## The Maximal Flow of a Vector Field

Given a smooth vector field we know what it means for a curve to be an integral curve of . We even know how to find them by starting at a point and solving differential equations as far out as we can. For every , let be the maximal open interval containing on which we can define the integral curve with .

Now, I say that there is a unique open set and a unique smooth map such that — the set cuts out the interval from the copy of at — and further for all . This is called the “maximal flow” of .

Since there is some integral curve through each point , we can see that . Further, it should be immediately apparent that is also a local flow. What needs to be proven is that is open, and that is smooth.

Given a , let be the collection of for which there is a neighborhood of contained in on which is differentiable. We will show that is nonempty, open, and closed in , meaning that it must be the whole interval.

Nonemptiness is obvious, since it just means that is contained in some local flow, which we showed last time. Openness also follows directly from the definition of .

As for closedness, let be any point in , the closure of . We know there exists *some* local flow with and . Now pick an close enough to so that and — this is possible since is in the closure of and is continuous. Then choose an interval around so that for each . And finally the continuity of at tells us that there is a neighborhood of so that .

Now, is defined and differentiable on , showing that . Indeed, if and , then and , so is defined. The curve is an integral curve of , and it equals at . Uniqueness tells us that is defined, and is thus differentiable at .

[...] we define a vector field by then is a flow for this vector field. Indeed, it’s a maximal flow, since it’s defined for all time at each [...]

Pingback by One-Parameter Groups « The Unapologetic Mathematician | May 31, 2011 |

[...] gives us a “derivative” of smooth functions . If is a smooth vector field it has a maximal flow which gives a one-parameter family of diffeomorphisms, which we can think of as “moving [...]

Pingback by The Lie Derivative « The Unapologetic Mathematician | June 15, 2011 |

[...] we want a characterization of -invariance in terms of the flow of . I say that is -invariant if and only if for all . That is, the flow should commute with [...]

Pingback by Invariance and Flows « The Unapologetic Mathematician | June 17, 2011 |

[...] mean? It turns out that the bracket of two vector fields measures the extent to which their flows fail to [...]

Pingback by Brackets and Flows « The Unapologetic Mathematician | June 18, 2011 |

[...] let be the flow of , and let be a small enough neighborhood of that we can define [...]

Pingback by Building Charts from Vector Fields « The Unapologetic Mathematician | June 22, 2011 |

[...] defined the Lie derivative of one vector field by another, . This worked by using the flow of to compare nearby points, and used the derivative of the flow to translate [...]

Pingback by The Lie Derivative on Forms « The Unapologetic Mathematician | July 13, 2011 |