a

r
X
i
v
:
s
u
b
m
i
t
/
0
2
7
1
2
0
5


[
m
a
t
h
-
p
h
]


2
4

J
u
n

2
0
1
1
Metric Compatible or Noncompatible
FinslerRicci Flows
Sergiu I. Vacaru

Science Department, University Al. I. Cuza Iasi,
54, Lascar Catargi street, Iasi, Romania, 700107
June 24, 2011
Abstract
There were elaborated dierent models of Finsler geometry using
the Cartan (metric compatible), or Berwald and Chern (metric non
compatible) connections, the Ricci ag curvature etc. In a series of
works, we studied (non)commutative metric compatible Finsler and
nonholonomic generalizations of the Ricci ow theory [see S. Vacaru,
J. Math. Phys. 49 (2008) 043504; 50 (2009) 073503 and references
therein]. The goal of this work is to prove that there are some models of
Finsler gravity and geometric evolution theories with generalized Perel-
mans functionals, and correspondingly derived nonholonomic Hamil-
ton evolution equations, when metric noncompatible Finsler connec-
tions are involved. Following such an approach, we have to consider
distortion tensors, uniquely dened by the Finsler metric, from the
Cartan and/or the canonical metric compatible connections. We con-
clude that, in general, it is not possible to elaborate selfconsistent
models of geometric evolution with arbitrary Finsler metric noncom-
patible connections.
Keywords: Finsler geometry, Ricci ows, geometric evolution.
MSC: 53C55, 53C60, 53D15, 83C15

sergiu.vacaru@uaic.ro, http://www.scribd.com/people/view/1455460-sergiu
All Rights Reserved c 2011 Sergiu I. Vacaru
1
Contents
1 Motivation and Introduction 2
2 Metric Compatible Finsler Geometries 6
2.1 Finsler and Riemannian metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2 CartanFinsler geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2.1 The canonical Nconnection, adapted frames and met-
rics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2.2 Torsion and curvature of dconnections . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.3 The Cartan dconnection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.2.4 The almost K ahler model of CartanFinsler geometry 14
3 Metric Noncompatible Finsler Spaces 14
3.1 Nonholonomic deformations and distortions . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.1.1 Distortions of Ricci tensors for Finsler dconnections . 17
3.1.2 A Ricci tensor constructed by AkbarZadeh . . . . . . 18
3.2 EinsteinFinsler spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4 FinslerRicci Flows and Distortions 24
4.1 The Perelmans Functionals on Finsler Spaces . . . . . . . . . 24
4.2 On Nadapted geometric structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.3 Hamilton equations for metric noncompatible Finsler spaces . 27
4.4 Statistical analogy and thermodynamics of FinslerRicci ows 30
1 Motivation and Introduction
Geometric analysis and evolution equations are important topics of re-
search in modern mathematics and physics, see original R. Hamiltons [1, 2]
and G. Perelmans [3, 4, 5] works and reviews of results in [6, 7, 8]. In
2007, it was published a communication at a Conference in memory of M.
Matsumoto (at Sapporo, in 2005), where D. Bao [9] mentioned that the idea
to study such problems related to Finsler geometry came to S. -S. Chern in
2004. Unfortunately, the famous mathematician had not published any his
proposals/results on a FinslerRicci ow theory.
1
1
It was onetwo years after famous Grisha Perelmans electronic preprints containing
the proof of the Thurston/ Poincar`e conjecture were put in arXiv.org. That induced
a number of papers on geometric ows and applications related to various branches of
mathematics, physics, optimization etc. Im grateful to D. Bao and E. Peyghan for im-
portant correspondence, historical remarks about S. Chern original ideas, and discussions
2
In May-June, 2005, there were a series of lectures of N. Higson at Madrid,
Spain, where the R. Hamilton and G. Perelman fundamental contributions
in mathematics were discussed with respect to possible applications in mod-
ern gravity, cosmology and astrophysics. The author of this paper attended
one of those lectures at CSIC, Madrid. At that time, he worked in some
directions of nonholonomic mechanics and Finsler geometry and geomet-
ric methods of constructing exact solutions in Einstein gravity and modi-
cations. He knew that Cherns connection in Finsler geometry is metric
noncompatible which gives rise to a number of diculties for applications
related to standard theories of physics (see discussions in [10, 11, 12, 13]; we
also mention here some most important monographs on Finsler geometry
[14, 15, 16, 17, 18]). It is obvious that a general extension of the Hamilton
Perelman theory for metric noncompatible spaces, including Finsler models,
is not possible. If Dg = 0 for a metric g and a linear connection D (such
geometric objects may be Finsler or other types), the evolution of geometric
objects on a real parameter can not be determined only by a Ricci tensor
(see relevant formulas on next page and rigorous denitions in sections 3
and 4).
In our works, we preferred to use the Cartan connection and metric
compatible modications and generalizations of Finsler geometry because
the geometric constructions and proofs of the main results are quite simi-
lar to those for Riemannian spaces but for some special classes of Finsler
connections. A series of results were developed for the theory of nonholo-
nomic Ricci ows (with additional nonintegrable constraints) for certain
classes of Einstein, Finsler, Lagrange and other nonholonomic, noncommu-
tative, nonsymmetric, fractional and stochastic spacetimes and geometries
[19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28].
The problem of Ricci ows and Finsler geometry was considered again
in a recent paper [29]
2
, where FinslerRicci ow type evolution equations
are studied following D. Baos heuristic proposals related to geometric ows
and Finsler geometry. In such a case, even the Berwald connection (which is
also metric noncompatible) is involved, the constructions may be associated
to the Cartan metric compatible connection. A new denition/type of the
Ricci tensor [30, 9, 18] which is symmetric and seem to provide an alterna-
tive approach to formulating Finsler like gravity and Ricci ow theories is
considered. Such results are original and important. Nevertheless, the ge-
on FinslerRicci ows and almost Kahler models of Finsler geometry and generalizations.
2
I thank E. Peyghan for sending two preliminary versions of their work before the
authors would publish the results in a preprint or journal version
3
ometric evolution equations with right side Ricci ag curvature postulated
in the mentioned works (by D. Bao and A. Tayebi and E. Peyghan) were
not derived from certain generalized Perelmans functionals, i.e. it was is
not clear if such equations may describe an evolution gradient process (we
shall prove this in the present paper, as a particular case). It was not stated
if, and when, the models of FinslerRicci ows with ag curvature may
have certain limits to standard Laplacian operators and LeviCivita con-
gurations (this would be an important argument that such theories may
describe welldened evolution processes).
In this work we extend our former results on FinslerRicci ows for met-
ric compatible connections in a more general context when metric noncom-
patible Finsler connections (like the Berwald and Chern ones) are used for
nonholonomic deformations of Perelmans functions. We shall analyze pos-
sible relations to former results on nonholonomic Ricci ows and Lagrange
Finsler evolution models via Cartan type (metric compatible) connections
which positively describe geometric evolution processes in a selfconsistent
and similar manner to the Ricci ow theory on Riemannian manifolds.
R. S. Hamiltons evolution equations were postulated for real Rieman-
nian manifolds [1, 2] following heuristic arguments,
g
ij

= 2Ric
ij
, g
ij
[
=0
=

g
ij
(x
k
).
In these equations, geometric ows of metrics g
ij
(, x
k
) are considered for
a real parameter on a manifold M when local coordinates x
k
are labeled
by indices i, j, ... = 1, 2, ..., n = dimM. The Ricci tensor Ric
ij
in dened by
the LeviCivita connection of g
ij
(for our purposes, it is enough to work
with nonnormalized ows).
For a Finsler fundamental/generating function
3
, F(x
k
, y
a
), we can con-
sider
v
g
ij
=
1
2

2
F
2
y
i
y
j
(1)
as a vertical (v) metric on typical ber if det [
v
g
ij
[ = 0.
4
Following a
formal analogy to Hamiltons works, but for
v
g
ij
on tangent bundle TM,
3
see denitions and details in next section
4
On TM, we can identify the horizontal, h, and vindices, i.e. i, j, ... and a, b, ...). In
our work, left up and low indices are used as labels, for instance, F being associated
to Finsler etc. We cite the monographs [14, 15, 16, 17, 18] on main Finsler geometry
methods and comprehensive bibliography and our papers [10, 11], for critical remarks,
principles and perspectives of applications in modern physics, cosmology and geometric
mechanics. We suggest readers to consult such works for reviews of results and notation
conventions.
4
we can postulate certain evolution equations of type

v
g
ij

F
Ric
ij
, (2)
where
F
Ric
ij
is a variant of Ricci tensor constructed for a model of Finsler
geometry and ows/evolution of fundamental Finsler functions are parametr-
ized by F(, x
k
, y
a
). A heuristic denition of
F
Ric
ij
is related to an im-
portant question if a chosen Finsler type Ricci tensor would limit, or not,
a Laplacian operator
F
derived in metric compatible form for a Finsler
geometry model. The answer is armative for Laplacians determined by
the LeviCivita and/or Cartan connections but not for models of Finsler
geometry when
F
Ric
ij
is introduced in a nonstandard form, or using a
general metric noncompatible Finsler connection. In [30, 9, 29], the problem
if and how a Laplacian
F
may be associated naturally to the Ricci ag
(and AkbarZadehs) curvature and geometric ows was not analyzed.
The goal of this paper is to prove that (nonholonomically constrained)
FinslerRicci ow evolution equations and corresponding
F
Ric
ij
can be de-
rived for some classes of metric noncompatible Finsler connections and/or
AkbarZadehs Ricci curvature. If such geometric objects are determined in
unique forms (up to frame/coordinate transforms) by respective distortion
tensors which, in their turns, are also completely dened by a Finsler fun-
damental function, we can formulate well dened Finsler evolution theories.
In our approach, we use our former results and techniques elaborated for
the models of geometric Finsler evolution with the Cartan connection and
certain metric compatible generalizations [21, 22, 24]. Such constructions
are very similar to those for Riemannian spaces but derived with respective
Finsler connections and adapted frames. This allows us to dene certain gen-
eralized Perelman functionals and associated entropy and thermodynamical
type values and derive Hamilton type evolutions equations.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we survey the most impor-
tant geometric constructions and the basic language on metric compatible
Finsler spaces. In Section 3 there are the fundamental geometric objects
for metric noncompatible Finsler spaces (using distortions from compatible
ones) and dened the most important formulas for EinsteinFinsler spaces.
The material outlined in the rst three sections is oriented to nonexperts
on Finsler geometry but researchers on geometric analysis and mathemati-
cal physics. Perelmans functionals are dened for special classes of metric
noncompatible Finsler spaces in Section 4. There are proven main theorems
on FinslerRicci ows and nonholonomic, in general, metric noncompatible
5
geometric evolution equations. We also speculate on statistical analogy and
thermodynamics for FinslerRicci ows.
Acknowledgement 1.1 Im grateful to D. Bao and E. Peyghan for inter-
est, discussions and correspondence on FinslerRicci ows.
2 Metric Compatible Finsler Geometries
In this section, we provide an introduction and analyze some common
features and dierences of (pseudo) Riemannian and metric compatible
Finsler geometry models (proofs are omitted, see details in Refs. [10, 11,
13]). The fundamental geometric objects are presented in Figure 1, for a
comparative study of Riemann and Finsler spaces. In section 3 and Figure
2, we shall analyze the most important formulas for metric compatible and
noncompatible Finsler geometry models. We emphasize that in Ricci ow
theories, it is convenient to work both with global and coordinate/index
formulas and equations. Some historical remarks will be presented in order
to explain the most important ideas and results in Finsler geometry and
related evolution/gravity theories.
2.1 Finsler and Riemannian metrics
Let M be a real C

manifold of dimension dimM = n and denote by

TM its tangent bundle. Denoting by T
x
M the tangent spaces at x M, we
have TM =

xM
T
x
M.
A Finsler fundamental/generating function (metric) is a function F :
TM [0, ) subjected to the conditions:
1. F(x, y) is C

on

TM := TM`0, where 0 denotes the set of zero
sections of TM on M;
2. F(x, y) = F(x, y), for any > 0, i.e. it is a positive 1homogeneous
function on the bers of TM;
3. y

T
x
M, the Hessian
v
g
ij
(1) is nondegenerate and positive de-
nite
5
.
5
this condition should be relaxed for models of Finsler gravity with nite, in general,
locally anisotropic speed of light [10, 11]
6
The term metric for F is used in Finsler geometry because it denes
on TM a nonlinear quadratic element
ds
2
= F
2
(x, dx) (3)
for dx
i
y
i
. The wellknown and very important example of (pseudo)
Riemannian geometry, determined by a metric tensor g
ij
(x
k
), is a particular
case with quadratic form F =

[g
ij
(x)y
i
y
j
[ when
ds
2
= g
ij
(x)dx
i
dx
j
(4)
and the signature of g
ij
is of type (+, +, +, +), or (+, +, +, ), for corre-
sponding space like, or spacetime, manifolds. It should be noted that the
condition (4) allows us to identify the ber of TM with a at (pseudo)
Euclidean space, respectively, Minkowski spacetime, in any point x M.
The tangent spaces T
x
M are considered in (pseudo) Riemannian geometry
on M in order to dene geometrically tensors and forms by analogy to at
spaces. For instance, a vector A = A
i
(x) TM in any system of refer-
ence/coordinates, has coecients A
i
(x) depending only on base coordinates
x
k
but not on y
a
. The fundamental geometric objects (for instance, the
LeviCivita connection and respective curvature tensor and Ricci tensor)
are completely and uniquely determined by a metric tensor
h
g = g
ij
(x)
following the condition of metric compatibility and zero torsion, see left
blocks 2l, 3l, 4l and 5l in Figure 1. This is a result of the quadratic condi-
tion (4) when, in general, geometric and/or gravity theory models based on
(pseudo) Riemannian geometry, and various Einstein/RiemannCartan or
metricane generalizations, are for geometric/physical objects depending
only on xcoordinates. Any given (pseudo) Riemannian metric structure
naturally generates a unique chain
h
g(x) (x)

{(x)

Ric(x)
following welldened geometric rules. The standard theory of Ricci ows
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5] was formulated for (pseudo) Riemannian) metrics g
ij
(, x)
depending on a real ow parameter (for simplicity, we omit details on
geometric ows of (almost) K ahler geometries).
If a Finsler metric F is generic nonlinear, the problem of constructing
geometric models on TM became more sophisticate. Any relation of type
(3) for a class of correspondingly dened functions F allows us to study
various metric properties of T
x
M and, in general, of TM, including ber
constructions, using
v
g
ij
(x, y) (1) and its possible projections, conformal
7
transforms etc. For instance, it is well known that B. Riemann in his famous
thesis [31] considered the rst example of Finsler metric with nonquadratic
quadratic elements (see historical remarks and references in [14, 15, 16,
17, 18]; that why the term RiemannFinsler geometry was introduced in
modern literature) even he elaborated a complete geometric model only
for Riemannian spaces. Nevertheless, to know the metric properties is not
enough for constructing a complete geometric model on TM for a given F
and respective
v
g
ij
. We need more assumptions, for instance, how we chose
to dene connections naturally determined by F because for generic Finsler
metrics there is not a unique analog of the LeviCivita connection.
2.2 CartanFinsler geometry
The rst complete geometric model of Finsler geometry is due to E.
Cartan [14]. Roughly speaking, the CartanFinsler geometry is a variant of
the well known RiemannCartan one, with nonzero torsion, but constructed
on TM in a form when all geometric objects are generated by F following the
conditions of metric compatibility and vanishing of pure horizontal and
vertical components of torsion. Here we note that the CartanFinsler torsion
(see block 5r] in Figure 1 and block 4) in Figure 2) is dierent from that
used, for instance, in EinsteinCartan gravity when torsion is considered
as an additional (to metric) tensor eld for which additional (algebraic)
eld equations are introduced. For the CartanFinsler model, the torsion
eld is completely determined by metrics F and
v
g
ij
[F], when (at least, in
principle) a complete metric
F
g can be constructed on total TM following
certain well dened geometric principles.
2.2.1 The canonical Nconnection, adapted frames and metrics
Nevertheless, the CartanFinsler space is not only a RiemannCartan
geometry on TM with metric tensor and metric compatible connection
with torsion (all induced by F). This is also an example of nonholonomic
manifold/bundle space when the geometric objects are adapted to a non
integrable distribution on TM induced by F in such a form that canonical
semispray and nonlinear connection (Nconnection) structures are dened.
In the mentioned rst monograph on Finsler geometry [14], the concept of
Nconnection is considered in coordinate form (the rst global denitions
are due to Ehresmann [32] and A. Kawaguchi [33, 34], see details in [16]
and, for the Einstein gravity and generalizations, in [10, 13]). Let us ana-
lyze, in brief, such constructions. A Nconnection N can be dened as a
8
nonintegrable (there are used equivalent terms like nonholonomic and/or
anholonomic) distribution
TTM = hTM vTM (5)
into conventional horizontal (h) and vertical (v) subspaces
6
. Locally, such a
geometric object is determined by its coecients N
a
i
, when N =N
a
i
(u)dx
i

/y
a
, and characterized by its curvature (Neijenhuis tensor)
=
1
2

a
ij
d
i
d
j

a
,
with coecients

a
ij
=
N
a
i
x
j

N
a
j
x
i
+N
b
i
N
a
j
y
b
N
b
j
N
a
i
y
b
. (6)
In CartanFinsler geometry, the Nconnection in canonically determined
by F following a geometric/variational principle: The value L = F
2
is con-
sidered as an eective regular Lagrangian on TM and action integral
S() =
1

0
L(x(), y())d, for y
k
() = dx
k
()/d,
for x() parametrizing smooth curves on a manifold M with [0, 1]. The
EulerLagrange equations
d
d
L
y
i

L
x
i
= 0 are equivalent to the nonlinear
geodesic (equivalently, semispray) equations
d
2
x
k
d
2
+ 2

G
k
(x, y) = 0, where

G
k
=
1
4
g
kj

y
i

2
L
y
j
x
i

L
x
j

, (7)
for g
kj
being inverse to
v
g
ij
g
ij
(1), denes the canonical Nconnection

N
a
j
:=


G
a
(x, y)
y
j
. (8)
A fundamental Finsler function F(x, y) induces naturally a Nadapted
frame structure (dened linearly by

N
a
j
), e

= (e
i
, e
a
), where
e
i
=

x
i


N
a
i
(u)

y
a
and e
a
=

y
a
, (9)
6
In our works, we use boldface symbols for spaces and geometric objects en-
dowed/adapted to Nconnection structure.
9
and the dual frame (coframe) structure is e

= (e
i
, e
a
), where
e
i
= dx
i
and e
a
= dy
a
+

N
a
i
(u)dx
i
. (10)
There are satised nontrivial nonholonomy relations
[e

, e

] = e

=

W

(11)
with (antisymmetric) nontrivial anholonomy coecients

W
b
ia
=
a

N
b
i
and

W
a
ji
=

a
ij
. This is a reason to say that a Finsler geometry is a nonholonomic
one when F denes a preferred frame structure on TM.
7
If a generating
function F is of particular quadratic type (4), the values

N
a
j
, e

and

W

can be parametrized in some forms not depending explicitly on y

a
. In such
cases, e

can be arbitrary frames not depending on a degenerate Finsler,

i.e. on a (pseudo) Riemannian metric g
ij
(x).
Using data ( g
ij
, e

) , we can dene a canonical (Sasaki type) metric struc-

ture on

TM,
g = g
ij
(x, y) e
i
e
j
+ g
ij
(x, y) e
i
e
j
. (12)
It is possible to use other geometric principles for lifts and projections
with
v
g
ij
on the typical ber, when from a given F it is constructed a
metric on total/horizontal spaces of TM. Nevertheless, for models of locally
anisotropic/Finsler gravity on TM, with a generalized covariance principle,
such constructions are equivalent up to certain frame/coordinate transforms
e

= e

. In such cases, we can omit tilde on symbols and write,

in general, g = g

and N = N
a
i
= e
a
a

e
i

i
N
a

. There is a subclass of
transforms preserving a prescribed splitting (5).
We note that in Finsler geometry and generalizations there are used
terms like distinguished tensor/ metric/ connection etc (in brief, dtensor,
dmetric, dconnection) for geometric objects adapted to Nconnection
splitting when coecients are computed with respect to frames of type (9)
and (10). For instance, a dvector X = (
h
X,
v
X) =X
i
e
i
+X
a
e
a
.
2.2.2 Torsion and curvature of dconnections
For any dmetric g (12), we may construct in standard form, on TM, its
LeviCivita connection

. Nevertheless, such a linear connection is not used
in Finsler geometry because it is not adapted to the Nconnection structure
N. This motivates the denition of a new class of linear connections.
7
Such a Nadapted frame system of reference does not prohibits us to consider arbitrary
frame and coordinate transforms on TM.
10
A distinguished connection (dconnection) D on TM is a linear connec-
tion conserving under parallelism the Whitney sum (5). For any D, there is
a decomposition into h and vcovariant derivatives,
D
X
XD =
h
XD+
v
XD =D h
X
+D v
X
=
h
D
X
+
v
D
X
,
where denotes the interior product.
The torsion of a dconnection D is dened in standard from by dtensor
eld
T (X, Y) := D
X
YD
Y
X[X, Y], (13)
for which a Nadapted h-vdecomposition is possible,
T (X, Y) = T(
h
X,
h
Y ) +T(
h
X,
v
Y ) +T(
v
X,
h
Y ) +T(
v
X,
v
Y ).
The curvature of a dconnection D is
{(X, Y) := D
X
D
Y
D
Y
D
X
D
[X,Y]
(14)
for any dvectors X, Y, with a corresponding hvdecomposition (for sim-
plicity, we omit such formulas) .
The Nadapted components

of a dconnection D

= (e

D) are
computed following equations D

, or

(u) = (D

)e

.
Respective splitting into h and vcovariant derivatives are given by
hD = D
k
=

L
i
jk
, L
a
bk

, and vD = D
c
=

C
i
jc
, C
a
bc

,
where, by denition,
L
i
jk
= (D
k
e
j
)e
i
, L
a
bk
= (D
k
e
b
)e
a
, C
i
jc
= (D
c
e
j
)e
i
, C
a
bc
= (D
c
e
b
)e
a
.
A set of coecients

L
i
jk
, L
a
bk
, C
i
jc
, C
a
bc

completely dene a d
connection D on TM enabled with Nconnection structure.
The simplest way to perform computations with dconnections is to use
Nadapted dierential forms. The dconnection 1form is

.
For instance, the hvcoecients T

= T
i
jk
, T
i
ja
, T
a
ji
, T
a
bi
, T
a
bc
of tor-
sion T (13) are computed using formulas
T

:= De

= de

.
We obtain
T
i
jk
= L
i
jk
L
i
kj
, T
i
ja
= T
i
aj
= C
i
ja
, T
a
ji
=
a
ji
,
T
a
bi
=
N
a
i
y
b
L
a
bi
, T
a
bc
= C
a
bc
C
a
cb
. (15)
11
Similarly, we can compute the Nadapted components R

of the curva-
ture R (14),
{

= d

= R

. (16)
For simplicity, we omit formulas for an explicit hvparametrization of
R

, see details in Refs. [10, 13, 16].

There is a subclass of dconnections D on TM which are metric com-
patible to a dmetric
g = g
ij
(x, y) e
i
e
j
+ h
ab
(x, y) e
a
e
b
(17)
with Nadapted decomposition g =hg
N
vg = [hg, vg].
8
The condition of
compatibility Dg = 0 split in respective conditions for h-vcomponents,
D
j
g
kl
= 0, D
a
g
kl
= 0, D
j
h
ab
= 0, D
a
h
bc
= 0.
We can construct a canonical dconnection

D completely dened by a
dmetric g (17) in metric compatible form,

Dg =0, and with zero h- and
v-torsions (with

T
i
jk
= 0 and

T
a
bc
= 0 but, in general, nonzero

T
i
ja
,

T
a
ji
and

T
a
bi
, see (15)). The coecients of

D, computed with respect to Nadapted
frames are

L
i
jk
,

L
a
bk
,

C
i
jc
,

C
a
bc

for

L
i
jk
=
1
2
g
ir
(e
k
g
jr
+e
j
g
kr
e
r
g
jk
) , (18)

L
a
bk
= e
b
(N
a
k
) +
1
2
h
ac

e
k
h
bc
h
dc
e
b
N
d
k
h
db
e
c
N
d
k

C
i
jc
=
1
2
g
ik
e
c
g
jk
,

C
a
bc
=
1
2
h
ad
(e
c
h
bd
+e
c
h
cd
e
d
h
bc
) .
For any metric structure g on TM, we can compute also the Levi
Civita connection for which

T

= 0 and g = 0. There is a canonical

distortion relation

D=+

Z (19)
8
Any dmetric g = g

du

du

on TM, via corresponding frame/coordinate transforms

can be parametrized in the form (17) and g (12) (in the last case, we have to prescribe a
generating function F). This mean that on the total space of a tangent bundle endowed
with metric structure g we can always introduce Finsler variables when g = g and there is
a hvsplitting N =

N. The constructions are performed equivalently but depend on the
type of geometric structure chosen to be the fundamental one. If F is prescribed, then we
construct data

F :

N, g

which up to frame transforms [e

= e

e; the vielbeins e

have to be dened as a solution of an algebraic quadratic equations g

= e

for given g

and g

] are equivalent to some data (N, g). Inversely, we can x any

(N, g) (in particular, N can be for any conventional hvsplitting) and then chose any
convenient F when via frame transforms (N, g) (

N, g).
12
where both connections

D, and

Z (such a distortion tensor is an algebraic
combination of nontrivial torsion coecients

T
i
ja
,

T
a
ji
and

T
a
bi
) are uniquely
dened by the same metric structure g. Taking g = g, such values

D,

and

Z can be derived from a Finsler metric F (for simplicity, we omit explicit

coordinate formulas for and

Z, see details in [10, 13, 16]). This allows
us to construct a complete model of Finsler space on TM. Such a canonical
metric compatible geometry is determined by data

F : g, N,

.
2.2.3 The Cartan dconnection
Historically, E. Cartan [14] used another type of metric compatible d
connection

D which via frame transforms and deformations can be related
to

D (18). If we consider that

L
a
bk


L
i
jk
and

C
i
jc


C
a
bc
, by identifying
respectively a = n +i with i and b = n +j, we obtain the socalled normal
dconnection
n
D = (

L
i
jk
,

C
i
jc
) with Nadapted 1form

i
j
=

i
j
e

=

L
i
jk
e
k
+

C
i
jc
e
c
,
where

L
i
jk
=
1
2
g
ih
(e
k
g
jh
+e
j
g
kh
e
h
g
jk
),

C
a
bc
=
1
2
g
ae
(e
b
h
ec
+e
c
h
eb
e
e
h
bc
). (20)
Taking g = g, when

h
ij
= g
ij
, and N =

N in (20), we dene the Cartan
dconnection

D = (

L
i
jk
,

C
i
jc
).
For

D, the nontrival h and vcomponents of torsion

T

T
i
jc
,

T
a
ij
,

T
a
ib

and curvature

R

R
i
hjk
,

P
i
jka
,

S
a
bcd
are respectively

T
i
jc
=

C
i
jc
,

T
a
ij
=

a
ij
,

T
a
ib
= e
b

N
a
i

L
a
bi
, (21)
and

R
i
hjk
= e
k

L
i
hj
e
j

L
i
hk
+

L
m
hj

L
i
mk


L
m
hk

L
i
mj


C
i
ha

a
kj
, (22)

P
i
jka
= e
a

L
i
jk

D
k

C
i
ja
,

S
a
bcd
= e
d

C
a
bc
e
c

C
a
bd
+

C
e
bc

C
a
ed

C
e
bd

C
a
ec
.
We note that h and vcomponents of torsion are zero,

T
i
jk
= 0 and

T
a
bc
= 0,
even there are also nontrivial components

T
a
ij
and

T
a
ib
.
The Cartan dconnection is characterized by a unique distortion relation

D =

+

Z, (23)
where all values

D,

and

Z are determined (up to frame/coordinate trans-
forms) by F and g. On TM, the data

F; g,

N,

D

dene a model of Cartan

Finsler geometry.
13
2.2.4 The almost Kahler model of CartanFinsler geometry
There is a fundamental result by M. Matsumoto [15] which allows us to
reformulate

F; g,

N,

D

, equivalently, as an almost K ahler geometry. Let

us consider a linear operator

J acting on vectors on TM following formulas

J(e
i
) = e
i
and

J(e
i
) = e
i
,
where the superposition

J

J = I, for the unity matrix I.

A Finsler fundamental function F(x, y) and the corresponding Sasaki
type metric g (12) induce, respectively, a canonical 1form = F
F
y
i
e
i
and
a canonical 2form

= g
ij
(x, y)e
i
e
j
. (24)
Such objects are associated to J following formula

(X, Y) := g(

JX, Y)
for any dvectors X and Y. By straightforward computations, we can prove
that d =

. This states on TM an almost Hermitian (symplectic) struc-
ture nonholonomically induced by F. Considering

D

D as an almost
symplectic dconnection, we can prove that

D
X

= 0 and

D
X

J = 0.
The data (F;

J,

D) dene a nonholonomic almost K ahler space.
It should be noted that canonical almost symplectic/K ahler variables

J, and

D can be introduced for any TM endowed with dmetric, g,
and Nconnection, N, structures. For this, we have to prescribe an eective
generating function F and compute e

and g. Solving a quadratic alge-

braic equation to construct e

= e

, we encode equivalently and

data (TM, g) as a CartanFinsler model, (F; g,

N,

D), and/or an almost
K ahlerFinsler model, (F;

J,

D). Such results were used for deformation
quantization of LagrangeFinsler spaces [38]. Finally, we cite an alternative
approach with K ahler structures associated to Berwald or Randers metrics
etc [39, 40, 41].
3 Metric Noncompatible Finsler Spaces
There were developed alternative approaches to constructing geomet-
ric models determined by a fundamental Finsler function F(x, y). In some
sense, mathematicians attempted to formulate a more simple version of
Finsler geometry than the Cartan model, not mimicking on tangent bundles
14

1r] Finsler quadratic element ds

2
= F
2
(x, y)
F(x
i
, y
a
) = F(x
i
, y
a
), 0, y
i

dx
i
ds
, on TM/0
vertical metric
v
g :=
1
2
Hess(F
2
) = g
ab
:=
1
2

2
F
2
y
a
y
b

linear quadratic elements,

(pseudo) Riemannian geometry
nonlinear quadratic elements,
models of (pseudo) Finsler geometry

2r] N-connect.

N : TTM = hTM vTM

N
a
i
:=

G
a
y
i
;

G
k
:=
1
4
g
kj
(y
i
2
F
2
y
j
x
i


2
F
2
x
j
)
e

:= ( e
i
=

x
i


N
a
i

y
a
, e
b
=

y
b
)
e

:= (e
j
= dx
j
, e
b
= dy
b
+

N
b
i
dx
i
)
3r] g =
h
g
v
g = g
ij
e
i
e
j
+ g
ab
e
a
e
a

J = I,

J( e
i
) = /y
i
,

J(/y
i
) = e
i
,

(, ) := g(

J, ) = d , :=
1
2
F
2
y
i
dx
i

4r] dconnections and distortions:

D = (hD; vD) =

= (L,
v
L; C,
v
C)

= (

L;

C),
B
= (
B
L; 0),
Ch
= (
Ch
L; 0)

D = +

Z,
Ch
D =

D+
Ch

Z
F, g uniquely dene

Z,

Z,
B
Z,
Ch
Z
almost symplec.

D

D,

D = 0

5r] Curvature, torsion, nonmentricity:

{(X, Y) := D
X
D
Y
D
Y
D
X
D
[X,Y]
T (X, Y) := D
X
YD
Y
X[X, Y]

T = 0;
B
T = 0;
Ch
T = 0
O := Dg;

O = 0;
B
O = 0;
Ch
O = 0

6r] Ricci tensors: Ric = R

:= R

Ric =

Ric +

Zic,

Ric =

Ric +

Zic,
B
Ric =

Ric +
B

Zic,
Ch
Ric =

Ric +
Ch

Zic

7r] AkbarZadeh Ricci

R =

R
i
k
[

G
i
] dx
k

x
i
[
x

R := F
2

R
i
i
, Ric
ij
:= F
2

2
(

R
k
k
)/y
i
y
j
2l] metric: ds
2
= g
ij
(x
k
)dx
i
dx
j
arbitrary frames and splitting

3l] LeviCivita connection ;

k
g
ij
= 0,

T = 0

4l] Curvature:

{(X, Y) :=

Y

Y

[X,Y]

5l] Ricci tensor:

Ric =

R

6l] Einstein manifolds:

Ric
ij
(x) = g
ij
(x), = const
Ricci ows:
gij (,x)

Ric
ij
Figure 1: Riemann and Finsler spaces generated by g
ij
(x
k
) and F(x
i
, y
a
)
15
a variant of nonholonomic Riemann space. Chronologically, the rst met-
ric noncompatible models were proposed by L. Berwald [35] and S. Chern
[42] (see details in [18]). More recently, a dierent nonstandard construc-
tion for the Ricci curvature was proposed by H. AkbarZadeh [30]. In this
section, we outline three important models of nonCartan Finsler spaces
following Fugure 2.
The Berwald dconnection is
B
D : = (
B
L
i
jk
=

N
i
j
/y
k
,
B
C
i
jc
=
0), when the hcovariant derivative is dened by the rst vderivatives
of Cartans Nconnection structure

N (8) and an additional constraint
that the vcovariant derivative is zero is imposed.
The Chern dconnection is
Ch
D : = (
Ch
L
i
jk
=

L
i
jk
,
Ch
C
i
jc
= 0),
when the hcovariant derivative is the Cartans one computed as in
the rst formula for the normal dconnection (20), with an additional
constraint that the vcovariant derivative is zero is imposed.
Both geometries with
B
D and/or
Ch
D can be modelled on hTM.
The Cherns dconnection keeps all properties of the LeviCivita connec-
tion for geometric constructions on the hsubspace. Nevertheless, both d
connections are not metric compatible on total space of TM, i.e. there are
nontrivial nonmetricity elds, O := Dg,
B
O = 0 and
Ch
O = 0. Such non-
metricities, in general, present substantial diculties in constructing well
dened minimal Finsler extensions of the standard models of Finsler gravity,
see critical remarks in Refs. [11, 10, 13] (for instance, there are problems
with physical interpretation of nonmetricity elds, denition of spinors and
constructing Dirac operators, formulating conservation laws etc).
Applying formulas (13) and (14), we compute respectively the torsions
B
T = 0,
Ch
T = 0 and curvatures
B
{ = 0,
Ch
{ = 0 as 2forms.
In Refs. [43, 30], it is used as curvature in Finsler geometry the value

R =

R
i
k
dx
k

x
i
[
x
: T
x
M T
x
M,
(this type of curvature is considered in a manner dierent that denitions
of curvatures with associated 2forms) where

R
i
k
= 2

G
i
x
k
y
j

2

G
i
x
j
y
k
+ 2

G
j

2

G
i
y
j
y
k



G
i
y
j

G
j
y
k
(25)
is determined by semispray

G
k
(7). Such values are convenient for study
geometric objects in T
x
M for a point x M.
16
3.1 Nonholonomic deformations and distortions
We note that above presented formulas for metric compatible and non-
commpatible dconnections in Finsler geometry are uniquely related via
certain distortion tensors of type (23) and (19). In order to derive deforma-
tions of fundamental tensor objects (for instance, torsions and curvature) in
Nadapted form it is convenient to perform all constructions for the Car-
tan dconnection and then to compute distortions for necessary tensors and
dierential forms. We can write
B
D=

D+
B

Z and
Ch
D=

D+
Ch

Z, (26)
where all dconnections and distorting tensors are uniquely computed using
components of g and

N for a chosen fundamental Finsler function F. Both
dconnections are with nontrivial nonmetricity
B
O = 0 and
Ch
O = 0. Nev-
ertheless, such tensor objects are not arbitrary ones but completely induced
by respective
B

Z and
Ch

Z.
3.1.1 Distortions of Ricci tensors for Finsler dconnections
Hereafter, we shall denote by
F
D any dconnection (metric compatible
or not, for instance, of type (26)) uniquely determined by F. Computing the
curvature 2form (16) for
F
D,
F
{

F
D
F

= d
F

=
F
R

,
we express
F
R

=

R

+

Z

. (27)
Contracting indices,
F
R

:=
F
R

, we obtain the Nadapted coe-

cients for the Ricci tensor
F
{ic
F
R

=(R
ij
, R
ia
, R
ai
, R
ab
) . This ten-
sor, in general, is not symmetric,
F
R

=
F
R

, and corresponding Bianchi

identities result in constraints
F
D

F
R

1
2
g

F
s
R

:=
F
J

= 0 (28)
even for metric compatible
F
D. In above formulas, the scalar curvature is
by denition
F
s
R := g
F
R

= g
ij
R
ij
+h
ab
R
ab
. (29)
The Einstein tensor
F
E

can be postulated in standard form for any

F
D,
F
E

:=
F
R

1
2
g

F
s
R. (30)
17
The relations (28) can be considered as a nonholonomic unique defor-
mations of standard relations

= 0, with Einstein tensor E

for the
LeviCivita connection

, in general relativity. Using distorting relations

(26), we can always compute the source
F
J

and dene an associated set

of constraints as in nonholonomic mechanics.
The distortions of connections will be used in the nonholonomic geomet-
ric ow theory is as follows. Contracting indices in (27), we compute
F
R

=

R

+

Z

, (31)

R

:=

R

= e

Z

:=

Z

= e

+

Z

+

Z

+

Z

.
Introducing in above formulas

Z =
B

Z, or

Z =
Ch

Z, we get explicit
formulas for distortions of the Ricci tensor (31) for the Berwald, or Chern,
dconnection (for simplicity, we omit such technical results in this work).
Equivalent distortions can be computed if we x, for instance, as a back-
ground connection but such constructions are not adapted to the N
connection splitting. Other fundamental geometric objects derived for
B
D
and/or
Ch
D can be generated by noholonomic deformations from analogous
ones for the metric compatible, and almost K ahler, dconnection

D

D.
This property is very important because it allows us to construct, for in-
stance, Dirac operators and dene generalized Perelmans functionals (see
next section) even such geometric models are metric noncompatible.
We conclude that metric compatible Finsler geometry models with d
connections uniquely dened by respective metric structures (and induced
by fundamental Finsler functions and Hessians) play a preferred role both
for elaborating geometric and physical theories on TM. Using one of the con-
nections

D, or

D, we work as in usual RiemannCartan geometry and/or
the Ricci ow theory of Riemannian metrics. It is also possible to refor-
mulate the theories as almost K ahler geometries. Then, such constructions
can be nonholonomically deformed into metric noncompatible structures by
considering respective distortion tensors.
3.1.2 A Ricci tensor constructed by AkbarZadeh
For a class of geometric and ow models on T
x
M, see Refs. [30, 9, 43,
29], a dierent than (31) Ricci tensor is used. As noted above, there is
18

1) Finsler fundamental function (metric) F(x, y)

Hessian as vertical metric
v
g :=
1
2
Hess(F
2
) on TM/0
F(x
i
, y
a
) = F(x
i
, y
a
), 0, and
v
g = g
ab
:=
1
2

2
F
2
y
a
y
b

semisprays, N/ dconnections,
Nadapted frames, distortions
total metric, almost symplectic forms,
curvatures and torsions
N-connect.

N : TTM = hTM vTM
2)

N =

N
a
i
:=

G
a
y
i
, semispray:

G =

G
k
:=
1
4
g
kj
(y
i
2
F
2
y
j
x
i


2
F
2
x
j
)
e

:= ( e
i
=

x
i


N
a
i

y
a
, e
b
=

y
b
)
e

:= (e
j
= dx
j
, e
b
= dy
b
+

N
b
i
dx
i
)
3) total bundle metric: g =
h
g
v
g
g =
h
g
v
g = g
ij
e
i
e
j
+ g
ab
e
a
e
a
almost complex structure:

J

J = I

J( e
i
) = /y
i
,

J(/y
i
) = e
i
,
canon. sympl. form:

(, ) := g(

J, )

= g
ij
e
i
dx
j
= d , :=
1
2
F
2
y
i
dx
i
4) dconnection: D = (hD; vD)
=

= (L
i
jk
,
v
L
a
bk
; C
i
jc
,
v
C
a
bc
)
Normal dcon.
v
L L
i
jk
,
v
C C
i
jc
Cartan dconnect.

= (

L
i
jk
;

C
i
jk
),

L
i
jk
=
1
2
g
ih
( e
k
g
jh
+ e
j
g
hk
e
h
g
jk
)

C
i
jk
=
1
2
g
ih
(
g
jh
y
k
+
g
hk
y
j

g
jk
y
h
)
B

= (
B
L
i
jk
=

N
i
j
/y
k
;
B
C
i
jk
= 0)
Ch

= (
Ch
L
i
jk
=

L
i
jk
;
Ch
C
i
jk
= 0)
5) canonical dconnection

D =

,
dvector X =
h
X+
v
X, curvatures:
{(X, Y) := D
X
D
Y
D
Y
D
X
D
[X,Y]
Torsions:

T = 0;
B
T = 0;
Ch
T = 0
T (X, Y) := D
X
YD
Y
X[X, Y]
N-coef: { = R

, T = R

Nonmetricity O := Dg; Cartan

O = 0;
Berwald
B
O = 0; Chern
Ch
O = 0
distortions of LeviCivita &

D,

D:
6)

D = +

Z,

D = +

Z,
B
D =

D+
B

Z,
Ch
D =

D+
Ch

Z
F, g uniquely dene

Z,

Z,
B

Z,
Ch

Z
is not adapted to

N
almost symplec.

D

D,

D = 0
7) Ric = R

:= R

Ric =

Ric +

Zic,

Ric =

Ric +

Zic,
B
Ric =

Ric +
B

Zic,
Ch
Ric =

Ric +
Ch

Zic
8)

R =

R
i
k
dx
k

x
i
[
x
: T
x
M T
x
M

R
i
k
= 2
G
i
x
k
y
j
2
G
i
x
j
y
k
+ 2G
j
2
G
i
y
j
y
k

G
i
y
j
G
j
y
k

R := F
2

R
i
i
, Ric
ij
:= F
2

2
(

R
k
k
)/y
i
y
j
Finsler gravity, nonholonomic Dirac operators
9) FinslerRicci ow evolution equations
Perelmans functionals for Finsler connections

Figure 2: Fundamental Objects for Finsler Geometries on TM

19
an alternative curvature tensor

R
i
k
(25) completely determined by semi
spray

G
k
(7). Contracting indices, we introduce a scalar function

R(x, y) :=
F
2

R
i
i
and dene a variant of the Ricci tensor,

Ric
jk
:= F
2

2

R
y
j
y
k
. (32)
The geometric object

Ric
jk
(32) is induced by the Finsler metric F
via inverse Hessian g
ij
, see g
ij
(1), and

G
k
not involving in such a model
the Nconnection structure, lifts on metrics on total space of TM, and d
connections. By deniton, the scalar

R is postive homogeneous of degree 0
in vvariables y
a
.
Following such an approach to Finsler geometry, the Einstein metrics g
ij
are those for which

Ric
jk
= (x) g
jk
, i.e. when the scalar function

R(x, y) =
(x) is a function only on hvariables x
k
. This class of Finsler spaces is by
denition dierent from that derived for a Ricci dtensor
F
{ic (31) on TM.
The priority of

Ric
jk
(32) is that it is always symmetric (by denition) and
simplied to consider a Ricci eld and/or evolution dynamics in any point
T
x
M. Nevertheless, such a nonholonomically constrained model does not
allow us to study, for instance, mutual transforms of Riemann and Finsler
metrics with general nonsymmetric Ricci dtensor

R

, and respective
Einstein dtensor (30) on total space of TM and nonholonomic (pseudo)
Riemannian manifolds [21, 22, 24] (a series of works from 20062008).
A variant of geometric evolution equations for Finsler metrics F(, x, y)
using

Ric
jk
was published in 2007 in Ref. [9],
g
ij

= 2

Ric
jk
, (33)
when the Hessian g
ij
(, x, y) and the volume element
:= (F/y
i
)dx
i
(34)
depend on [, ] R and > 0 is suciently small. These equa-
tions consist an example of heuristic Finsler evolution equations (2) when
F
Ric
ij


Ric
jk
. In order to elaborate a selfconsistent Ricci ow theory,
at rst steps, we have to prove the conditions when

Ric
jk

F
, for a
Finsler Laplacian, and nd certain analogs of Perelmans functionals from
which (33). One of the aims of the present paper is to show that this
type of evolution models belong to a class of nonholonomicaly constrained
system (in general, with metric noncompatible Finsler connections) which
20
can be uniquely dened via corresponding nonholonomic deformations and
constraints from theories ows of the canonical and/or Cartan dconnection
[19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28].
For any F() = F(, x, y), and respective g
ij
and

N
a
i
, we can compute
a family of Ricci dtensors,

R

() =

R
hj
:=

R
i
hji
,

P
ja
:=

P
i
jia
,

S
bc
:=

S
a
bca
,
for the dconnection

D, by constructing respective tensors in (22), or

R

() =

R
ij


R
k
ijk
,

R
ia

R
k
ika
,

R
ai


R
b
aib
,

R
ab


R
c
abc
. (35)
for the canonical dconnection

D (18) (see explicit formulas for hvcompo-
nents in Refs. [10, 13, 16]). Because all values

Ric
jk
,

R
hj
and

R
ij
are
generated by the same Finsler metric, we can compute in unique forms (up
to frame transforms) the distortions

Ric
jk
=

R
jk
+

Zic
jk
,

Ric
jk
=

R
jk
+

Zic
jk
, (36)
if values

R

and

R

are dened on TM. Similar splitting can be com-
puted in unique forms for Ricci dtensors corresponding to
B
D=

D+
B

Z
and
Ch
D=

D+
Ch

Z from (26),
B
R

=

R

+
B

Zic

,
Ch
R

=

R

+
Ch

Zic

; (37)
B
R

=

R

+
B

Zic

,
Ch
R

=

R

+
Ch

Zic

. (38)
If we construct a geometric evolution model for F() with g
ij
() de-
rived for

R

(such constructions are preferred for almost K ahler models
and deformation quantization [38]), or for

R

(which is important to study
evolution of exact solutions in gravity theories [36, 37]), we can always ex-
tract and follow evolution of geometric objects and metric noncompatible
Finsler geometries and/or with nonstandard curvature (25).
3.2 EinsteinFinsler spaces
Following classication presented in Figure 2, we can work equivalently
with any dconnection

D,

D,
B
D,
Ch
D (all these geometric objects are
uniquely determined by F and/or g. To study possible physical applications
with generalized gravitational eld/ evolution equations is important to de-
cide which type of connection and nonholonomic constraints are used for
elaborating physical theories.
21
It should be noted that all constructions provided in previous sections
can be performed not only on tangent bundle TM with Nconnection split-
ting (5) but on any manifold V with conventional hvsplitting (called
also as a nonholonomic manifold) dened by a Whitney sum
TV = hVvV. (39)
Such a nonintegrable distribution, for instance, can be introduced always on
a Lorenz manifold V in general relativity (GR) dening a socalled 2 + 2
splitting.
9
More than that, GR and various modications can be described
equivalently in Finsler and/or almost K ahler variables, see details in Refs.
[10, 12, 13, 36, 37]. There is an unied formalism for geometrical/physical
models which can be elaborated any nonholonomic manifold, V, or tangent
bundle space, V = TM. Physically, the yvariables are treated dierently:
On a general V, such values/coordinates are certain nonholonomically con-
strained ones; on TM, the values y
a
as some velocities (for dual congu-
rations on T

M, there are considered momenta).

The Einstein equations in GR were postulated in standard form using
the LeviCivita connection ,
R


1
2
g

R = T

, (40)
written for the LeviCivita connection =

. In formulas (40), R

and R are respectively the Ricci tensor and scalar curvature of ; it is also
considered the energymomentum tensor for matter, T

, where = const.
Various tetradic, spinor, connection etc variables were used with various
purposes to construct exact solutions and quantize gravity, see standard
monographs [44, 45]. Using conventional Finsler variables, the gravitational
eld equations (40) can be rewritten equivalently using the canonical d
connection

D (18),

R


1
2
g
s

R =

, (41)

L
c
aj
= e
a
(N
c
j
),

C
i
jb
= 0,
a
ji
= 0, (42)
for

if

D . The constraints (42) are equivalent to the
condition of vanishing of torsion (15), the distortion dtensors

Z = 0, which
results in

D=, see formulas (19). The system of equations (41) and (42)
9
we use boldface letters for manifolds, bundles endowed with Nconnection structure
and for geometric objects adapted to corresponding h-vsplitting
22
have a very important property of decoupling with respect to Nadapted
frames (9) and (10) which allows to integrate the Einstein and geometric
evolution equations in very general forms [10, 12, 13, 36, 37, 19, 20, 26, 27,
28].
10
On TM, for metric compatible Finsler geometry models, constraints of
type (42), or (44), are not necessary. Using distortion relations (19), (23)
and (26), we can compute other types of distortions,

=
Ch
D
Ch

Z =
B
D
B

Z =

D

Z =

D

Z, (45)
where all geometric objects are determined by F(u) via g
ij
(u). Such non-
holonomic constraints show that in any model of Finsler geometry we can
consider equivalently notadapted (to Nconnection) geometric construc-
tions with

dened by a (pseudo) Riemannian metric
g

g
ij
+

N
a
i

N
b
j
g
ab

N
e
j
g
ae

N
e
i
g
be
g
ab

, (46)
where the coecients g

are those for the Finsler dmetric (12) redened

with respect to a coordinate co-basis, du

= (dx
i
, dy
a
). The nonholonomic
structure is encoded into vielbeins e

= e

(u)

with coecients
e

(u) =

e
i
i
(u)

N
b
i
(u) e
a
b
(u)
0 e
a
a
(u)

, (47)
when g
ij
(u) = e
i
i
(u) e
j
j
(u)
ij
, for
ij
= diag[1, ... 1] xing a correspond-
ing local metric signature on TM.
We conclude this section with the remark that models of Finsler ge-
ometry on TM
11
with Cartan/ canonical dconnection, Berwald and/or
10
Up to frame/coordinate transforms the equations (40), and/or (41) and (42), are
equivalent to

1
2
g
s

R =

, (43)

L
a
bi
= e
b
(

N
a
i
),

C
i
jc
= 0,

a
ij
= 0, (44)
when the dconnection is chosen to be the Cartan one

D

D. The conditions (44) are
for zero torsion (21) when

Z = 0 and

D =

, in (23). Here, we note that, in general,

is dierent from

. The priority of system (43) written in Cartan dmetric and

dconnection Finsler variables is a the possibility to redene the geometric objects in
almost Kahler variables with a further deformation quantization [38]. The decoupling
eect for gravitational eld equations also exists but the zero torsion conditions seem to
be more rigid for such congurations.
11
and/or any nonholonomic manifold V with Nconnection splitting
23
Chern dconnections can be reconsidered equivalently as certain nonholo-
nomic (pseudo) Riemannian ones endowed with nonholonomic h-vsplitting
and corresponding unique distortions of

. The distortion relations (45)
play a crucial role in constructing models of FinslerRicci ow evolution
uniquely related to standard theory of Ricci ows for Riemannian geome-
tries. The main theorems can be proven using

and then the results for
Finsler ows are stated by uniquely dened nonholonomic distortions and
constraints.
4 FinslerRicci Flows and Distortions
In this section we show how a selfconsistent approach to geometric ows
with metric noncompatible connections can be elaborated if there are used
special classes of nonholonomic deformations/distortions of metric compat-
ible ows.
4.1 The Perelmans Functionals on Finsler Spaces
G. Perelmans idea [3] was to derive the Ricci ow equations of (pseudo)
Riemannian geometries as gradient ows for some functionals dened by the
LeviCivita connection and respective scalar curvature

R. Consider-
ing a compact region 1 TM (in general, we can take any nonholonomic
manifold V instead of TM), with

computed for g

(46). This family

of geometric objects is induced by a family of Finsler generating function
F(, x, y) parametrized by a ow parameter [, ] R with a su-
ciently small > 0. It is possible to introduce such functionals in Finsler
geometry (we use our system of denotations),

T( g,

, f) =

R +

e
f
dV, (48)

)( g,

, f, ) =

R +

2
+f 2n)

dV,
where dV is the volume form of g g (up to frame transforms), integration
is taken over 1, dim1 = 2n. Via frame transforms and for a parameter > 0,
we can x

V
dV = 1 when = (4)
n
e
f
. Working with

, we can model
in not Nadapted form dierent types of Ricci ow evolutions of Finsler
geometries by imposing nonholonomic constraints with a distortion relation
(45). In this approach, the FinslerRicci ows can be considered as evolving
nonholonomic dynamical systems on the space of Riemannian metrics on
24
TM and the functionals

T and

) are of Lyapunov type. LeviCivita Ricci
at congurations are dened as xed on points of the corresponding
dynamical systems.
The goal of this section is to redene the functionals (48) in Nadapted
form when the evolution of Finsler geometries with Sasaki type metrics (12)
on

TM will be extracted by a corresponding xing
F
D =
Ch
D, or
B
D (the
variants with
F
D =

D, and/or =

D where studied in Refs. [22, 24]).

Lemma 4.1 For a Finsler geometry model with dconnection
F
D com-
pletely determined by F and g, the Perelmans functionals (48) can be re
written equivalently in Nadapted form by considering distortion relations
for scalar curvature and Ricci tensor (31),
F
T( g,
F
D,

f) =

V
(
F
s
R +[
F
D

f[
2
)e

f
dV, (49)
F
)( g,
F
D,

f, ) =

V
[ (
F
s
R +[
h
D

f[ +[
v
D

f[)
2
+

f 2n] dV, (50)
where the scalar curvature
F
s
R (29) is computed for
F
D = (
F
h
D,
F
v
D),

F
D

2
=

F
h
D

f

2
+

F
v
D

f

2
, and the new scaling function

f satises

V
dV = 1 for = (4 )
n
e

f
and > 0.
Proof. The proof of this Lemma is similar to that for Claim 3.1 in Ref.
[22] for nonholonomic manifolds (for a prescribed canonical dconnection).
On

TM, such a statement transforms into a Lemma similar to that in origi-
nal Perelmans work [3] if we consider models of Finsler geometry with
F
D
is related to

via a unique distortion relation (45). For simplicity, we can
use =
h
=
v
for a couple of possible h and vows parameters,
= (
h
,
v
), and introduce a new function

f, instead of f. This scalar
function is redened in such a form that in formulas (48) the distortion of
Ricci tensor (31) and dconnection under


F
D results in
(


R +[

f[
2
)e
f
= (
F
s
R+[
F
D

f[
2
)e

f
+ (51)
for (49). Similarly, we rescale the parameter to have
[(


R+[

f[)
2
+f 2n)] = [ (
F
s
R+[
h
D

f[ +[
v
D

f[)
2
+

f 2n] +
1
(52)
for some and
1
for which

V
dV = 0 and

V

1
dV = 0. This results
in formula (50). Finally, in this proof, we conclude that both in metric
compatible and noncompatible Finsler models uniquely determined by F
25
and g, the Perelman functionals are certain nonholonomic deformations of
those for

.

A similar proof with redenition to a corresponding function

f f and
parameter , can be used for proof of
Corollary 4.1 Fixing a point x TM and a compact region 1
x
and via
distortions (36), respectively, we can transform (49) and (50) into
F
T( g
ij
,

D,

f) =

V
( g
jk

Ric
jk
+[

D

f[
2
)e
f
dV, (53)
F
)( g
ij
,

D,

f, ) =

V
[( g
jk

Ric
jk
+[

D

f[)
2
+f n] dV, (54)
dening a nonholonomic dynamics related to AkbarZadeh denition of the
Ricci tensor

Ric
jk
(32).
In above formulas, integrals of type

V
. . .dV can be transformed into
computations on spherical bundle SM, see details [30, 43, 29],

SM
. . .
(1)
n(n1)/2
(n 1)!
(d)
n1
=

SM
. . .dV
SM
,
where the volume element is determined by F following formula (34).
4.2 On Nadapted geometric structures
Following the classication of fundamental geometric objects for Finsler
geometry models presented in Figures 1 and 2 , we conclude that any geo-
metric conguration and Ricci ow evolution formula for Riemannian met-
rics containing the LeviCivita connection can be transformed into its
analogous on TM for Finsler spaces following such rules:
Conclusion 4.1 (Rules)
1. Consider a h-vsplitting determined by F() := F(, u) via ows of
canonical Nconnection

N () and adapted frames

() = (e
i
() =
i
N
b
i
()
b
, e
a
=
a
),
du

() =

e
i
= dx
i
, e
a
= dy
a
+N
a
k
()dx
k

,
related to e

() (9) and e

() (10) by any convenient frame/coordinate

transforms.
26
2. Metrics g

() (46) are transformed equivalently into dmetrics g()

(12) and/or any related via frame transforms g (17).
3. Via distortion relations (45), we construct necessary chains of distor-
tions of connections,

() ()

D() =

h
D(),
v
D()

F
D(), where
F
D =

D, =
Ch
D, or =
B
D.
4. Using such distortions of connections, we can compute distortions of
curvature tensors and related Ricci tensors (see (31), (37), (38) and
(36)) and scalar curvatures.
5. Changing data (f, ) (

f, ) given by formulas of type (51) and (52),
we compute distortions of the Perelmans functionals (48), i.e

T and

) , into
F
T and
F
), respectively, (49) and (50).
In this work, we shall omit detailed proofs if they can be obtained us-
ing metric compatible constructions in (pseudo) Riemannian and Lagrange
Finsler geometry as in Refs. [3, 6, 21, 22, 24] following rules stated in Con-
clusion 4.1.
4.3 Hamilton equations for metric noncompatible Finsler spa-
ces
For the canonical dconnection

D (similarly, for

D), we can construct
the canonical Laplacian operator,

:=

D

D , h- and vcomponents of the
Ricci tensor,

R
ij
and

R
ab
, and consider parameter (), / = 1 (for
simplicity, we do not include the normalized term).
Theorem 4.1 The FinslerRicci ows for
F
D preserving a symmetric
metric structure g = g and nonholonomic constraints

=
F
D
F

Z,

D =
F
D
F

Z, (55)
resulting in distortions

=

D

=
F
+
Z

, (56)
F
=
F
D

F
D

,
Z

=
F

Z

F

Z

[
F
D

(
F

Z

) +
F

Z

(
F
D

)];

R

=
F
R


F

Zic

,
s

R =
F
s
R g
F

Zic

=
F
s
R
F
s

Z,
F
s

Z = g
F

Zic

=
F
h

Z +
F
v

Z,
F
h

Z = g
ij F

Zic
ij
,
F
v

Z = h
ab F

Zic
ab
;
F
s
R =
F
h
R +
F
v
R,
F
h
R := g
ij F
R
ij
,
F
v
R = h
ab F
R
ab
,
can be characterized by two equivalent systems of geometric ow equations:
27
1. Evolution with distortions of the canonical dconnections introduced
in metric compatible nonholonomic Ricci ow equations,
g
ij

= 2

F
R
ij

F

Zic
ij

,
g
ab

= 2

F
R
ij

F

Zic
ij

,
F
R
ia
=
F

Zic
ia
,
F
R
ai
=
F

Zic
ai
, (57)

F
+
Z

f +

F
D
F

Z

F
s
R +
F
s

Z,
and the property that

T(g,

D,

f) =
2

V
[[
F
R
ij

F

Zic
ij
+ (
F
D
i

F

Z
i
)(
F
D
j

F

Z
j
)

f[
2
+
[
F
R
ab

F

Zic
ab
+ (
F
D
a

F

Z
a
)(
F
D
b

F

Z
b
)

f[
2
]e

f
dV,
when

V
e

f
dV is constant.
2. Evolution derived from distorted Perelmans functional
F
T( g,
F
D,

f)
(49),
g
ij

= 2

F
R
ij

F

Zic
ij

,
g
ab

= 2

F
R
ij

F

Zic
ij

,
F
R
ia
=
F

Zic
ia
,
F
R
ai
=
F

Zic
ai
, (58)

=
F

f +

F
D

F
s
R ,
and the property that

F
T( g,
F
D,

f) = 2

V
[[
F
R

+
F
D

F
D

f[
2
]e

f
dV,
when

V
e

f
dV = const.
Proof. The distortions (45) can be written in an equivalent form (55)
which allows us to compute respective splitting for Laplacians and, follow-
ing formula (29), the decomposition of necessary types Ricci and scalar
curvature operators (56). This reduces the constructions to a corresponding
system of Ricci ow evolution equations for

D, see proofs in Refs. [22, 24],
g
ij

= 2

R
ij
,
g
ab

= 2

R
ab
, (59)

f +

h

R
v

R,
28
derived from the functional

T( g,

D,

f) =

V
(
s

R +[

f[
2
)e

f
dV .
Such metric compatible canonical FinslerRicci ow equations are equiv-
alent (via nonholonomic transforms

D) to those proposed for Rieman-
nian spaces by G. Perelman [3] (details of the proof with are given in
Proposition 1.5.3 of [6]). We must impose the conditions

R
ia
= 0 and

R
ai
= 0 if we wont to keep the total metric to be symmetric under Ricci
evolution. If such conditions are not satised, we generate nonsymmetric
metrics under nonholonomic geometric evolution because the Ricci tensor
may be nonsymmetric for Finsler spaces, see details in [23].
The system of equations (57) is just that for the canonical dconnection
(59) but rewritten in terms of (in general, metric noncompatible)
F
D.
This means that we can follow a metric noncompatible evolution derived
from a Perlman type functional

T formulated in terms of the canonical
dconnection and respective scalar function

f.
In another turn, the system of evolution equations (58) is derived di-
rectly from
F
T( g,
F
D,

f) applying the same methods from [3, 6] and, for
spaces with Nconnection structure, in [21, 22, 23, 24]. The equivalence
of both systems (57) and (58) can be proven for Finsler connections which
are related mutually via distortions completely and uniquely determined by
F and g, for instance, the Berwald and Chern connections. In such cases,
via frame transforms and nonholonomic deformations

T can be transformed
into
F
T and inversely. Such an equivalence and, in general, Perelman func-
tionals can not be introduced in selfconsistent form if
F
D is with arbitrary
nonmetricity.
Finally, we note that the functional

T(g,

D,

f) is nondecreasing in time
and the monotonicity is strict unless we are on a steady Nadapted gradient
solution (see details in [22]). This property may not survive under non-
holonomic deformations to certain
F
D. This is not surprising for metric
noncompatible geometric evolutions. Nevertheless, such distortions can be
computed in unique forms due to relations (45) and kept under control via
nonholonomic constraints which allows us to construct
F
T( g,
F
D,

f) and
derive metric noncompatible evolution equations (58).
The above theorem can be reformulated in terms of distortions from
the Cartan dconnection, when instead of

D =
F
D
F

Z in (55) it is
considered

D =
F
D
F

Z. To consider an almost K ahler model of Cartan

Finsler space is important because following such an approach we work with
almost symplectic variables, see an explicit construction in section 2.2.4.
This way it is possible to perform deformation quantization of the Finsler
Ricci ow theory [38] and develop noncommutative models [25] applying
29
standard geometric quantization methods.
The FinslerRicci evolution equations derived in this work are with re-
spect to Nadapted frames (9) and (10) which in their turn are subjected to
geometric evolution. Using vielbein parametrizations (47) and similar for-
mulas for Riemannian spaces [6, 7, 8] (see also models of geometric evolution
with Nconnections in [21, 22]),
Corollary 4.2 The evolution, for all time [0,
0
), of Nadapted frames
in a Finsler space,
e

() = e

(, u)

,
up to frame/coordinate transforms, is dened by the coecients
e

(, u) =

e
i
i
(, u)

N
b
i
(, u) e
a
b
(, u)
0 e
a
a
(, u)

,
e

(, u) =

e
i
i
=
i
i
e
b
i
=

N
b
k
(, u)
k
i
e
i
a
= 0 e
a
a
=
a
a

,
with g
ij
() = e
i
i
(, u) e
j
j
(, u)
ij
and g
ab
() = e
a
a
(, u) e
b
b
(, u)
ab
, where

ij
= diag[1, ... 1] and
ab
= diag[1, ... 1] x a signature of g
[0]

(u),
is given by equations

= g

(60)
if we prescribe that the geometric constructions are derived by the canonical
dconnection.
Finally, we emphasize that g

= g
ij

R
ij
+ g
ab

R
ab
in (60) selects
for evolution only the symmetric components of the Ricci dtensor for the
canonical dconnection. The formulas for a distortion

R

=
F
R


F

Zic

allow us to compute ow contributions dened by metric noncom-

patibe ows with
F
R

.
4.4 Statistical analogy and thermodynamics of FinslerRicci
ows
The functional

) is in a sense analogous to minus entropy [3] and
this property was proven for metric compatible FinslerRicci ows [22, 24]
with functionals

) and/or

), respectively written for

D and

D. This
30
allows to associate some theromdynamical values characterizing (non) holo-
nomic geometric evolution. The aim of this section is to show how a sta-
tistical/thermodynamic analogy can be provided for metric noncompatible
Ricci ows.
For the functionals

) and
F
) (50), we can prove two systems of
equations as in Theorem 4.1 (we omit such considerations in this work). For
simplicity, we provide an equivalent result for stated for

).
Theorem 4.2 For any dmetric g() (17),

D =
F
D
F

Z, and functions

f() and () being solutions of the system of equations

g
ij

= 2

F
R
ij

F

Zic
ij

,
g
ab

= 2

F
R
ab

Zic
ab

= (
F
+
Z

)

f +

(
F
D
F

Z)

f

s

R +
2n

,

= 1,
it is satised the condition

)(g(),

f(), ()) = 2

V
[[
F
R

Zic

+
(
F
D

)(
F
D

)

f
1
2
g

[
2
](4 )
n
e

f
dV,
for

V
e

f
dV = const. This functional is Nadapted nondecreasing if it is
both h and vnondecreasing.
Proof. We apply the rules from Conclusion 4.1 using, for instance, a
proof with Nadapted modication of Proposition 1.5.8 in [6] containing
the details of the original result from [3]). For metric compatible Lagrange
and/or Finsler ows, there are proofs [22, 24] that for

D, the equations
g
ij

= 2

R
ij
,
g
ab

= 2

R
ab
,

f +

s

R +
2n

,

= 1
result in the condition

)(g(),

f(), ()) = 2

V
[[

R
ij
+

D
i

D
j

f
1
2
g
ij
[
2
+
[

R
ab
+

D
a

D
b

f
1
2
g
ab
[
2
](4 )
n
e

f
dV.
31
The rules from Conclusion 4.1 allows us to write for

D, rescaling correspond-
ingly the functions

f()

f(), () (), that
g
ij

= 2

R
ij
,
g
ab

= 2

R
ab
,

f +

s

R +
2n

,

= 1
and (for another functional,

))

)(g(),

f(), ()) = 2

V
[[

+

D

f
1
2
g

[
2
](4 )
n
e

f
dV.
In the above formulas, we introduce the distorting relations

=
F
D
F

Z,

D =
F
D
F

Z,

D =
F
D
F

Z (61)
and

=

D

=
F
+
Z

, (62)
F
=
F
D

F
D

,
Z

=
F

[
F
D

(
F

) +
F

(
F
D

)];

R

=
F
R


F

Zic

,
s

R =
F
s
R g
F

Zic

=
F
s
R
F
s

Z,
F
s

Z = g
F

Zic

=
F
h

Z +
F
v

Z,
F
h

Z = g
ij F

Zic
ij
,
F
v

Z = h
ab F

Zic
ab
;
F
s
R =
F
h
R +
F
v
R,
F
h
R := g
ij F
R
ij
,
F
v
R = h
ab F
R
ab
,
resulting in the equations and condition of theorem.
Ricci ows with ,

D and

D are characterized by respective thermody-
namic values, see section 5 in [3] and, for metric compatible Finsler spaces,
Refs. [22, 24]. Such constructions can be noholonomically deformed into
metric noncompatible congurations.
In order to provide a statistical analogy, we consider a partition function
Z =

exp(E)d(E) for the canonical ensemble at temperature

1
being
dened by the measure taken to be the density of states (E). The ther-
modynamical values are computed in standard form for the average energy,
'E` := log Z/, the entropy S := 'E` + log Z and the uctuation
:=

(E 'E`)
2

=
2
log Z/
2
.
32
Theorem 4.3 Any family of Finsler geometries for which the conditions of
Theorem 4.2 are satised is characterized by thermodynamic values

F
E

=
2

F
s
R +[
F
D

f[
2

dV,
F
S =

F
s
R +[
F
D

f[
2

+

f 2n

dV,
F
= 2
4

V
[[
F
R

Zic

+ (63)
(
F
D

)(
F
D

)

f
1
2
g

[
2
] dV.
Proof. There are two possibilities to prove this theorem. The rst
one is to use the partition function

Z = exp

V
[

f +n] dV

and com-
pute values (63) using methods from [3, 6], changing
F
D follow-
ing rules from Conclusion 4.1 and rescaling

f

f and (such a
rescaling is useful if we wont to compare thermodynamical values for dif-
ferent Finsler connections). A similar proof is possible if metric compatible
Finsler connections are used. For instance, considering

D
F
D and

Z = exp

V
[

f +n] dV

, we compute [22, 24]

=
2

s

R +[

f[
2

dV,

S =

s

R +[

f[
2

+

f 2n

dV,
= 2
4

V
[[

+

D

f
1
2
g

[
2
] dV.
Introducing distortions (61) and (62) into the thermodynamical values for

D, we generate analogous thermodynamical values (63) for

F
D.
In general, for a given fundamental Finsler function F(u), we can con-
struct an innite number of metric compatible and noncompatible dconnec-
tions
F
D. The theory of FinslerRicci ows allows us to solve the problem
which Finsler conguration is more optimal thermodynamically. Fixing
two dconnections
F
1
D and
F
2
D generated by the same F, we can compute
two triples of data

F
1
E

,
F
1
S,
F
1

and

F
2
E

,
F
2
S,
F
2

.
Conclusion 4.2 Two models of Finsler geometry,

F, g,
F
1
D

and

F, g,
F
2
D

generated by the same fundamental Finsler function F are thermodynami-

cally more (less, equivalent) convenient if
F
1
S <
F
2
S (
F
1
S >
F
2
S,
F
1
S =
33
F
2
S). Similar statements on energetic convenience can be formulated com-
paring

F
1
E

and

F
2
E

.
The theorems and conclusions provided in this section can be formulated
and proved separately on h- and vsubspaces of a nonholonomic manifold V
and/or a tangent bundle TM. Some geometric and physical models with the
Akbar-Zadeh curvature or other preferred Finsler connection (Berwald,
Chern types etc) can be more/less/equivalent to alternative ones, but gen-
erated by the same F. An exact answer is possible if a value F is xed
following certain geometric/physical arguments.
References
[1] R. S. Hamilton, Threemanifolds with positive Ricci curvature, J. Di.
Geom. 17 (1982) 255306
[2] R. S. Hamilton, The Formation of Singularities in the Ricci Flow, in
Surveys in Dierential Geometry, Vol. 2 (International Press, 1995),
pp. 7136
[3] G. Perelman, The entropy formula for the Ricci ow and its geometric
applications, arXiv: math.DG/ 0211159
[4] G. Perelman, Ricci ow with surgery on threemanifolds, arXiv: math.
DG/ 03109
[5] G. Perelman, Finite extinction time for the solutions to the Ricci ow
on certain threemanifolds, arXiv: math.DG/ 0307245
[6] H. -D. Cao and X. -P. Zhu, HamiltonPerelmans proof of the Poincare
conjecture and the geometrization conjecture, Asian J. Math., 10
(2006) 165495; arXiv: math. DG/ 0612069
[7] B. Kleiner and J. Lott, Notes on Perelmans papers, Geometry & Topol-
ogy 12 (2008) 25872855; arXiv: math.DG/ 0605667
[8] J. W. Morgan and G. Tian, Ricci ow and the Poincare conjecture,
American Mathematical Society, Clay Mathematics Monographs, vol.
3 (2007); arXiv: math.DG/ 0607607
[9] D. Bao, On two curvaturedriven problems in RiemannFinsler geom-
etry, in: Finsler Geometry. In memory of M. Matsumoto. Proceedings
34
of the 40th symposium on Finsler geometry, Sapporo, September 6-
10, 2005; editors: S. V. Sabau et all. Tokyo, Mathematical Society of
Japan; Advanced Studies in Pure Mathematics 48 (2007) 19-71
[10] S. Vacaru, Finsler and Lagrange geometries in Einstein and string grav-
ity, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 5 (2008) 473-511
[11] S. Vacaru, Critical remarks on Finsler modications of gravity and cos-
mology by Zhe Chang and Xin Li, Phys. Lett. B 690 (2010) 224-228
[12] S. Vacaru, Principles of Einstein-Finsler Gravity and Perspectives in
Modern Cosmology, arXiv: 1004.3007
[13] Cliord and Riemann- Finsler Structures in Geometric Mechanics and
Gravity, Selected Works, by S. Vacaru, P. Stavrinos, E. Gaburov and
D. Gont a. Dierential Geometry Dynamical Systems, Monograph 7
(Geometry Balkan Press, 2006); www.mathem.pub.ro/dgds/mono/va-
t.pdf and gr-qc/0508023
[14] E. Cartan, Les Espaces de Finsler (Paris, Herman, 1935)
[15] M. Matsumoto, Foundations of Finsler Geometry and Special Finsler
Spaces (Kaisisha: Shigaken, 1986)
[16] R. Miron and M. Anastasiei, The Geometry of Lagrange Spaces: Theory
and Applications, FTPH no. 59 (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dor-
drecht, Boston, London, 1994)
[17] A. Bejancu, Finsler Geometry and Applications (Ellis Horwood, Chich-
ester, England, 1990)
[18] D. Bao, S. -S. Chern, and Z. Shen, An Introduction to RiemannFinsler
Geometry. Graduate Texts in Math., 200 (SpringerVerlag, 2000)
[19] S. Vacaru, Ricci ows and solitonic pp-waves, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 21
(2006) 4899-4912
[20] S. Vacaru and M. Visinescu, Nonholonomic Ricci ows and running
cosmological constant: I. 4D Taub-NUT metrics, Int. J. Mod. Phys.
A22 (2007) 1135-1159
[21] S. Vacaru, Nonholonomic Ricci Flows: I. Riemann Metrics and
Lagrange-Finsler Geometry, math.DG/0612162
35
[22] S. Vacaru, Nonholonomic Ricci ows: II. Evolution equations and dy-
namics, J. Math. Phys. 49 (2008) 043504
[23] S. Vacaru, Nonholonomic Ricci ows, exact solutions in gravity, and
symmetric and nonsymmetric metrics, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 48 (2009)
579-606
[24] S. Vacaru, The Entropy of Lagrange-Finsler spaces and Ricci ows,
Rep. Math. Phys. 63 (2009) 95-110
[25] S. Vacaru, Spectral functionals, nonholonomic Dirac operators, and
noncommutative Ricci ows, J. Math. Phys. 50 (2009) 073503
[26] S. Vacaru, Nonholonomic Ricci ows and parametric deformations of
the solitonic pp-waves and Schwarzschild solutions, Electronic Journal
of Theoretical Physics (EJTP) 6, N21 (2009) 63-93; arXiv: 0705.0729
[27] S. Vacaru, Fractional Nonholonomic Ricci Flows, arXiv: 1004.0625
[28] S. Vacaru, Diusion and Self-Organized Criticality in Ricci Flow Evo-
lution of Einstein and Finsler Spaces, arXiv: 1010.2021
[29] A. Tayebi and E. Peyghan, Finsler Surface with Ricci Flow Equation
[unpublished]
[30] H. AkbarZadeh, Generalized Einstein manifolds, J. Geom. Phys. 17
(1995) 342380
[31] B. Riemann,

Uber die Hypothesen, welche der Geometries zugrunde
liegen. Habilitationsvortrag 1854. Ges. math. Werke, 272287 (Leipzig,
1892); Reproduced: (Dover Publications, 1953)
[32] C. Ehresmann, Les conexiones innit`esimales dans un espace bre
dierentiable. Coloque de Topologie, Bruxelles (1955) 2955
[33] A. Kawaguchi, Bezienhung zwischen einer metrischen linearen Uber-
tragung unde iener michtmetrischen in einem allemeinen metrischen
Raume, Akad. Wetensch, Amsterdam, Proc. 40 (1937) 596601
[34] A. Kawaguchi, On the theory of nonlinear connections, I, II, Tensor,
N. S. 2 (1952) 123142; 6 (1956) 165199
[35] L. Berwald, On Cartan and Finsler geometries, III, Two dimensional
Finsler spaces with rectilinear extrema, Ann. Math. 42, No. 2 (1941)
84122
36
[36] S. Vacaru, On general solutions in Einstein gravity, Int. J. Geom. Meth.
Mod. Phys. 8 (2011) 921
[37] S. Vacaru, On general solutions in Einstein and high dimensional grav-
ity, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 49 (2010) 884-913
[38] S. Vacaru, Deformation quantization of almost Kaehler models and
Lagrange-Finsler spaces, J. Math. Phys. 48 (2007) 123509
[39] E. Peyghan and A. Tayebi, Finslerian complex and K ahler structures,
Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 11 (2010) 30213030
[40] E. Peyghan and A. Tayebi, A K ahler structure with nonzero constant
ag curvature, J. Math. Phys. 51 (2010) 022904
[41] E. Peyghan and A. Heyari, A class of locally symmetric paraKahler
Einstein structures on the cotangent bundle, Int. Math. Forum, 5 (2010)
145153
[42] S. Chern, Local equivalence and Euclidean connections in Finsler
spaces, Sci. Rep. Nat. Tsing Hua Univ. Ser. A. 5 (1948) 95121; or
Selected Papers, vol. II, 194 (Springer, 1989)
[43] D. Bao and C. Robles, Ricci and ag curvatures in Finsler geometry.
In: A Sample of RiemannFinsler Geometry, Mathematical Sciences
Research Institute Publications, vol. 50 (Cambridge University Press,
2004) 197259
[44] C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne and J. A. Wheeler, Gravitation (Freeman,
1973)
[45] R. M. Wald, General Relativity (University of Chicago Press, 1984)
37