S0(3)/SO(2) is isomorphic to the projective plane

  • Thread starter Thread starter eddo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Plane
eddo
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
For an assignment, my prof asked that we show that S0(3)/SO(2) is isomorphic to the projective plane (ie the 2-sphere with antipodal points identified). Here's my problem. I checked in a textbook for some help, and it claimed that SO(3)/SO(2) is isomorphic to the 2-sphere. So which one is right? It would be nice to know what I should be trying to prove before I put too much work in. Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
eddo said:
For an assignment, my prof asked that we show that S0(3)/SO(2) is isomorphic to the projective plane (ie the 2-sphere with antipodal points identified). Here's my problem. I checked in a textbook for some help, and it claimed that SO(3)/SO(2) is isomorphic to the 2-sphere. So which one is right? It would be nice to know what I should be trying to prove before I put too much work in. Thank you.

S^n \cong SO \left( n+1 \right)/SO \left( n \right)

and

\mathbb{R}P^n \cong SO \left( n+1 \right)/O \left( n \right),

so SO \left( 3 \right)/SO \left( 2 \right) is isomorphic to the 2-sphere, and SO \left( 3 \right)/O \left( 2 \right) is isomorphic to the projective plane.
 
Last edited:
Thank you. Intuitively that's what I expected to be the case, because of the relationship between O(n) and SO(n). It makes sense that antipodal points get identified if you mod out by O(n) because the reflections that O(n) has over SO(n) would identify these points. But you can't always count on intuition so thank you for verifying this.
 
Thread 'Derivation of equations of stress tensor transformation'
Hello ! I derived equations of stress tensor 2D transformation. Some details: I have plane ABCD in two cases (see top on the pic) and I know tensor components for case 1 only. Only plane ABCD rotate in two cases (top of the picture) but not coordinate system. Coordinate system rotates only on the bottom of picture. I want to obtain expression that connects tensor for case 1 and tensor for case 2. My attempt: Are these equations correct? Is there more easier expression for stress tensor...
Back
Top