Quotient set of equivalence class in de Rham cohomology

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on expressing the equivalence class X/∼ in terms of the quotient operation, specifically in the context of de Rham cohomology. The initial proposal suggests that H^k could be represented as H^k = {closed k forms}/[0], but this approach is deemed problematic due to the lack of clarity in the operation. Participants clarify that H^k can also be defined as Z^k/B^k, yet this formulation appears to overlook the significance of the equivalence relation defining the classes. The conversation emphasizes the need to better understand how the equivalence classes are determined, particularly when considering the relationship between elements and their corresponding forms. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the complexities involved in defining equivalence classes within the framework of de Rham cohomology.
ianhoolihan
Messages
144
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

So the equivalence class X/\sim is the set of all equivalences classes [x]. I was wondering if there was a way of writing it in terms of the usual quotient operation:
G/N=\{gN\ |\ g\in G\}?

From what I've read, it would be something like X/\sim = X/[e]. But, since I'm looking at the de Rham cohomology group H^k = \{ closed\ k\ forms\}/\sim so
H^k = \{ closed\ k\ forms\}/[0] = \{ \omega [0]\ |\ \omega\ is\ a\ closed\ form\}
doesn't work, as the the operation \omega [0] doesn't seem to make sense.

It's also defined H^k = Z^k/B^k if you're familiar with that notation.

Any thoughts?

Cheers
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Ideas anyone?
 
Quotients of vector spaces can be written E/F = {x+F | x∈E} as the group law involved in such quotients is the law of vector addition.
Any problem ?
 
spoirier said:
Quotients of vector spaces can be written E/F = {x+F | x∈E} as the group law involved in such quotients is the law of vector addition.
Any problem ?

Yes, still a problem. First, B^k = [0], which I should have mentioned before. Second, by your definition
H^k = Z^k/B^k = \{z + B^k\ |\ z\in Z^k\}

But this appears to me to include no information about the equivalence relation \sim, which states that u and v are equivalent if there exists some w such that u - v = dw.

Ok, but since each equivalence class can be defined by its specific dw (and d is a unique (one-to-one?) map) then it is defined by its w. Hence it makes more sense that
H^k = Z^k/B^k = \{z - B^k\ |\ z\in Z^k\}.

If z - b = dw, then z= d(w+a) since b=da \in B^k, which also implies that z\in B^k. But what if there is no w such that z-b = dw? How does this give the rest of the equivalence classes?
 
I was reading a Bachelor thesis on Peano Arithmetic (PA). PA has the following axioms (not including the induction schema): $$\begin{align} & (A1) ~~~~ \forall x \neg (x + 1 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A2) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + 1 =y + 1 \to x = y) \nonumber \\ & (A3) ~~~~ \forall x (x + 0 = x) \nonumber \\ & (A4) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + (y +1) = (x + y ) + 1) \nonumber \\ & (A5) ~~~~ \forall x (x \cdot 0 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A6) ~~~~ \forall xy (x \cdot (y + 1) = (x \cdot y) + x) \nonumber...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
650
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
540
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
4K
Back
Top