Understanding Tangent Map Derivation in S.S. Chern's Ebook

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the derivation of the tangent map as presented in S.S. Chern's ebook, specifically focusing on the transition from equation 2.38. The user Sumanta expresses confusion regarding the notation and the steps involved in the derivation. A detailed explanation is provided, clarifying the application of the partial derivatives and the use of the Kronecker delta in the context of tangent maps. Additionally, a technical issue with LaTeX rendering in previews is noted, requiring users to refresh their edits for proper display.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of differential geometry concepts, particularly tangent maps
  • Familiarity with S.S. Chern's notation and terminology
  • Basic knowledge of partial derivatives and their applications
  • Experience with LaTeX for mathematical typesetting
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of tangent maps in differential geometry
  • Review S.S. Chern's ebook for deeper insights into his notation
  • Learn about the Kronecker delta and its applications in tensor calculus
  • Explore LaTeX troubleshooting techniques for effective mathematical presentation
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of differential geometry, and anyone seeking to understand tangent maps and their derivations in the context of S.S. Chern's work.

Sumanta
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am trying to understand the concept of tangent map and following the ebook of S S Chern.
I am a bit confused about the derivation of the tangent map acting on the basis

I tried for sometime to type out the equation but it appears I am having problems with the display and not sure what is being refreshed. Hence I am providing the link

http://www.worldscibooks.com/etextbook/3812/3812_chap1_2.pdf .

The derivation of equation 2.38 from the second equality to the third is not clear to me.

Could anyone kindly explain.

Thx
Sumanta
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It took me a while to get used to his notation, but now I see that what he's doing is this:

<br /> \begin{align*}<br /> &amp;\sum_{j=1}^m\bigg\langle\frac{\partial}{\partial u^i},du^j\bigg\rangle\bigg(\frac{\partial F^\alpha}{\partial u^j}\bigg)_p<br /> =\sum_{j=1}^m\delta^j_i\bigg(\frac{\partial F^\alpha}{\partial u^j}\bigg)_p<br /> =\bigg(\frac{\partial F^\alpha}{\partial u^i}\bigg)_p<br /> =\sum_{\beta=1}^n\bigg(\frac{\partial F^\beta}{\partial u^i}\bigg)_p\delta^\alpha_\beta\\<br /> &amp;=\sum_{\beta=1}^n\bigg(\frac{\partial F^\beta}{\partial u^i}\bigg)_p\bigg\langle\frac{\partial}{\partial v^\beta},dv^\alpha\bigg\rangle<br /> =\bigg\langle\sum_{\beta=1}^n\bigg(\frac{\partial F^\beta}{\partial u^i}\bigg)_p\frac{\partial}{\partial v^\beta},dv^\alpha\bigg\rangle<br /> \end{align*}<br />

There's a bug that causes the wrong LaTeX images to appear in previews. The only workaround is to refresh and resend after each preview, and sometimes also after saving an edit. (Also note that a closing tex tag looks like this: [noparse][/tex][/noparse]).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
Replies
7
Views
3K