Book on Curvature wrong or am I confused

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on a question from the book "Riemannian Geometry" by John M. Lee regarding the conditions under which a vector field X is tangent to an embedded submanifold N. The original question incorrectly states that Xf must vanish on all of M, while it only needs to vanish on N. An example using the vector field X = ∂x + y∂y on M = ℝ² illustrates this point, confirming that the question in the book is indeed flawed. The author emphasizes the importance of checking for errata on Lee's website and highlights Lee's responsiveness to reader inquiries.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of differential geometry concepts, specifically embedded submanifolds.
  • Familiarity with vector fields and their properties in the context of manifolds.
  • Knowledge of smooth functions and their behavior on manifolds.
  • Awareness of errata and author communication practices in academic texts.
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the errata for "Riemannian Geometry" by John M. Lee.
  • Study the properties of vector fields on manifolds, focusing on tangency conditions.
  • Explore examples of embedded submanifolds in differential geometry.
  • Learn about the implications of smooth functions vanishing on submanifolds.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those studying differential geometry, as well as anyone seeking to clarify concepts related to vector fields and submanifolds.

conquest
Messages
132
Reaction score
4
Hi,

I was doing some exercises from the book on curvature by Lee to buff up my differential geometry. I came a cross the following question and it seems to me the question isn't completely correct, but I'm not so good at differential geometry that I am confident. Maybe someone else is!

the question is:
Suppose N ⊂ M is an embedded submanifold.

If X is a vector field on M , show that X is tangent to N at points
of N if and only if Xf = 0 whenever f is a smooth function on M that
vanishes on N.



What looks to be wrong is Xf only needs to vanish at points of N not all of M.

I came up with the example:

the vector field X=\partial_x + y\partial_y on M=ℝ² where the submanifold N is the real line (so set y to 0).

It seems that although at points of N X=\partial_x (so at p \in N)
which is tangent to N.
the smooth function f(x,y)=y which vanishes on the real line has Xf=y so this only vanishes on N not on all of M.

So the question is is their something wrong with this reasoning or is the question wrong?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You're right, of course. The book should say "[...] if and only if Xf=0 on N [...]".
 
Ok thank you, I should probably doubt myself less!
 
Lee has errata for all his books in his web site.
 
Lee's also wonderful about answering emails with questions about his books. I spotted an error in that book and sent him an email, and he had emailed me back and posted the erratum within 24 hours.
 
Oh that's awesome! so next time I should check the website first and then e-mail!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K