity of \Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi). Let f,f'\in\Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi). Recall that p_1^*\Gamma(E_1)\oplus p_2^*\Gamma(E_2) is a generating set for \Gamma(E_1\times E_2) over \mathcal{C}^\infty(M\times M), i.e. there are \lambda_i,\lambda_j'\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M\times M), f_i,f_j'\in\Gamma(E_1) and g_i,g_j'\in\Gamma(E_2), i,j\in\left\lbrace 1,\ldots,n \right\rbrace, so that

Consider the sections

which are certainly contained in \Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi) and fulfil, by linearity of \varphi,

In view of [Vyso20, Proposition 2.12], we conclude

and therefore (by exchanging f and f', and \widehat{f} and \widehat{f}', respectively)

Then, (2.4) implies on \delta_M(M)

and hence [\![\widehat{f},\widehat{f}']\!]\in\Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi). This shows [\![f,f']\!]\in\Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi) and therefore \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi is indeed involutive. Unless \mathrm{rk}\, E_2 = 0, this implies in view of [Vyso20, Proposition 2.16] that (\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi)^{\bot\!\!\!\bot} is compatible with the anchor. If, however, \mathrm{rk}\, E_2 = 0, then \mathrm{rk}\, E_1 = 0 and hence (\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi)^{\bot\!\!\!\bot} = \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi is compatible with the then trivial anchor.

“\implies” Let \varphi be a classical Courant algebroid morphism. Let f_1,f_2 and consider \varphi-related sections g_1,g_2\in\Gamma(E_2). Then, isotropy of \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi implies

and hence (3.4) holds true. Recall that \Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi) denotes the sections of E_1\times E_2 which take on \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi_0 values in \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi. In particular, p_1^*f_i\oplus p_2^*g_i\in\Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi), i \in\left\lbrace 1,2 \right\rbrace. Since \varphi is a classical Courant algebroid morphism, \Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi) is involutive and hence

is contained in \Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi). Evaluating (Proof) on \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi_0 yields (3.4). The identity (3.4) is a consequence of [Vyso20, Proposition 2.16].

“\impliedby” Let (\varphi,\varphi_0): (E_1,M_1)\to (E_2,M_2) be a vector bundle morphism with (3.4)–(3.4). We show that \varphi is a classical Courant algebroid morphism. First, we show that \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi is isotropic. Let e,e'\in E_1 with \pi(e_1) = \pi(e_2) =: x. Then, there exist sections f_1,f_2\in\Gamma(E_1) with f_1(x) = e_1 and f_2(x) = e_2. Let g_1,g_2\in\Gamma(E_2) with f_1\sim_\varphi g_1 and f_2\sim_\varphi g_2, so that (3.4) holds. Then, we have

This shows that \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi is isotropic. A straightforward calculation yields from (3.4) that \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi is compatible with the anchor. We show that \Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi) is involutive. Let h_1,h_2\in \Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi) and define

Since h_1 and h_2 are sections of the product vector bundle E_1\times E_2, we have f_1,f_2\in\Gamma(E_1). Let g_1,g_2\in\Gamma(E_2) be \varphi-related to f_1 and f_2, respectively. Then, p_1^*f_i\oplus p_2^*g_i\in\Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi) and we have

Therefore, [Vyso20, Proposition 2.12] implies

Then (Proof) yields with (3.4) that [\![h_1,h_2]\!]\in\Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi). This shows that \Gamma(E_1\times E_2;\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi) is isotropic; and an analogous argument yields that we may replace g_1 and g_2 by any other \varphi-related sections. Finally, compatibility of \left(\mathrm{graph}\,\varphi\right)^{\bot\!\!\!\bot} with the anchor is a direct consequence of [Vyso20, Proposition 2.16].

Let f\in\Gamma(E). Define the function f_0 := \varphi\circ f\circ\varphi_0^{-1}. Since (\varphi,\varphi_0) is a vector bundle morphism and since f is a section of E, f_0 is a section of the restricted vector bundle F\vert_{\varphi_0(M)}. Since \varphi_0(M) is, by assumption, a closed regular submanifold of N a partition of unity argument implies the existence of a section g\in\Gamma(F) so that g\vert_{\varphi_0(M)} = f_0. In particular, we have

This shows that f and g are \varphi-related.

“\implies” Let (\rho',\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle',[\![\cdot,\cdot]\!] be a Courant algebroid structure on E' so that \varphi is a classical Courant algebroid morphism. In particular, \mathrm{graph}\,\varphi is isotropic with respect to the fiberwise inner product

Equivalently, we have

Let x_0\in E' so that the restriction of \langle\varphi(x_0),\cdot\rangle vanishes on \mathrm{im}\varphi\cap\pi^{-1}(\pi(\varphi(x_0))). Since \varphi is a vector bundle morphism, we have

Therefore, (Proof) yields

and thus \langle x_0,\cdot\rangle' \equiv 0. Since \langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle is nondegenerate, we conclude that x_0 = 0_{E'}(\pi'(x_0)); and since \varphi is fiberwise linear, this yields \varphi(x_0) = 0_{E}(\pi(\varphi(x_0))). This shows that \langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle is fiberwise nondegenerate on \mathrm{im}\,\varphi. Let f,g\in\Gamma(E;\varphi(E')). Since \varphi is (as classical Courant algebroid morphism) injective, the sections \widetilde{f} := \varphi^{-1}\circ f\circ \varphi_0 and \widetilde{g} := \varphi^{-1}\circ g\circ\varphi_0 are well-defined and \varphi-related to f and g, respectively. Since \varphi is, by assumption, a Courant algebroid morphism, we conclude that

and hence [\![f,g]\!]\in\Gamma(E;\varphi(E')).

“\impliedby” By assumption, \varphi_0 is an immersion onto its image \varphi_0(M'). In particular, \varphi_0 is a bijection onto its image and admits an inverse function \psi:\varphi_0(M)\to M'. From the implicit function theorem, it follows that \psi is a smooth function. Define the anchor

By assumption, \rho\circ\varphi maps into \mathcal{T}\varphi_0(M') and hence \rho' is well-defined. Since \rho is a vector bundle morphism over the identity, and \mathrm{d}\psi is a vector bundle morphism over \psi, \rho' is a vector bundle morphism over the identity. Since \langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle is a fiberwise bilinear form on E and since \varphi is a vector bundle morphism, the function

is a fiberwise bilinear form on E'. Let e\in E' so that \langle e,\cdot\rangle'\equiv 0; by construction this is equivalent to \langle\varphi(e),\cdot\rangle\vert_{\varphi(\pi'^{-1}(e))}\equiv 0. Since the restriction of \langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle to \mathrm{im}\varphi is nondegenerate by assumption, we conclude that \varphi(e) = 0; since \varphi is injective, we have e = 0_{E'}(\pi'(e)). This shows that \langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle' is a fiberwise nondegenerate inner product on E'. Lastly, we construct a Dorfman bracket on E'. Let f,g\in\Gamma(E'). In view of Lemma 3.6, there are sections \widehat{f},\widehat{g}\in\Gamma(E) so that \varphi\circ f = \widehat{f}\circ\varphi_0, and \varphi\circ g = \widehat{g}\circ\varphi_0. Define

We show that [\![f,g]\!]' is well-defined. Let \widetilde{f},\widetilde{g}\in\Gamma(E) with \varphi\circ f = \widetilde{f}\circ\varphi_0 and \varphi\circ g = \widetilde{g}\circ\varphi_0. Let x\in M'. Then, there exists an open neighbourhood U of x and e_1,\ldots,e_k\in\Gamma(E) so that (e_i\vert_U)_{i = 1}^n is a frame of the restriction E\vert_U := \pi^{-1}(U). Let f_1,\ldots,f_n\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M) and g_1,\ldots,g_n\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M) so that the restrićtions (f_i\vert_U)_{i = 1}^n and (g_i\vert_U)_{i = 1}^n are representations of (\widetilde{f}-\widehat{f})\vert_{U} and (\widetilde{g}-\widehat{g})\vert_{U} with respect to the frame (e_i\vert_U)_{i = 1}^n, respectively. By assumption, \widehat{g}\circ\varphi_0 = \widetilde{g}\circ\varphi_0 and \widehat{f} = \widetilde{f}, and thus (f_i\circ\varphi)\vert_{\psi(U)} = (g_i\circ\varphi)\vert_{\psi(U)}\equiv 0 for all i\in\underline{n}. In view of (2.4), we have, for all z\in\psi(U),

where \rho(\widetilde{f}(\varphi_0(z))(g_i)(\varphi_0(z)) = 0 since \rho(\widetilde{f}(\varphi_0(z))\in\mathcal{T}\varphi_0(M). In particular, we have [\![\widetilde{f},\widetilde{g}]\!]\circ\varphi_0 = [\![\widetilde{f},\widehat{g}]\!]\circ\varphi_0; analogously, it may be proven that [\![\widehat{f},\widetilde{g}]\!] = [\![\widehat{f},\widehat{g}]\!] and [\![\widetilde{g},\widetilde{f}-\widehat{f}]\!] = 0. By property (iii) in the definition of the Courant algebroid, we have

where D_\rho(s)\in\Gamma(E) denotes the unique section with \langle D_{\rho}(s),s'\rangle = \rho(s)(s') for all s'\in\Gamma(E). In particular, the assumption (Proof) yields that D_\rho(\langle \widetilde{f}-\widehat{f},\widetilde{g}\rangle)(\varphi_0(z))\in\varphi(E') and we have for all e'\in \pi'^{-1}(\left\lbrace z \right\rbrace),

hence D_\rho(\langle \widetilde{f}-\widehat{f},\widetilde{g}\rangle)(\varphi_0(z)) is orthogonal on \varphi(\pi'^{-1}(\left\lbrace z \right\rbrace). Since we assume that \langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle is nondegenerate on \varphi(E'), we conclude that D_\rho(\langle \widetilde{f}-\widehat{f},\widetilde{g}\rangle)(\varphi_0(z)) = 0_{E}(\varphi_0(z)). Thus, we conclude that [\![\widehat{f},\widetilde{g}]\!]\circ\varphi_0 = [\![\widetilde{f},\widetilde{g}]\!]\circ\varphi_0; analogously, we see that [\![\widehat{f},\widehat{g}]\!]\circ\varphi_0 = [\![\widetilde{f},\widehat{g}]\!]\circ\varphi_0. Therefore, we have

and [\![f,g]\!]' is indeed well-defined. It remains to show that (\rho',\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle',[\![\cdot,\cdot]\!]') is a Courant algebroid structure on E'. Let f,g,h\in\Gamma(E') with \varphi-related sections \widehat{f},\widehat{g},\widehat{h}\in\Gamma(E), i.e.

By construction of [\![\cdot,\cdot]\!], we find that [\![g,h]\!]', [\![f,g]\!]', [\![f,h]\!]' and [\![\widehat{g},\widehat{h}]\!], [\![\widehat{f},\widehat{g}]\!], [\![\widehat{f},\widehat{h}]\!] are \varphi-related, respectively. Therefore, we get

Since \varphi is injective, we conclude that

and thus (\Gamma(E'),[\![\cdot,\cdot]\!]') is a left-Loday algebra. For each x\in M', we have

This shows that (\rho',\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle',[\![\cdot,\cdot]\!]) fulfills the property (ii) in Definition 2.2. It remains to verify that (\rho',\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle',[\![\cdot,\cdot]\!]) fulfills (iii). Let \alpha\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M') and \widehat{\alpha}\in\mathcal{C}^\infty(M) so that \alpha = \widehat{\alpha}\circ\varphi_0. Equivalently, we have \widehat{\alpha}\vert_{\varphi_0(M')} = \alpha\circ\psi. Recall that D_{\rho'}(\alpha)\in\Gamma(E') is the unique solution of

for all x\in M' and k\in\Gamma(E'). Let x\in M' and k\in\Gamma(E') with \varphi-related section \widehat{k}\in\Gamma(E). Let further \ell\in\Gamma(E') be \varphi-related to D_{\rho'}(\alpha). Then, we have

From the nondegeneracy of \langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle on \mathrm{im}\,\varphi, we conclude that \ell\circ\varphi_0 = D_\rho(\widehat{\alpha})\circ\varphi_0. In particular, we have

This shows that (\rho',\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle',[\![\cdot,\cdot]\!]') is a Courant algebroid structure on E'.

The uniqueness of the Courant algebroid structure is a direct consequence of Proposition 3.4.

The bases of the morphism in Definition (4.1) are either zero sections or diffeomorphisms. Therefore, the prerequisites of Proposition 3.7 are met. Hence, there exists unique Courant-algebroid structures on \mathcal{T}M\oplus_M\mathcal{T}^*M, \mathcal{T}M\oplus_M\mathcal{T}^*M\oplus _ME\oplus_M E^* and E\oplus_M\mathcal{T}M\oplus_M\mathcal{T}^*M\oplus _ME\oplus_M E^* so that the arrows of the diagram in Definition 4.1 are Courant algebroid morphisms.