Does c(t) = ((1+t,0),(0,1+t)) Provide a Counterexample on p.85 of Spivak's Book?

  • Thread starter Thread starter zhentil
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Manifolds Spivak
zhentil
Messages
484
Reaction score
0
Please forgive any stupid mistakes I've made.

On p.85, 4-5:

If c: [0,1] \rightarrow (R^n)^n is continuous and each (c^1(t),c^2(t),...,c^n(t)) is a basis for R^n, prove that
|c^1(0),...,c^n(0)| = |c^1(1),...,c^n(1)|.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but doesn't c(t) = ((1+t,0),(0,1+t)) provide a counterexample to the statement when n=2?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
have you read the section preceding the problem, specifically the definition of the notation [v1,...vn]? the bracket notation refers to the orientation defined by the basis. so the problem is to prove that a continuously varying basis cannot change orientation. this is easy since the determinant cannot change sign without being zero in between.

you have misrepresented the bracket notation as absolute value, at least according to my copy of spivak.
 
I see. I have a (poor) photocopy of this section, and I can't distinguish between absolute value and the brackets you mentioned. Thank you for clarifying.
 
i suggest you buy one. then the author makes a few bucks, or maybe a nickel, i believe he told me once.
 
Spivak most definitely deserves some of your money. Possibly most of it.
 
Hello! There is a simple line in the textbook. If ##S## is a manifold, an injectively immersed submanifold ##M## of ##S## is embedded if and only if ##M## is locally closed in ##S##. Recall the definition. M is locally closed if for each point ##x\in M## there open ##U\subset S## such that ##M\cap U## is closed in ##U##. Embedding to injective immesion is simple. The opposite direction is hard. Suppose I have ##N## as source manifold and ##f:N\rightarrow S## is the injective...

Similar threads

Back
Top