Properties of Derivations and of Tangent Vectors

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of derivations and tangent vectors as presented in J. Lee's "Smooth Manifolds," specifically focusing on the differences between Lemmas 3.1 and 3.4. Participants explore the necessity of separate proofs for similar properties in the context of derivations defined on R^n versus those defined on manifolds.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that derivations in R^n and on manifolds are treated differently, suggesting that separate proofs are necessary due to the complexity of the latter.
  • Another participant argues that the expressions derived in both cases appear identical, questioning the need for different proofs.
  • A further response clarifies that the second lemma involves derivations on the space of germs of smooth maps on manifolds, which are more complex than those on R^n.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the derivation of compositions, indicating a limitation in their understanding of how these concepts apply in the context of manifold theory.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the necessity of separate proofs for the lemmas. There are competing views regarding the complexity of derivations on manifolds compared to those on R^n.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the definitions and properties of derivations, particularly in relation to compositions and products of functions.

Bacle
Messages
656
Reaction score
1
Hi, everyone:

I am going over J.Lee's Smooth Manifolds, Chapter 3; specifically, Lemmas

3.1, 3.4, in which he states properties of derivations. Lee calls linear maps L with the

Leibniz property (i.e L(fg)(a)=f(a)L(g)+g(a)L(f) ) derivations, when these maps are

defined in a subset of R^n, and he calls these same maps tangent vectors when these

maps are defined on the tangent space of a general (abstract) manifold. So far, so good.


**Now** , what I find confusing is this: that the lemmas are cited separately,

as if the two lemmas need different proofs; I don't see why different proofs

are necessary.

The two properties cited (same properties cited in lemmas 3.1, 3.4 respectively;

a),b) below are in lemma 3.1, and a'), b') are in lemma 3.4) )

are : (f is in C^oo(M) , a is a point in R^n , p is any point on the manifold M)

a) If f is a constant function, then Lf=0


b) If f(a)=g(a) , then L(fg)(a)=0

a') If f is a constant function, then Xf=0


b') If f(p)=g(p)=0 , then X(fg)(p)=0

The proof for a),b) are straightforward :

a) L(c)=X(1c)=1X(c)+cX(1)=cX(1)+cX(1)

b) L(fg)(p)=f(p)L(g)+g(p)L(f)


Now, why do we need separate proofs of the same facts for a') and b').?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, you said it yourself: the first lemma talks about derivations of R^n, and the second one talks about derivations of a manifolds. Not every manifold is an R^n, so you need a proof for the case of a general manifold.
 
Hi, Quasar:

I don't see any difference between the two cases; in both cases we end up with

an expression f(a)Xg+g(a)Xf , with X linear and both f,g real-valued. I don't see

how both cases are not identical. Any hints, please.?
 
Well, it is just that in the second lemma, X is a derivation at p on the space of (germs of) smooth maps on the manifold. And those are defined as the (germs of) maps whose composition with the chart maps are smooth, whatever the smooth atlas may be. So, they are more complicated objects than the derivations at p on R^n, who are just the (germs of) smooth maps in the usual sense, which is a special case of the above in the case where the atlas is the one chart atlas (R^n, id).

So clearly the second lemma is a generalization of the first.
 
Thanks, Quasar:

I was considering working with maps f composed with chart maps, but , AFAIK,
the derivation of a composition is not defined; only the derivation on a product
is defined.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K