A boundary point $p\in \partial{M}$ is in the domain of a boundary chart, $(U,\phi)$ , in this case is $\phi$ a homeomorphism to $\mathbb{R}^n$ or $\mathbb{H}^n$?
@AlessandroCodenotti That's a great classic. I finally worked it out when I started teaching point-set topology. Over the years, I believe I had two students who gave polished proofs.
I guess everything can be phrased in terms of categories if you try hard enough, but I feel that in most cases (and in this case in particular) it's nothing but obfuscation
I convinced myself that the identifications $T_x\mathbb{R}^n\cong\mathbb{R}^n$ are in fact natural, in the sense that they give a natural isomorphism between the differential functor and a functor representing the classical derivative (by acting on the trivial bundle) as functors from the full subcategory of $\mathbf{Diff}$ generated by Euclidean spaces to the category of smooth vector bundles
no i'm pretty sure the correct phrasing here is that there's a canonical isomorphism $TV \cong V \times V$ given by translating the tangent space above zero
To me "differentiable manifolds" is the basic subject ... differential topology and differential geometry are more advanced things having that underlying structure.
Yes, manifolds appear in robotics. I personally would opt for Guillemin and Pollack, but people love Tu's book. I know Tu (from years ago) but have never looked at his book.
But you need multivariable analysis. Derivative as a linear map. Inverse and implicit function theorems. Essential background for this stuff.
You can get a good start with my videos, of course (a proper subset thereof). That plus some exercises on the stuff would prepare you for the beginnings of a manifolds course.
then what's wrong with the following reasoning: Let $p$ be a point in the manifold boundary $\partial{M}$. So, there exists a chart $(U,\phi)$ where $\phi : U\rightarrow \mathbb{H}^n$ is a homeomorphism and $\phi(U)\cap \partial{H}^n$ is non-empty. Since $\phi(U)$ is open in $\mathbb{H}^n$, there exists a radius $r>0$ and a ball $B_{\mathbb{H}^n}(\phi(p),r)\subseteq \phi(U)$. Hence, $B_{\mathbb{H}^n}(\phi(p),r)\subseteq \phi(U)\cap \partial{H}^n$
Differentiation in the first semester, @Stan (through chain rule). Then you want to look at the intro to manifolds and then stuff on inverse/implicit function theorem in the second semester, plus a few more on manifolds there.
but wait, what is the difference between the category of discrete categories and the category of sets if functors between discrete categories are just maps between the objects?
@topologicalorientablesurface I think there may be some misunderstanding of what a boundary chart looks like. We're not talking about making the interior and the boundary into manifolds, separately. A boundary chart should incorporate both the boundary and the interior. For $H^2$, a boundary chart about $0$ looks like the top hemisphere of a disc
yeah, this highlights why the notion of topological boundary does not always capture what the boundary of a manifold intuitively ought to be (which isn't that surprising, the topological boundary is, in a way, extrinsic as it can depend on the ambient space, whereas the manifold boundary should be and is intrinsic)
@Balarka To answer your question on whether $Q$ has some kind of connectedness the answer is no, it is totally disconnected. For $T_1$ spaces $X$ $\dim X=0\implies X$ has a basis of clopen sets $\implies X$ is totally disconnected, but you need something like compact Hausdorff to reverse the implications
I meant linear programming in and of itself @Joanna some universities will accept certain computer programming languages as a second language towards a Ph.D.
If α,β,γ,δ, are the solution of the equation tan(θx+ Pi/4)= 3tanx . After simplifying previous expression i am getting a biquadtric equation in Tan(x) .My question is α,β,γ,δ, Or tan(α),tan(β) ...roots of that equation i got
Suppose I write: "Consider the algebra generated by the following: a sort $S$; elements $a, b : S$; an operation $\circ : S \times S \to S$; and the identity $x \circ y = y \circ x$."
To an algebraist, is it pretty obvious what I mean by that, or should I explain myself a bit more?
Not much, @Stan. Mostly listen when I drive, and haven't been doing that much. I have zillions of CD's, one third of which are uploaded to iTunes and on my phone.
@TedShifrin :') well that's gonna definitely make it hard to listen if driving is your favorite time. i honestly haven't really traveled at all recently tho either. hard to go anywhere at the moment
I have 8 identical pineapples and 5 identical bananas to distribute to four different students. In how many ways can I do this if two students only receive pineapples (each must receive at least one) and the other two students only receive bananas (each must receive at least one)?
As suggested, I followed the Stars and Bars principle and got 28, but I'm not sure if that's plausible
Because I tried with a smaller case of the problem, and it didn't seem to work
If anyone could check or verify if I got the right answer (or just let me know I'm on the right path) that would be great
how many possible ways of splitting the four students into pairs of two are there? how many ways of distributing 8 pineapples on the first pair such that each gets at least one are there? how many ways of distributing 5 bananas on the second pair such that each gets at least one banana are there?
Hey, I've done some research about derivatives, but I just don't understand what they are! All I know is they have something to do with constant. Thanks!