Integration on chains in Spivak's calculus on manifolds

In summary, Spivak does things differently and as a result, things can get a little weird. For instance, the first thing he asks himself after defining the integral of a k-form over a k-chain is whether or not the result is independent of the chain. He finds guidance in the person of problem 4-25, but after all, it's possible that there is no 1-1 p such that c o p = d. He also found a little guidance in answering the question of whether or not to reparametrize a chain with a p. A p with det p'(x) >= 0 looks like a smooth curve tracing out a circle on the Euclidean plane.
  • #1
quasar987
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
4,807
32
I would like to discuss this chapter with someone who has read the book.

From looking at other books, I realize that Spivak does things a little differently. He seems to be putting less structure on his chains (for instance, no mention of orientation, no 1-1 requirement and so on), and as a result, I find that things get a little weird.

For instance, the first thing I asked myself after reading the definition of the integral of a k-form over a k-chain is whether or not the result is independent of the chain. More precisely, if c and d are two k-chains with identical images, does

[tex]\int_c\omega=\int_d\omega[/tex]

as intuition demands??

I found a little guidance in answering this in the person of problem 4-25 (Independence of parametrization), but that's not entirely satisfying, because after all, coudn't it be that there is no 1-1 p such that c o p = d? If c and d are not injective for instance, the obvious p(t) := c^-1(d(t)) fails. And that det p'(x) >= 0 condition... what does it say about p? What characterize reparametrizations p with det p'(x) >= 0? (Does injectivity implies that the determinant does not chance sign? locally okay, but globally?!)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
quasar987 said:
From looking at other books, I realize that Spivak does things a little differently. He seems to be putting less structure on his chains (for instance, no mention of orientation, no 1-1 requirement and so on), and as a result, I find that things get a little weird.
Isn't a chain a formal linear combination of parametrized regions? The parametrization on a region gives it an orientation.

More precisely, if c and d are two k-chains with identical images, does

[tex]\int_c\omega=\int_d\omega[/tex]

as intuition demands??
If we set d = 2c, then wouldn't they have the same image and different integrals?
 
  • #3
Oops, I wrote k-chain everywhere where I should have written k-cube.

His k-cube on A (subset of R^n) is a smooth map c:[0,1]^k-->A.
 
  • #4
Well, it's easy enough to construct counterexamples in the same spirit. For example, c could be a curve tracing out a circle on the Euclidean plane, and d could be another curve that traces out the same circle twice.

(Of course, I doubt your intuition ever really demanded that these be the same...)
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Mmmh, true.

And about problem 4-25? It reads,

"Let c be a k-cube and p:[0,1]^k-->[0,1]^k a bijection with det p'(x) >= 0 everywhere. If w is a k-form, then

[tex]\int_c\omega=\int_{c\circ p}\omega[/tex]"

The proof is direct... what I'm wondering is say I want to reparametrize c with a p as in the exercise. What does a p with det p'(x) >= 0 looks like? What does det p'(x) >= 0 says about p geometrically or otherwise?
 
  • #6
Hello everybody!
I am an exchange student in Canada and one of the course I choose is Calculus on Manifolds. This is a intersting as it is difficult but I deal with it! Anyway, I try to compute an aera over the chain but I can't find the right chain!

I have to compute the area on R2 of a square with a semi-circle on its top (I hope it is easy to understand). If you could give me any to start with or hint, I'd be glad because for now I don't even have an idea.

Hope to hear from you,
Alex
 

FAQ: Integration on chains in Spivak's calculus on manifolds

1. What is integration on chains in Spivak's calculus on manifolds?

Integration on chains is a mathematical technique used in Spivak's calculus on manifolds to calculate the area, volume, or other measurements of a manifold. It involves breaking down the manifold into smaller pieces, called chains, and then summing up the contributions from each chain to find the overall measurement.

2. How does integration on chains differ from traditional integration?

Traditional integration involves finding the area under a curve by summing up infinitely small rectangles. Integration on chains, on the other hand, breaks down the manifold into smaller pieces and sums up their contributions, similar to breaking down a shape into smaller parts and finding their individual areas.

3. What are the benefits of using integration on chains?

Integration on chains allows for more complex calculations on manifolds that cannot be easily solved using traditional integration methods. It also provides a more general and powerful framework for integration on manifolds.

4. Can integration on chains be applied to any type of manifold?

Yes, integration on chains can be applied to any type of manifold, including smooth manifolds, topological manifolds, and even non-orientable manifolds.

5. Are there any limitations to integration on chains?

Integration on chains can become more complicated when working with high-dimensional manifolds, as the number of chains and their contributions can increase significantly. It also requires a solid understanding of multivariable calculus and topology to apply effectively.

Similar threads

Replies
36
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top