A question about differential form

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the existence of extensions of a closed differential form defined on \( R^n \setminus \{0\} \) to the entire space \( R^n \). Participants explore the implications of Stokes' Theorem and the conditions under which such extensions may or may not exist, particularly focusing on smoothness and continuity of the forms.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the integral of the closed form \( x \) on \( S^{n-1} \) equals 1, leading to questions about the existence of an \( n-1 \) form \( y \) on \( R^n \) such that \( y|_{R^n \setminus \{0\}} = x \).
  • Stokes' Theorem is referenced, with some arguing that the exterior derivative of \( x \) integrates to zero on the interior of the sphere, suggesting implications for the existence of extensions.
  • Participants discuss the necessity of specifying conditions such as "smooth" in the context of extensions, with some asserting that without such restrictions, extensions may exist that do not satisfy Stokes' Theorem.
  • One participant emphasizes the need for clarity regarding the notation used for differential forms, suggesting that assumptions about smoothness may be implicit in the notation.
  • There are claims that while discontinuous extensions can always be constructed, smooth extensions do not exist due to the integral properties of the form.
  • Another participant proposes using Stokes' Theorem on a ball with a small ball removed around the origin to analyze the behavior of the extension, suggesting that the integral over the boundary approaches zero.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the existence of extensions, particularly regarding the conditions of smoothness and continuity. While some agree that discontinuous extensions are possible, there is contention over the existence of smooth or continuous extensions, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of differential forms and the assumptions regarding smoothness, which are not universally agreed upon among participants.

1591238460
Messages
11
Reaction score
1
Suppose x ∈ Ω^(n−1)(Rn \{0}) is closed and the integral of x on S^(n-1) equals to 1. I am stuck on how to show
there does not exist an n − 1 form y ∈ Ω(n−1)(R^n) with y|R^n\{0} = x.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1591238460 said:
Suppose ##x ∈ Ω^{n−1}(R^n - 0)## is closed and the integral of ##x## on ##S^{n-1}## equals to 1. I am stuck on how to show
there does not exist an ##n − 1## form ##y ∈ Ω^{n−1}(R^n)## with ##y|R^n - 0 = x##.

Stokes Theorem says that the extension of this form to all of ##R^n## integrated over the sphere equals the integral of its exterior derivative over the interior region bounded by the sphere. Since it is closed on ##R^n - 0##, its exterior derivative integrates to zero on the interior of the sphere.
 
Last edited:
Dear Lavinia, thank you!
 
some restrictions like "smooth" belong in some of these sentences or else there does exist an extension that does not satisfy stokes' thorem. (I see now it depends on your definition of the symbol Omega.)
 
Last edited:
mathwonk said:
some restrictions like "smooth" belong in sone of these sentences or else there does exist an extension that does not satisfy stokes' thorem.
Right. By extension to a differential form, smooth is implicit.
 
Last edited:
Aha!, I have finally re - read the OP's question carefully enough to see he did not use the word "form", but rather a symbolic omega notation for them. And no doubt in his book this notation was reserved for smooth forms. So you guys are right. Before answering I should have asked for the definition of big Omega.But I still like hypotheses in my theorems. Let me ilustrate by precising the OP's question: assuming the original form was smooth, 1) does there exist any extension? 2) does there exist a smooth extension? 3) does there exist a continuous (but not necessarily smooth) extension?
 
Last edited:
mathwonk said:
But I still like hypotheses in my theorems. Let me ilustrate by precising the OP's question: assuming the original form was smooth, 1) does there exist any extension? 2) does there exist a smooth extension? 3) does there exist a continuous (but not necessarily smooth) extension?

-There is always a discontinuous extension. Give it any value at the origin.
-By Stokes Theorem, there is no smooth extension. There is not even a continuously differentiable extension.

-One cannot extend the form to a continuous form on all of ##R^n##
Since the form integrates to 1 on the unit sphere and is closed, it integrates to 1 on every sphere centered at the origin. This means that it is of the form
##π^{*}(ω) + dφ## where ##ω## is the volume element of the unit sphere and ##π## is radial projection. ##dφ## is the exterior derivative of an ##n-2## form. ##π^{*}(ω)## can not be extended to the origin continuously. If ,for instance,one evaluates the form on a constant (n-1)-tuple of tangent vectors to ##R^n## - e.g. in the plane, the constant vector field that points parallel to the x-axis - one sees that there is no limit at the origin. One still needs to show that one can not fix things with ##dφ##.
 
Last edited:
nice. iw as thinking of using stokes on a ball with small ball removed about the origin, then taking a limit. since the integral over the boundary of the small ball goes to zero (by continuity of the extension), you get the same result as if the extension were smooth at the origin.
 
mathwonk said:
nice. iw as thinking of using stokes on a ball with small ball removed about the origin, then taking a limit. since the integral over the boundary of the small ball goes to zero (by continuity of the extension), you get the same result as if the extension were smooth at the origin.

Lovely idea.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
872
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K