Here’s a quick computation of the fundamental solution to the laplacian in the constant curvature geometries.
This is well known but I always have to hunt a bit when I need them or end up re-deriving so figured I’d write it down.
(Laplacian in Constant Curvature)
If is an -dimensional constant curvature geometry, a point and is the Riemannian distance from , then the fundamental solution for the Laplacian based at is
For the volume of the unit sphere, and is equal to , or depending on if is spherical, Euclidean or hyperbolic respectively.
And here’s some specific ones in low dimensions
The fundamental solutions to the laplacian in constant curvature are proportional to the following functions, where is the geodesic distance from the chosen origin.
Two Dimensions:
Three Dimensions:
The Trick
In Euclidean, hyperbolic and spherical geometry we work in polar coordinates, where the laplacian factors additively into two components, one differentiating along the radius and the other along spheres, the level sets of constant .
Looking at these coordinate expressions we take advantage of a certain similarity - they are all the same up to a choice of , or . Thus, we can give a uniform expression abstracting these differences into a function :
This still looks a bit scary, but because everything is symmetric under rotations we might think to look for solutions sharing the same symmetry group. We’ll call such solutions radial as they depend only on . In this case things simplify drastically
(Radial Solutions)
In any of the constant curvature geometries, if is a radial solution to then is proporitional to the following integral:
If then it is constant along spheres, and so its restriction to the unit sphere satisfies . But if this term is zero, then the entire expression for the Laplacian collapses to
Cancelling the prefactor of we see
and as this derivative is identically zero, the quantity differentiated must be constant. That is, for some we have
And dividing through by produces a differential equation for , which upon integrating yields our formula
Our goal is to promote a radial solution to a fundamental solution, which means finding the correct multiplying factor . In practice, the easiest way for me to do this has been to find a function with suitably normalized derivative and then scale by the volume of the unit sphere.
(Radial to Fundamental)
If any radial solution to , then
is a fundamental solution to the laplacian, where is the sphere of radius in centered at .
Let be one of the constant curvature geometries, and be its Riemannian volume form. If is to act like the delta distribution under integration, then for any region we must have
Where is the point is based at ( in our coordinate system). On any region not containing this is trivial as our radial solution has constantly zero Laplacian everywhere it is defined. So, we only need to concern ourselves with regions containing . For specificity, we can consider the unit ball . Here we compute using the divergence theorem and set the result equal to 1 (since ):
Where is the Riemannian volume form induced on the sphere by the overall volume .
Since (and hence ) are functions of alone they are constant on the sphere , and restricting to the sphere is the same as plugging in . This allows the one term above to be pulled out of the integral, giving
This quantity is supposed to be . If it is not, we can simply divide the current definition of by it, and notice this constant multiple carries all the way through the calculation unscathed.
In fact, we can even do a little better than this since we know the functions that we are integrating. By the fundamental theorem of calculus
Thus is none other than , and we may as well incorporate this directly:
If is a constant curvature geometry, then a fundamental solution to the laplacian is given by
is a scalar multiple of which we know to be harmonic on . And, as we saw before integrating the radial derivative over the unit sphere gives
But now computing we see we have correctly arranged things:
Plugging this back into the original yields
But its even a little better than this! Because we are in the very special situation of constant curvature, we can actually compute the “volume” (ie surface area) of these spheres directly. For each let be the volume of the unit -sphere in . Then for all radii
$$\mathbb{E}^n:\hspace{1cm} \mathrm{vol}{\mathbb{S}{\mathbb{E}}(R)}=\omega{n-1} R^{n-1}=\omega_{n-1} k(r)^{n-1}\mathbb{S}^n:\hspace{1cm} \mathrm{vol}{\mathbb{S}_{\mathbb{S}}(R)}=\omega_{n-1} \sin(R)^{n-1}=\omega_{n-1} k(r)^{n-1}\mathbb{H}^n:\hspace{1cm} \mathrm{vol}{\mathbb{S}_{\mathbb{H}}(R)}=\omega_{n-1} \sinh(R)^{n-1}=\omega_{n-1} k(r)^{n-1}$$
Thus uniform across all geometries we have $\mathrm{vol}(\mathbb{S}X(1))=\omega{n-1}k(1)^{n-1}k(1)^{n-1}$ always cancel out. This gives our main theorem:
(Laplacian in Constant Curvature)
If is an -dimensional constant curvature geometry, a point and is the Riemannian distance from , then the fundamental solution for the Laplacian based at is
For the volume of the unit sphere, and is equal to , or depending on if is spherical, Euclidean or hyperbolic respectively.
Euclidean Space
Here are the explicit solutions for Euclidean spaces of low dimension, with .
(2D)
First we compute the integral
And then the normalizing factor: the “volume” of 1 dimensional sphere is just the cirumference of the unit circle, or . Thus
(3D)
We first compute the integral to find a radial solution:
And then normalize by , the surface area of the unit sphere
The same pattern continues in higher dimensions,
(n-Dimensions)
Spherical Space
Here are the explicit solutions for spherical spaces of low dimension, with .
(2D)
To find a radial solution we must compute
This is one of those annoying integrals you learn in calculus and then forget, because deriving it needs a trick. Anyway,
There are many trig identites one could use to “simplify” here: for example this is equal to (which I didn’t know until wolfram alpha told me so). For us, its nicest to simplify as
where the last equality is the tangent half angle formula.
We are in 2 dimensions so the normalizing factor is the unit 1-sphere’s volume or :
(3D)
Computing a radial solution to start, we recognize an easier integral from calculus involving the cotangent
For the normalizing constant in dimension 3 we look to the unit 2-sphere, whose area is .
Unlike in Euclidean space the calculations don’t stabilize in difficulty beyond , and instead get more challenging as powers of grow in the integrand.
(4D)
The radial solution is
This is an integral you might see in calculus if you’re looking for really tricky examples at the end of the chapter (perhaps the more commonly seen case is its sibling ):
We can simplify this a bit by (i) factoring out the constant , (ii) expanding cosecant and cotangent in terms of sines and cosines, and treating the last term with the half-angle identity, as we previously did.
Here the normalizing constant is the surface area of the unit 3-sphere. We can find this if we know the volume of balls grows as by differentiation, , so the unit sphere has volume . Dividing by this gives the answer
In higher dimensions, we continue having to confront the integral of for various . Such integrals are doable (though not fun), with the tricks basically sorting by even and odd dimensions.
Hyperbolic Space
Here are the explicit solutions for hyperbolic spaces of low dimension, with .
(2D)
Very analogous to the spherical case, we have the integral
This integral can be accomplished by substitution and partial fractions unpacking the definition of in terms of the exponential…or just remembered in analogy with the spherical trigonometric case:
Writing in terms of and lets us recognize the hyperbolic tangent half angle identity:
Where we have switched the order of the terms from the previous lines, as they occur inside an absolute value so it does not affect anything. Finally dividing by the normalizing constant of 2D, or yields the answer
(3D)
The radial solution is calculable as
The normalizing constant in three dimensions is , so
(4D)
Higher Dimensions: