latentcorpse
- 1,411
- 0
In the notes attached here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3042019#post3042019
(apparently I can't attach the same thing in multiple threads?)
I have quite a few problems with one of the proofs. In the proof of the proposition on p15,
a) he says to note that \nu(0)=0. why is this?
b) he goes from
\{ \frac{d}{dt} [ \alpha ( x^\mu ( \lambda(t)) - x^\mu(p)) + \beta (x^\mu(\kapa(t))-x^\mu(p)) + x^\mu(p)] \}_{t=0} = [ \alpha ( \frac{d x^\mu ( \lambda (t))}{dt})_{t=0} + \beta ( \frac{dx^\mu ( \kappa ( t))}{dt} )_{t=0}]
I really don't understand how these two lines are equal at all!
And also how can we change the \phi's to x^\mu's in going from eqn 25 to the defn of Z_p(f)?
c) where does eqn 27 come from? isn't ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu})_p (f) = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x^\mu})_p
is it something like if we compose the numerator with \phi^{-1} then we have to cancel that out by composing the p with \phi to give the \phi(p)? I don't really get why this is allowed though?
d)Where does eqn 29 come from?
Thanks a lot for any help. I really need to get my head round all this vector business over the holidays!
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3042019#post3042019
(apparently I can't attach the same thing in multiple threads?)
I have quite a few problems with one of the proofs. In the proof of the proposition on p15,
a) he says to note that \nu(0)=0. why is this?
b) he goes from
\{ \frac{d}{dt} [ \alpha ( x^\mu ( \lambda(t)) - x^\mu(p)) + \beta (x^\mu(\kapa(t))-x^\mu(p)) + x^\mu(p)] \}_{t=0} = [ \alpha ( \frac{d x^\mu ( \lambda (t))}{dt})_{t=0} + \beta ( \frac{dx^\mu ( \kappa ( t))}{dt} )_{t=0}]
I really don't understand how these two lines are equal at all!
And also how can we change the \phi's to x^\mu's in going from eqn 25 to the defn of Z_p(f)?
c) where does eqn 27 come from? isn't ( \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu})_p (f) = \frac{\partial f}{\partial x^\mu})_p
is it something like if we compose the numerator with \phi^{-1} then we have to cancel that out by composing the p with \phi to give the \phi(p)? I don't really get why this is allowed though?
d)Where does eqn 29 come from?
Thanks a lot for any help. I really need to get my head round all this vector business over the holidays!