@DanielFischer: Is there a simple way to show that $(\partial_{x^1})_p, \dots, (\partial_{x^n})_p \in T_p M$ are linearly independent? The proof we used introduces some weird cutoff function without any motivation, in my opinion, and seems a bit far-fetched.
@Huy You use a cut-off function so that you have no problem extending your function that is annihilated by all but one of the differential operators to the whole manifold. If that's the proof you're looking at. Of course, if you define $T_pM$ as the space of derivations on the germs of smooth functions, the linear independence is practically built into the definition.
@DanielFischer: In GR, we defined vectors as derivations satisfying the Leibniz rule. We did not prove there that they are linearly independent but just assumed it to be given. In DG however, we defined them as directional derivatives. So there's no simple way to avoid the cut-off functions, right?
@Huy Depends on whether you defined them as acting on locally defined functions, or globally defined. If locally defined, you of course don't need a cut-off. If globally, cut-off is the easiest way to extend to the whole manifold.
@DanielFischer: Is there a reason to define the vectors as directional derivatives as opposed to derivations, except for intuition? It seems to me most of the proofs are much easier using the more abstract definition.
@Huy Each of the definitions has its advantages and disadvantages. Directional derivatives are easier to see the concept of, derivations are easier for algebraic manipulations.
The wise course uses both. And possibly also the third classical definition as the space of equivalence classes of some curves.
@DanielFischer: Something else I noticed: In DG, we defined vector fields as maps from $M$ to $TM$, which to me seems like the most natural definition. In GR however, vector fields were defined to be linear maps $X: C^\infty(M) \to C^\infty(M)$ satisfying the Leibniz rule. How are these two definitions equivalent? Or are they different things?
@Huy If you have a smooth section $V$ of $TM$, then $X \colon f \mapsto (p\mapsto V(p)f)$ is a vector field in the GR sense. In the other direction, you go by coordinate functions times cut-off functions.
According to my lecture notes: Let x be the child of the node that we delete. Let w be its sibling node and p the father of x. There are four cases: 1. Case 1: w is red. We cahnge the color of w to black and of p to red and we make a left rotation around the father of x. Now we have one of the cases 2,3 or 4. For example the case 2 is this: Both of the children of w are black. We chage the color of w to red, x to black and we transfer the black that we subtracted from w and x to p. If p was red it becomes black and the algorithm terminates. Otherwise, p gets double black and the algorithm c…
According to my lecture notes:
Let $x$ be the child of the node that we delete. Let $w$ be its sibling node and $p$ the father of $x$.
There are four cases:
At the first case, $w$ is red. We cahnge the color of $w$ to black and of $p$ to red and we make a left rotation around the father of $...
@SayanChattopadhyay An important thing: proposed problems and the research articles cannot be sent in the same way. For the latter ones you need to regitser on their site and provide with more information.
@SayanChattopadhyay In general, when you send a question with a solution, put all in latex, follow their guidelines, and I'm sure that if what you proposed is considered proper to be published, it will be published.
@Ramanewbie Mostly in the Pyrenées and in Savoie, but also a bit on the Cote d'Argent and in the Massif Central, plus once in the Normandie. And a bit here-and-there occasionally.
@DanielFischer: After having defined the tangent bundle, we show that it has a unique naturally induced structure of a $2n$-dimensional smooth manifold. Is that of any relevance? I don't see it explicitly being used in the later course anymore.
My friend has this plan where he implies that it's impossible to lose, as long as the odds of winning are 50/50 on each bet. His idea is that basically you keep doubling your bet until you win and then start over again.
So for example, you bet 1 dollar and you lose, your net profit is now -1 dol...
@DanielFischer: After introducing smooth vector fields, we look at the example $TS^1 \cong S^1 \times \mathbb{R}$ and afterwards it is stated that the analogous does not hold for the $2$-sphere, in words "there is no non-zero vector field". This is supposed to state "no non-zero smooth vector field", right? That would be the hairy ball theorem, correct?
@Huy You can relax "smooth" to "continuous", yes, known as the hairy ball theorem, or in German, der Igelsatz: "Ein stetig gekämmter Igel hat mindestens einen Glatzpunkt."
@DanielFischer: We used smooth vector fields in this context because we used the fact that the tangent bundle of $M$ is diffeomorphic to $M \times \mathbb{R}^n$ iff $M$ possesses $n$ smooth vector fields that are linearly independent at each point.
Can I relax that statement with continuity as well?
@Huy Yes. If the fields are linearly independent at a point, all close enough fields will be too, and you can approximate a zero-free continuous vector field as good as you want by a (zero-free) smooth field.
@r9m Soon it's going to appear a generalization I did with a mathematician on a problem where I used that Stirling's formula along with a clever use of the symmetry.
@r9m I tested it on some mathematicians. Some asked me: "is this a joke?" I replied: "no, it's not". I admit it blows up minds by its very nice good-looking. :-)
@Chris'ssis would you decapitate me if I told you I don't remember the problem statement ? :P (I thought I had copied it to a text file .. seems I haven't :( .. )
Smoking is not only bad for your health but also disgusting, in my opinion.
@DanielFischer: Any idea what the symbol $\sqcap$ usually denotes? I've seen it for the first time, our prof denotes the set of orientations on a vector space as $\sqcap(V)$, but I've never seen that before.
@DanielFischer @DavidZhang: Any idea how you would "say" it? Our prof. said he didn't know what the name of the symbol was so he would just say "table V".
@DanielFischer: We want to check for $n=1,2$ whether $\mathbb{R}P^n$ is orientable. The argument given in the notes is a bit unclear to me. It starts with a double cover $\pi: S^n \to \mathbb{R}P^n = S^n / \sim$, and then concludes $\mathbb{R}P^1 = S^1 / \sim \cong S^1$ is orientable whereas, since the Mobius strip $\subseteq \mathbb{R}P^2$, $\mathbb{R}P^2$ is not orientable. How can I see that the Mobius strip is contained in $\mathbb{R}P^2$?
@DanielFischer: Also, how is $S^1 / \sim \cong S^1$?
@Huy Restrict your attention to a closed hemisphere. Hammer it flat to become a closed disk in your mind if you want. Think a "straight" strip on the closed hemisphere along a great circle passing through the pole. The identification of antipodes on the ends of the strip lying on the equator of the sphere glues the strip to be a Möbius strip.
@Huy Take a closed semicircle and glue the endpoints together.
@DanielFischer: We defined an immersion as a smooth map $f: M \to N$ with $df(p)$ being injective for all $p \in M$. All of this definition is completely clear to me but I have a really hard time visualising what an immersion might look like, or how I can imagine $f$ if I know its differential is injective. Do you have any advice for that?
(@DanielFischer: Since we defined vectors through directional derivatives, we defined the differential by mapping some path inducing the vector via $f$ on $M$ and then the result is the corresponding vector on $T_{f(p)}N$, if that is of any relevance)
(the path is mapped on $N$, not $M$, of course)
Also, in this context, what is the difference between the differential of a function and the push forward of the tangent map? The former is used in DG, the latter in GR, in my courses. They seem to be the same, right? @DanielFischer
@Huy Each point of $M$ has a neighbourhood $U$ such that $f(U)$ looks like the graph of a function $\mathbb{R}^{\dim M} \to \mathbb{R}^{\dim N - \dim M}$. That's not necessarily particularly helpful, though. Globally, images of immersions can be less nice, $8$ is an immersed $S^1$ for example (But $8$ isn't bad, just one easy self-intersection. However, it's the most-easily typed example.)
@Huy "push forward of the tangent map"? The differential is also often called the tangent map. But also $df(p) \colon T_pM \to T_{f(p)}N$ is often called the tangent map. Not sure which one is meant.
@DanielFischer: Sorry, I confused something. The tangent map is also called push-forward, in GR, and its adjoint the pull-back. So push-forward is the same as differential, correct?
I'll try to make use of your description of immersions.
@Huy Yes, one can also use push-forward and pull-back. While calling the tangent map push-forward is somewhat rare, it's very common to call the map on the differential forms the pull-back (by $f$).
@robjohn using that $\pi$ is irrational we have that (and your answer) $\left|e^{ip}-1\right|=\left|e^{i(p-2\pi q)}-1\right|\le|p-2\pi q|<\frac{1}{q}<\varepsilon$ so there are integers $p$ for which $e^{ip}$ is arbitrarily close to ( but not equal to ) $1$.
I build an algorithm for solving Integer Factorization problem when the number to factor is selected by multiplication of two prime numbers with the same bit count.
So far I only been able to factor 60 bit numbers. I want to explain to you how it works and perhaps you be able to suggest me ways ...
@MikeMiller: I'm looking at the statement that a curve is an immersion iff it is regular. How can I imagine $d \gamma(p)$ for some curve $\gamma$, or more importantly the tangent space of an interval? It's just $\mathbb{R}$, I guess, but somehow I get all confused trying to imagine this setup.
@Huy: The tangent space of an interval is just the interval times $\Bbb R$. I just imagine it not very tangently at all, as $I \times \Bbb R$, each copy of $\Bbb R$ perpendicular to $I$.
@ABeautifulMind: I didn't plan to do that anytime soon. I'll go snowboarding with her, this weekend, if you must know.
@MikeMiller: And how can I think about $d \gamma(p)$? The basis of the tangent space of the interval is just $\partial_t|t=p$, right? Which vector in $T_{\gamma(p)}M$ will this be mapped to?
@Ilya_Gazman When the snow hits around 10 feet, around 5% of the population has latent genes triggered, ala X-men, and morph into yeti like beasts. These beasts are mostly friendly, and you can make a valuable friend if you are willing to offer some hunks of meat.
@MikeMiller: Too confusing if we're suddenly in $\mathbb{R}^n$, or even subsets of it. I can't think properly anymore. But I already had a cup of coffee. :(
@Huy The problem, I think, is that beause $I$ is in $\Bbb R$, you're automatically taking it in coordinates (and thinking of the basis as $\partial_t$). This makes it harder to think abstractly, which you need to do when your codomain is a manifold.
@Huy The definition of the tangent space at a point on a manifold is the space of functionals on the space of functionals on the space of functions at that point etc
You have to be in a coordinate chart to talk about directional derivatives, or at least embedded in $\Bbb R^n$. This works out OK if you know what a vector bundle is, but I doubt that.
@DonLarynx: Solve for $y$, then the perpendicular line is $y = - \frac{b}{a}x$ and now you can find the intersection point and compute the distance from the origin using Pythagoras, would be the straightforward approach.
@DonLarynx: The intersection can be found setting $-\frac{b}{a} x = \frac{1}{b} (ax-1)$, i.e. $\frac{b}{a} x + \frac{a}{b} x = \frac{1}{b}$. The LHS is $(\frac{a^2+b^2}{ab})x$ and thus $x = \frac{a}{a^2+b^2}$. Correspondingly, you plug in to find $y = -\frac{b}{a^2+b^2}$ and then Pythagoras gives you $l = \sqrt{\frac{a^2+b^2}{(a^2+b^2)^2}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{a^2+b^2}}$.
If the length of perpendicular from the point (1,1)to the line ax-by+c=o be 1, show that 1/c+1/a-1/b=c/2ab.
if p and p' be the length of the perpendiculars from the origin upon the straight line whose eqn are xsecA+ycosecA=a and xcosA-ysinA=acos^2A, prove that 4p^2+(2p')^2=4a^2cosA^2.
Please ...
See let me name the points as x1 and y1 and the other set of points as x2 and y2 . now find the values ofx and y from the equation and then put iron the distance between the points which is sqrt of x2-x1 whole square +y2-y1 whole square
hey everyone, this is not fit for a full question/post on the site so I ask here: In a group if $(ab)^n=a^n b^n \forall a,b \in G $ and for all n in integers, then prove that G is abelian. I can prove ab = ba using only n = 2 case, then why is more info given?
Because more is necessary, @zed. There are groups with $(ab)^n=a^nb^n$ for all $a,b$ for some fixed $n$ that are not abelian. If it's true for three consecutive integers $n$ then your group is Abelian.
@MikeMiller: On wikipedia, an embedding is defined as an injective immersion which is homeomorphic onto its image. Isn't stating it is injective redundant, since a homeomorphism is bijective?
The canonical example of an injective immersion that is not an embedding is an irrational line in the torus: $t \mapsto (e^{it},e^{i\alpha t})$, where $\alpha$ is irrational.