Usefulness of partition of unity?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter JonnyG
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Partition Unity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the usefulness of partitions of unity (P.O.U) as presented in Spivak's "Calculus on Manifolds." Participants explore the theoretical and practical implications of P.O.U in the context of manifolds, including their role in constructing globally defined objects from locally defined ones.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses understanding of the construction of P.O.U but questions its usefulness and significance.
  • Another participant suggests that P.O.U allows for the patching of locally-defined objects, such as Riemannian metrics, into globally defined objects.
  • A participant elaborates on the idea that P.O.U can break a map into smaller maps, allowing for localized analysis and construction before gluing results together.
  • Concerns are raised about why one would break up a map instead of just the set, indicating a need for clarification on the advantages of this approach.
  • References are made to the application of P.O.U in algebraic geometry, suggesting its broader relevance beyond just the context of manifolds.
  • Some participants indicate that further reading and problem-solving in Spivak's book is helping them gain clarity on the use of P.O.U.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the advantages of using P.O.U over simply breaking up the set. There are multiple viewpoints regarding the utility and application of P.O.U, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Some participants mention that the domains of the maps overlap, which complicates the idea of a disjoint partition of the set. There are also references to specific examples and applications that may require further exploration.

JonnyG
Messages
233
Reaction score
45
I am going through Spivak's Calculus on manifolds. I am on the chapter now regarding partitions of unity. I understand the construction of it, but why exactly is a partition of unity useful? Why do we care about it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Greetings,
few Words.
Hope I have provided the right answer in my answer...[pssst: I don't know what is this!I just know how to ultra google and tera- research!]
 
I read that already, but it didn't give me the clearest picture.
 
Basically, P.O.U's allow you to patch locally-defined objects, like Riemannian metrics in the manifold into globally defined objects.
 
Bacle2 said:
Basically, P.O.U's allow you to patch locally-defined objects, like Riemannian metrics in the manifold into globally defined objects.
I already said that. :cool:
Where is @JonnyG anyways? (Huh, oops...That will show a new alert on his page :wink:)
 
@Bacle2 It seems as if a partition of unity will allow us to break up a map into smaller maps. For example, if there was a set A \subset \mathbb{R}^n and \{ \phi_i \} is a partition of unity on A and f was a map on A then given any x \in A we can write f(x) = \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} \phi_i (x) f(x). Each \phi_i (x) f(x) is smaller than f(x) because the \phi_i(x)f(x) will vanish outside of some open set about x. Thus we are concentrating the map just into that open set. Thus we can prove something or construct something regarding f just in that small open set, then use a partition of unity to "glue it all together". I get that now. My question is - what advantages does this provide? I mean, why not just break up the set into smaller pieces rather than breaking up the map?
 
the domains of the maps overlap, so there is no disjoint partition of the set. all you have to do is keep reading spivak and see how he uses it. it is also used in algebraic geometry, in a different version where the key fact is that when elements f1,...,fn generate the unit ideal then there exiust g1,...,gn such that sum fjgj = 1.
 
JonnyG said:
@Bacle2 It seems as if a partition of unity will allow us to break up a map into smaller maps. For example, if there was a set A \subset \mathbb{R}^n and \{ \phi_i \} is a partition of unity on A and f was a map on A then given any x \in A we can write f(x) = \sum_{i = 1}^{\infty} \phi_i (x) f(x). Each \phi_i (x) f(x) is smaller than f(x) because the \phi_i(x)f(x) will vanish outside of some open set about x. Thus we are concentrating the map just into that open set. Thus we can prove something or construct something regarding f just in that small open set, then use a partition of unity to "glue it all together". I get that now. My question is - what advantages does this provide? I mean, why not just break up the set into smaller pieces rather than breaking up the map?
Noticing you have not taken advantage of the link I provided...All I can say is that you didn't read the whole Spivak's Calculus.
 
I have read the link provided...anyway, after working on some of the problems in Spivak's book and Munkres' book, I am starting to get a more clear picture of how a P.O.U. should be used. As I continue on, I am sure it will become even more clear and apparent. Thanks for the help everybody.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K