fresh_42 said:
I haven't used a metric. Those are simply the solutions of your equation for a couple of ##n##. The metric only comes into play when you define the sine and cosine by the ratio of lengths. But as all metrics are basically the same, I don't expect much of a difference to the 2-norm.
Ok, the curves that you have plotted are fine, but let's examine the diff. equation:
## y+y''=0 ##. Do you expect this to define the Sine function when the metric is ##
ds=\sqrt[2] {dx^2-dy^2} ##? The Sine in this case is the Hyperbolic Sine Function and is given by: ## y-y''=0 ##. For the simple n=4 case I can work out a differential equation for you but I am busy right now, maybe during the weekend.
The metric comes into play everywhere, the metric defines the new Sine and Cosine functions, the metric defines their derivatives and the metric defines the curvature.
I have to ask you, what is a derivative in this case? Well, ## [NewCosine(x+dx) - NewCosine(x)] / dx ##, but do you expect the formula for ##NewCosine(x+dx)## to be the same as in ##Cos(x+dx)##? It's not the same for ##Cosh##.
Similarly, there should be new formulae for the radius of curvature defined as a ratio of ds and the length of an arc of a unit circle ( this arc being defined by the two unit normals on both ends of ds taken on the unit circle in the same direction as on ds, the unit circle being defined by the metric each time) , then, the curves that you have plotted all will be having constant curvature. Oh, and the normals won't be normals in the Euclidean sense, since the dot product of vectors does not apply. I thought that dN (N being the unit normal ) would suffice for the calculations, but is dN tangent to the unit circle, in this case? I don't think so! It's harder than it looks...
Anyway, we are mathematicians. We can fill in the details.