Distributing the Product of Functions over Composition of Functions

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of function multiplication and composition as presented in John M. Lee's "Introduction to Smooth Manifolds," specifically focusing on the pushforward of functions and the relationship between the product of functions and their composition. Participants seek clarification on the mathematical justification for the equality $$(fg) \circ F = (f \circ F)(g \circ F)$$ and explore the implications of this relationship in the context of differential topology.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Peter questions the validity of the equation $$(fg) \circ F = (f \circ F)(g \circ F)$$ and seeks clarification on its justification.
  • Some participants provide a computation to show that $((f \cdot g) \circ F)(p) = (f \cdot g)(F(p)) = f(F(p)) \cdot g(F(p)) = (f \circ F)(p) \cdot (g \circ F)(p), arguing that this follows from the definitions of function multiplication and composition.
  • Peter expresses confusion over why the step $$(f \cdot g)(F(p)) = f(F(p)) \cdot g(F(p))$$ holds, suggesting it appears to involve distributing multiplication over composition.
  • Participants clarify that the definitions of function multiplication and composition are essential to understanding the equality and that setting $x = F(p)$ simplifies the notation.
  • There is an acknowledgment of the need for clear definitions and the role they play in justifying the relationships discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definitions of function multiplication and composition, but there remains some uncertainty regarding the justification of the specific equality in question. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the deeper implications of distributing multiplication over composition.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the dependence on definitions of function operations and the potential for confusion when interpreting the relationships between multiplication and composition. Some assumptions about the properties of functions are not explicitly stated, leaving room for further exploration.

Math Amateur
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
3,920
Reaction score
48
I am reading John M. Lee's book: Introduction to Smooth Manifolds ...

I am focused on Chapter 3: Tangent Vectors ...

I need some help in fully understanding Lee's definition and conversation on pushforwards of $$F$$ at $$p$$ ... ... (see Lee's conversation/discussion posted below ... ... )

Although the book is on differential topology, my question is essentially algebraic ...

Lee's definition and discussion of pushforwards of $$F \ : \ M \longrightarrow N $$ is as follows (see page 66):View attachment 5327In the above discussion we read the following:

" ... ... $$(F_*X)(fg) = X((fg) \circ F)$$

= $$X((f \circ F) (g \circ F) ) $$

= ... ...

... ... "The above working by Lee implies that

$$(fg) \circ F = (f \circ F) (g \circ F)$$

but why is this true ... ?

Can someone help ...

Peter*** EDIT ***

Just thinking ... if R was an algebra of smooth functions with operations of addition and multiplication of functions and a 'multiplication' that was composition of functions ... then would multiplication of functions distribute over composition ... just a thought ... but I suspect a bit muddled ...

Maybe if one could justify that functions under product and composition of functions ... but you would have to assume the required distributivity anyway ...

Must be a more direct way ...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Peter,

Peter said:
I am reading John M. Lee's book: Introduction to Smooth Manifolds ...

The above working by Lee implies that

$$(fg) \circ F = (f \circ F) (g \circ F)$$

but why is this true ... ?

This is the result of the following computation: $((f\cdot g)\circ F)(p) = (f\cdot g)(F(p))=f(F(p))\cdot g(F(p)) = (f\circ F)(p)\cdot (g\circ F)(p)$. Since $p$ was arbitrary, $(f\cdot g)\circ F = (f\circ F)\cdot (g\circ F).$ Hope that helps! Let me know if there's still confusion.
 
GJA said:
Hi Peter,
This is the result of the following computation: $((f\cdot g)\circ F)(p) = (f\cdot g)(F(p))=f(F(p))\cdot g(F(p)) = (f\circ F)(p)\cdot (g\circ F)(p)$. Since $p$ was arbitrary, $(f\cdot g)\circ F = (f\circ F)\cdot (g\circ F).$ Hope that helps! Let me know if there's still confusion.
Thanks GJA ... appreciate your help ...

... but ... I need a further clarification ...Why, exactly is $$(f\cdot g)(F(p))=f(F(p))\cdot g(F(p))$$?

Can you explain ...?

Thanks again ...

Peter
 
Hi Peter,

I was trying to be explicit about multiplication using the "dot" versus the composition using the "circle."

The definition of function multiplication is given by $(f\cdot g)(x) := f(x)\cdot g(x).$

The definition of function composition is given by $(f\circ F)(x) := f(F(x)).$

Combining these two definitions gives the computation I presented in the previous post. Hope that helps!
 
GJA said:
Hi Peter,

I was trying to be explicit about multiplication using the "dot" versus the composition using the "circle."

The definition of function multiplication is given by $(f\cdot g)(x) := f(x)\cdot g(x).$

The definition of function composition is given by $(f\circ F)(x) := f(F(x)).$

Combining these two definitions gives the computation I presented in the previous post. Hope that helps!
Hi GJA ... yes, understand those two definitions ...

... but ... is the equation

$$(f\cdot g)(F(p))=f(F(p))\cdot g(F(p))$$

simply the result of applying the two definitions that you mention above ... ?It looks to me as if the $$\cdot$$ is distributed over the $$\circ$$ as follows:

$$(f\cdot g)(F(p)) = ( f \cdot g ) \circ F (p)$$ ... ... ... ... (1) (just definition!/notation)then the "distribute $$\cdot$$ over $$\circ$$" step:

$$( f \cdot g ) \circ F (p) = f \circ F(p) \cdot g \circ F(p)$$ ... ... ... (2)and then we have

$$f \circ F(p) \cdot g \circ F(p) = f(F(p) \cdot g(F(p)$$ ... (3) (just definition/notation)
I understand equations (1) and (3) because they simply rest on the definitions you mention ... but I still fail to see why step (2) holds ... it does not seem to me to be just a matter of the definitions you mention ...

Can you help/clarify further ... ...

Peter
 
Hi Peter,

Let's try to simplify the notation by setting $x$ equal to the point $F(p)\in N$; i.e. let $x=F(p)$. Then we can write

$((f\cdot g)\circ F)(p) = (f\cdot g)(F(p)) = (f\cdot g)(x) = f(x)\cdot g(x)=f(F(p))\cdot g(F(p)) = (f\circ F)(p)\cdot (g\circ F)(p).$

The first equality follows from the definition of function composition, the second by our definition of $x$, the third by the definition of function multiplication, the fourth by our definition of $x$, the fifth by the definition of function composition.

Note that all of the justifications above either involve a definition of function combinations (multiplication or composition), or the use of $x=F(p).$ So, had we not taken the extra step of setting $x=F(p)$, then the only things needed to justify the equality you're after is the definitions of function multiplication and function composition.

Does this help clear things up at all?

Edit: $F(p)$ is an element of $N$, not $\mathbb{R}$ as I originally said.
 
GJA said:
Hi Peter,

Let's try to simplify the notation by setting $x$ equal to the point $F(p)\in N$; i.e. let $x=F(p)$. Then we can write

$((f\cdot g)\circ F)(p) = (f\cdot g)(F(p)) = (f\cdot g)(x) = f(x)\cdot g(x)=f(F(p))\cdot g(F(p)) = (f\circ F)(p)\cdot (g\circ F)(p).$

The first equality follows from the definition of function composition, the second by our definition of $x$, the third by the definition of function multiplication, the fourth by our definition of $x$, the fifth by the definition of function composition.

Note that all of the justifications above either involve a definition of function combinations (multiplication or composition), or the use of $x=F(p).$ So, had we not taken the extra step of setting $x=F(p)$, then the only things needed to justify the equality you're after is the definitions of function multiplication and function composition.

Does this help clear things up at all?

Edit: $F(p)$ is an element of $N$, not $\mathbb{R}$ as I originally said.
Thanks GJA ... most helpful of you ...

Everything made clear!

Peter
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K