Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Something weird! (diff geom)

  1. Oct 23, 2006 #1

    quasar987

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Here's something really weird. As can be read in Pressley's "Elementary Differential Geometry":

    Proposition 1.3: Any reparametrization of a regular curve is regular.

    And 4 pages later:

    Exemple 1.8: For the parametrization [itex]\gamma(t)=(t,t^2)[/itex] of the parabola y=x², [itex]\dot{\gamma}[/itex] is never 0 so [itex]\gamma[/itex] is regular. But [itex]\tilde{\gamma}(t)=(t^3,t^6)[/itex] is also a parametrization of the same parabila. This time, [itex]\dot{\tilde{\gamma}}=(3t^2,6t^5)[/itex] and this is zero when t=0, so [itex]\tilde{\gamma}[/itex] is not regular.

    Just to make sure that [itex]\tilde{\gamma}[/itex] is a reparametrization of [itex]\gamma[/itex], consider the reparametrization map [itex]\phi:(-\infty,+\infty)\rightarrow (-\infty,+\infty)[/itex] define by [itex]\phi(t)=t^3[/itex]. Then [itex]\phi[/itex] is a smooth bijection with a smooth inverse such that [itex]\gamma \circ \phi = (\phi(t),\phi(t)^2)=(t^3,t^6)= \tilde{\gamma}[/itex], so [itex]\tilde{\gamma}[/itex] is really a reparametrization of [itex]\gamma[/itex] but it is not regular, contradicting proposition 1.3.
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2006
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 23, 2006 #2

    AKG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    It's inverse is not smooth. It's inverse isn't even once differentiable (look at what would happen to the derivative of the inverse at 0).
     
  4. Oct 23, 2006 #3

    quasar987

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    mmh, yes.

    What is a little strange though is that in another book on differential geometry, the author makes the definition that a curve is a reparametrization of another curve is there exist a reparametrization map btw them that is continuous, bijective (from the domain of one curve to the domain of the other) and monotonous increasing. In other words, he does not require of the reparametrization map to be smooth.

    So these two ways of defining when two curves differ by a change of param really aren't equivalent, because in the second case, proposition 1.3 above is not true. :-O
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2006
  5. Oct 24, 2006 #4
    No, the reparameterisation has to be differentiable as well. I.e., the whole thing has to be a "diffeomorphism", not just a straight isomorphism. Not that a striaght isomorphism would be completely terrible. It just wouldn't be a very good curve anymore.
     
  6. Oct 29, 2006 #5

    quasar987

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    That the reparametrization map and its inverse be one time differentiable is enough for prop.1.3 to be true. Is "smoothness" a luxury, or is it important for some other reason that it really be indefinitely differentiable?
     
  7. Oct 29, 2006 #6

    matt grime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Smoothness is a luxury - almost all of differential geometry can be done with C^2 functions.
     
  8. Oct 29, 2006 #7

    quasar987

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Good to know.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Something weird! (diff geom)
  1. Weird integral (Replies: 1)

  2. A weird expansion (Replies: 1)

  3. Weird equation (Replies: 2)

  4. Weird integral? (Replies: 2)

Loading...