What's the meaning of the underlined sentence in page 1 of GTM 102?











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












enter image description here



What's the meaning of the underlined sentence in page 1 of GTM 102?










share|cite|improve this question






















  • Does the terminology "algebra" here mean group,ring and module?
    – Born to be proud
    Nov 22 at 16:50








  • 2




    It's a vector algebra: it's a subspace of the complex vector space of all functions $UtoBbb C $ and it's closed under (pointwise) multiplication and contains the constant $1$.
    – Berci
    Nov 22 at 17:33

















up vote
0
down vote

favorite












enter image description here



What's the meaning of the underlined sentence in page 1 of GTM 102?










share|cite|improve this question






















  • Does the terminology "algebra" here mean group,ring and module?
    – Born to be proud
    Nov 22 at 16:50








  • 2




    It's a vector algebra: it's a subspace of the complex vector space of all functions $UtoBbb C $ and it's closed under (pointwise) multiplication and contains the constant $1$.
    – Berci
    Nov 22 at 17:33















up vote
0
down vote

favorite









up vote
0
down vote

favorite











enter image description here



What's the meaning of the underlined sentence in page 1 of GTM 102?










share|cite|improve this question













enter image description here



What's the meaning of the underlined sentence in page 1 of GTM 102?







lie-groups lie-algebras






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Nov 22 at 16:44









Born to be proud

782510




782510












  • Does the terminology "algebra" here mean group,ring and module?
    – Born to be proud
    Nov 22 at 16:50








  • 2




    It's a vector algebra: it's a subspace of the complex vector space of all functions $UtoBbb C $ and it's closed under (pointwise) multiplication and contains the constant $1$.
    – Berci
    Nov 22 at 17:33




















  • Does the terminology "algebra" here mean group,ring and module?
    – Born to be proud
    Nov 22 at 16:50








  • 2




    It's a vector algebra: it's a subspace of the complex vector space of all functions $UtoBbb C $ and it's closed under (pointwise) multiplication and contains the constant $1$.
    – Berci
    Nov 22 at 17:33


















Does the terminology "algebra" here mean group,ring and module?
– Born to be proud
Nov 22 at 16:50






Does the terminology "algebra" here mean group,ring and module?
– Born to be proud
Nov 22 at 16:50






2




2




It's a vector algebra: it's a subspace of the complex vector space of all functions $UtoBbb C $ and it's closed under (pointwise) multiplication and contains the constant $1$.
– Berci
Nov 22 at 17:33






It's a vector algebra: it's a subspace of the complex vector space of all functions $UtoBbb C $ and it's closed under (pointwise) multiplication and contains the constant $1$.
– Berci
Nov 22 at 17:33












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










Let me start with the explicit definition of $mathcal D(U)$, i.e.
$$
mathcal D(U) = { f: U to mathbb C mid f text{~is smooth} }.
$$



Now, an algebra over the field $k=mathbb C$ is a vector space with an bilinear from
$$
cdot: mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f cdot g.
$$

This bilinear form assigns a ring structure to $mathcal D(U)$ and is also a multiplication in this sense, but it is not the same as the scalar multiplication!



In our case, this map is defined pointwise. For $f,g in mathcal D(U)$, we define $f cdot g in mathcal D(U)$ by
$$
f cdot g : U to mathbb C: x mapsto (fcdot g)(x) := f(x) cdot g(x),
$$

where the last addition is the addition of complex numbers.
In addition, this map has to satisfy the axioms of a bilinear map, e.g. stuff like linearity with respect to scalars of the field $lambda (fcdot g) = (lambda f) cdot g$, for $lambda in k = mathbb C$ and the other axioms.



Since the functions of the differentiable structure are complex valued, these properties are satisfied.



The last statement $1 in mathcal D(U)$ asserts, that the constant function
$1: U to mathbb C: x mapsto 1$ is an element of the algebra $mathcal D(U)$.
It is also the unity element with respect to the ring multiplication $cdot$.





If you know a bit of algebraic geometry, you can see that the axioms in the book
point a little bit in the direction of sheafs.



Hence, topological objects like open set $U, V$ are assigned to rings $mathcal D(U)$ and $mathcal D(V)$, an we if $mathcal U subseteq mathcal V$, then we can find a (restriction) morphism $vert_U: mathcal D(V) to mathcal D(U)$, which is in this case just the restriction of the functions onto the smaller domain.
(See the wikipedia article for the complete definitions of sheafs.)



Hence, these a sheaf is a link between topology and algebraic strucutres.
And they allow to relate purely local with global data, therefore it is no surprise, that they are also important for manifolds.
(But I am not an expert about that! Don't trust me.)





Details about the vector space structure:



The addition
$$
+ : mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f+g
$$

is also defined pointwise by $(f+g) (x) = f(x) + g(x) in mathbb C$.



And the scalar multiplication
$$mathbb C times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (lambda,f) mapsto lambda f,
$$

is defined via $(lambda f)(x) = lambda cdot f(x) in mathbb C$.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • So $M$ is assumed to be smooth, isn't it?
    – Born to be proud
    Nov 22 at 18:03










  • Good point! I guess that you can only talk about $C^{infty}$ structures on smooth manifolds. (Since if $M$ is only a $C^k$ manifold, then there is no practical definition for $C^infty$ maps, since the charts may change the differentiability of the chart repesentation of a map. (i.e. for some charts it maybe is smooth, but for others it is only $C^k$, since the chart is only $C^k$)). But you could also talk about $C^k$ differentiable structures. (In fact, these structures can be used to define manifolds!)
    – Steffen Plunder
    Nov 22 at 18:09













Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3009336%2fwhats-the-meaning-of-the-underlined-sentence-in-page-1-of-gtm-102%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
2
down vote



accepted










Let me start with the explicit definition of $mathcal D(U)$, i.e.
$$
mathcal D(U) = { f: U to mathbb C mid f text{~is smooth} }.
$$



Now, an algebra over the field $k=mathbb C$ is a vector space with an bilinear from
$$
cdot: mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f cdot g.
$$

This bilinear form assigns a ring structure to $mathcal D(U)$ and is also a multiplication in this sense, but it is not the same as the scalar multiplication!



In our case, this map is defined pointwise. For $f,g in mathcal D(U)$, we define $f cdot g in mathcal D(U)$ by
$$
f cdot g : U to mathbb C: x mapsto (fcdot g)(x) := f(x) cdot g(x),
$$

where the last addition is the addition of complex numbers.
In addition, this map has to satisfy the axioms of a bilinear map, e.g. stuff like linearity with respect to scalars of the field $lambda (fcdot g) = (lambda f) cdot g$, for $lambda in k = mathbb C$ and the other axioms.



Since the functions of the differentiable structure are complex valued, these properties are satisfied.



The last statement $1 in mathcal D(U)$ asserts, that the constant function
$1: U to mathbb C: x mapsto 1$ is an element of the algebra $mathcal D(U)$.
It is also the unity element with respect to the ring multiplication $cdot$.





If you know a bit of algebraic geometry, you can see that the axioms in the book
point a little bit in the direction of sheafs.



Hence, topological objects like open set $U, V$ are assigned to rings $mathcal D(U)$ and $mathcal D(V)$, an we if $mathcal U subseteq mathcal V$, then we can find a (restriction) morphism $vert_U: mathcal D(V) to mathcal D(U)$, which is in this case just the restriction of the functions onto the smaller domain.
(See the wikipedia article for the complete definitions of sheafs.)



Hence, these a sheaf is a link between topology and algebraic strucutres.
And they allow to relate purely local with global data, therefore it is no surprise, that they are also important for manifolds.
(But I am not an expert about that! Don't trust me.)





Details about the vector space structure:



The addition
$$
+ : mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f+g
$$

is also defined pointwise by $(f+g) (x) = f(x) + g(x) in mathbb C$.



And the scalar multiplication
$$mathbb C times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (lambda,f) mapsto lambda f,
$$

is defined via $(lambda f)(x) = lambda cdot f(x) in mathbb C$.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • So $M$ is assumed to be smooth, isn't it?
    – Born to be proud
    Nov 22 at 18:03










  • Good point! I guess that you can only talk about $C^{infty}$ structures on smooth manifolds. (Since if $M$ is only a $C^k$ manifold, then there is no practical definition for $C^infty$ maps, since the charts may change the differentiability of the chart repesentation of a map. (i.e. for some charts it maybe is smooth, but for others it is only $C^k$, since the chart is only $C^k$)). But you could also talk about $C^k$ differentiable structures. (In fact, these structures can be used to define manifolds!)
    – Steffen Plunder
    Nov 22 at 18:09

















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










Let me start with the explicit definition of $mathcal D(U)$, i.e.
$$
mathcal D(U) = { f: U to mathbb C mid f text{~is smooth} }.
$$



Now, an algebra over the field $k=mathbb C$ is a vector space with an bilinear from
$$
cdot: mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f cdot g.
$$

This bilinear form assigns a ring structure to $mathcal D(U)$ and is also a multiplication in this sense, but it is not the same as the scalar multiplication!



In our case, this map is defined pointwise. For $f,g in mathcal D(U)$, we define $f cdot g in mathcal D(U)$ by
$$
f cdot g : U to mathbb C: x mapsto (fcdot g)(x) := f(x) cdot g(x),
$$

where the last addition is the addition of complex numbers.
In addition, this map has to satisfy the axioms of a bilinear map, e.g. stuff like linearity with respect to scalars of the field $lambda (fcdot g) = (lambda f) cdot g$, for $lambda in k = mathbb C$ and the other axioms.



Since the functions of the differentiable structure are complex valued, these properties are satisfied.



The last statement $1 in mathcal D(U)$ asserts, that the constant function
$1: U to mathbb C: x mapsto 1$ is an element of the algebra $mathcal D(U)$.
It is also the unity element with respect to the ring multiplication $cdot$.





If you know a bit of algebraic geometry, you can see that the axioms in the book
point a little bit in the direction of sheafs.



Hence, topological objects like open set $U, V$ are assigned to rings $mathcal D(U)$ and $mathcal D(V)$, an we if $mathcal U subseteq mathcal V$, then we can find a (restriction) morphism $vert_U: mathcal D(V) to mathcal D(U)$, which is in this case just the restriction of the functions onto the smaller domain.
(See the wikipedia article for the complete definitions of sheafs.)



Hence, these a sheaf is a link between topology and algebraic strucutres.
And they allow to relate purely local with global data, therefore it is no surprise, that they are also important for manifolds.
(But I am not an expert about that! Don't trust me.)





Details about the vector space structure:



The addition
$$
+ : mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f+g
$$

is also defined pointwise by $(f+g) (x) = f(x) + g(x) in mathbb C$.



And the scalar multiplication
$$mathbb C times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (lambda,f) mapsto lambda f,
$$

is defined via $(lambda f)(x) = lambda cdot f(x) in mathbb C$.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • So $M$ is assumed to be smooth, isn't it?
    – Born to be proud
    Nov 22 at 18:03










  • Good point! I guess that you can only talk about $C^{infty}$ structures on smooth manifolds. (Since if $M$ is only a $C^k$ manifold, then there is no practical definition for $C^infty$ maps, since the charts may change the differentiability of the chart repesentation of a map. (i.e. for some charts it maybe is smooth, but for others it is only $C^k$, since the chart is only $C^k$)). But you could also talk about $C^k$ differentiable structures. (In fact, these structures can be used to define manifolds!)
    – Steffen Plunder
    Nov 22 at 18:09















up vote
2
down vote



accepted







up vote
2
down vote



accepted






Let me start with the explicit definition of $mathcal D(U)$, i.e.
$$
mathcal D(U) = { f: U to mathbb C mid f text{~is smooth} }.
$$



Now, an algebra over the field $k=mathbb C$ is a vector space with an bilinear from
$$
cdot: mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f cdot g.
$$

This bilinear form assigns a ring structure to $mathcal D(U)$ and is also a multiplication in this sense, but it is not the same as the scalar multiplication!



In our case, this map is defined pointwise. For $f,g in mathcal D(U)$, we define $f cdot g in mathcal D(U)$ by
$$
f cdot g : U to mathbb C: x mapsto (fcdot g)(x) := f(x) cdot g(x),
$$

where the last addition is the addition of complex numbers.
In addition, this map has to satisfy the axioms of a bilinear map, e.g. stuff like linearity with respect to scalars of the field $lambda (fcdot g) = (lambda f) cdot g$, for $lambda in k = mathbb C$ and the other axioms.



Since the functions of the differentiable structure are complex valued, these properties are satisfied.



The last statement $1 in mathcal D(U)$ asserts, that the constant function
$1: U to mathbb C: x mapsto 1$ is an element of the algebra $mathcal D(U)$.
It is also the unity element with respect to the ring multiplication $cdot$.





If you know a bit of algebraic geometry, you can see that the axioms in the book
point a little bit in the direction of sheafs.



Hence, topological objects like open set $U, V$ are assigned to rings $mathcal D(U)$ and $mathcal D(V)$, an we if $mathcal U subseteq mathcal V$, then we can find a (restriction) morphism $vert_U: mathcal D(V) to mathcal D(U)$, which is in this case just the restriction of the functions onto the smaller domain.
(See the wikipedia article for the complete definitions of sheafs.)



Hence, these a sheaf is a link between topology and algebraic strucutres.
And they allow to relate purely local with global data, therefore it is no surprise, that they are also important for manifolds.
(But I am not an expert about that! Don't trust me.)





Details about the vector space structure:



The addition
$$
+ : mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f+g
$$

is also defined pointwise by $(f+g) (x) = f(x) + g(x) in mathbb C$.



And the scalar multiplication
$$mathbb C times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (lambda,f) mapsto lambda f,
$$

is defined via $(lambda f)(x) = lambda cdot f(x) in mathbb C$.






share|cite|improve this answer














Let me start with the explicit definition of $mathcal D(U)$, i.e.
$$
mathcal D(U) = { f: U to mathbb C mid f text{~is smooth} }.
$$



Now, an algebra over the field $k=mathbb C$ is a vector space with an bilinear from
$$
cdot: mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f cdot g.
$$

This bilinear form assigns a ring structure to $mathcal D(U)$ and is also a multiplication in this sense, but it is not the same as the scalar multiplication!



In our case, this map is defined pointwise. For $f,g in mathcal D(U)$, we define $f cdot g in mathcal D(U)$ by
$$
f cdot g : U to mathbb C: x mapsto (fcdot g)(x) := f(x) cdot g(x),
$$

where the last addition is the addition of complex numbers.
In addition, this map has to satisfy the axioms of a bilinear map, e.g. stuff like linearity with respect to scalars of the field $lambda (fcdot g) = (lambda f) cdot g$, for $lambda in k = mathbb C$ and the other axioms.



Since the functions of the differentiable structure are complex valued, these properties are satisfied.



The last statement $1 in mathcal D(U)$ asserts, that the constant function
$1: U to mathbb C: x mapsto 1$ is an element of the algebra $mathcal D(U)$.
It is also the unity element with respect to the ring multiplication $cdot$.





If you know a bit of algebraic geometry, you can see that the axioms in the book
point a little bit in the direction of sheafs.



Hence, topological objects like open set $U, V$ are assigned to rings $mathcal D(U)$ and $mathcal D(V)$, an we if $mathcal U subseteq mathcal V$, then we can find a (restriction) morphism $vert_U: mathcal D(V) to mathcal D(U)$, which is in this case just the restriction of the functions onto the smaller domain.
(See the wikipedia article for the complete definitions of sheafs.)



Hence, these a sheaf is a link between topology and algebraic strucutres.
And they allow to relate purely local with global data, therefore it is no surprise, that they are also important for manifolds.
(But I am not an expert about that! Don't trust me.)





Details about the vector space structure:



The addition
$$
+ : mathcal D(U) times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (f,g) mapsto f+g
$$

is also defined pointwise by $(f+g) (x) = f(x) + g(x) in mathbb C$.



And the scalar multiplication
$$mathbb C times mathcal D(U) to mathcal D(U): (lambda,f) mapsto lambda f,
$$

is defined via $(lambda f)(x) = lambda cdot f(x) in mathbb C$.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Nov 22 at 17:41

























answered Nov 22 at 17:33









Steffen Plunder

508211




508211












  • So $M$ is assumed to be smooth, isn't it?
    – Born to be proud
    Nov 22 at 18:03










  • Good point! I guess that you can only talk about $C^{infty}$ structures on smooth manifolds. (Since if $M$ is only a $C^k$ manifold, then there is no practical definition for $C^infty$ maps, since the charts may change the differentiability of the chart repesentation of a map. (i.e. for some charts it maybe is smooth, but for others it is only $C^k$, since the chart is only $C^k$)). But you could also talk about $C^k$ differentiable structures. (In fact, these structures can be used to define manifolds!)
    – Steffen Plunder
    Nov 22 at 18:09




















  • So $M$ is assumed to be smooth, isn't it?
    – Born to be proud
    Nov 22 at 18:03










  • Good point! I guess that you can only talk about $C^{infty}$ structures on smooth manifolds. (Since if $M$ is only a $C^k$ manifold, then there is no practical definition for $C^infty$ maps, since the charts may change the differentiability of the chart repesentation of a map. (i.e. for some charts it maybe is smooth, but for others it is only $C^k$, since the chart is only $C^k$)). But you could also talk about $C^k$ differentiable structures. (In fact, these structures can be used to define manifolds!)
    – Steffen Plunder
    Nov 22 at 18:09


















So $M$ is assumed to be smooth, isn't it?
– Born to be proud
Nov 22 at 18:03




So $M$ is assumed to be smooth, isn't it?
– Born to be proud
Nov 22 at 18:03












Good point! I guess that you can only talk about $C^{infty}$ structures on smooth manifolds. (Since if $M$ is only a $C^k$ manifold, then there is no practical definition for $C^infty$ maps, since the charts may change the differentiability of the chart repesentation of a map. (i.e. for some charts it maybe is smooth, but for others it is only $C^k$, since the chart is only $C^k$)). But you could also talk about $C^k$ differentiable structures. (In fact, these structures can be used to define manifolds!)
– Steffen Plunder
Nov 22 at 18:09






Good point! I guess that you can only talk about $C^{infty}$ structures on smooth manifolds. (Since if $M$ is only a $C^k$ manifold, then there is no practical definition for $C^infty$ maps, since the charts may change the differentiability of the chart repesentation of a map. (i.e. for some charts it maybe is smooth, but for others it is only $C^k$, since the chart is only $C^k$)). But you could also talk about $C^k$ differentiable structures. (In fact, these structures can be used to define manifolds!)
– Steffen Plunder
Nov 22 at 18:09




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3009336%2fwhats-the-meaning-of-the-underlined-sentence-in-page-1-of-gtm-102%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Quarter-circle Tiles

build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

Mont Emei