If $(U,varphi)$ is a coordinate chart around $p in M$, where $M$ smooth manifold, then how does $varphi$...












2












$begingroup$


I am studying differential topology and I have some trouble understanding how coordinates are induced on the tangent space at any point.





Let $M$ be an $n$-dimensional smooth manifold, and let $p in M$. Let $(U,varphi)$ be a coordinate chart around $p$, with coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$. The tangent space $T_p M$ is defined to be $(mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2)^*$, where $mathfrak{m}_p$ is the $Bbb{R}$-algebra of germs at $p$ that vanish at $p$.



Now, we have the following lemma (whose proof I omit).




Lemma. If $x_1,dots,x_n$ are coordinates around $p in M$ and $f in mathfrak{m}_p$, then there exist germs $g_1,dots,g_n$ at $p$ such that $f = sum_i x_i g_i$.




Using this we can show that the images of the coordinates in $mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2$ form a basis for this vector space.
Indeed, we have the following:





  1. $f in mathfrak{m}_p^2 iff g_i in mathfrak{m}_p$ for all $i = 1,dots,n$, since clearly $x_i in mathfrak{m}_p$ for all $i = 1,dots,n$.

  2. If $f = sum x_i g_i in mathfrak{m}_p$, then $f = sum x_i (g_i - g_i(0)) + sum g_i(0) x_i implies bar{f} = sum g_i(0) bar{x}_i$. Here, the bar indicates the image in $mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2$.


Let $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ be the dual basis of $bar{x}_1,dots,bar{x}_n$. Then, we say that the coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ around $p$ induce the coordinates $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ on $T_p M$.





If my understanding so far is correct, what this means is that I can talk about the coordinates $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ on $T_p M$ induced by $varphi$ only when the coordinates around $p$ given by $varphi$ are such that $varphi(p) = 0$. Otherwise, in the above construction it is no longer true that the coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ define germs at $p$ that vanish at $p$.



So, in particular this means that although $(U,varphi)$ defines coordinates around every point $p' in U$, $varphi$ does not induce coordinates on $T_{p'} M$ if $varphi(p') neq 0$.



Is this true? I would appreciate any helpful comments and answers in this regard.





Further motivation.



This line of thinking emerged while I was trying to solve the following problem.




Exercise. Let $f : M to N$ be a smooth map between smooth manifolds. Show that the set of critical points of $f$ form a closed subset of $M$.




The natural method in my opinion is to show that the complement, that is the set of regular points, is open in $M$. So if $p in M$ is a regular point, then $df_p : T_p M to T_{f(p)} N$ is of maximal rank. If suitable coordinate charts $(U,varphi)$ and $(V,psi)$ are chosen around $p$ and $f(p)$, respectively, defining coordinates $x_1,dots,x_m$ and $y_1,dots,y_n$, respectively, then $df_p$ is represented by the Jacobian of $tilde{f} equiv psi circ f circ varphi^{-1}$ at the point $varphi(p)$, with respect to the bases $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ on $T_p M$ and $frac{partial}{partial y_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial y_n}$ on $T_{f(p)} N$.
Now, I know that for every $varphi(p')$ in a small enough neighbourhood around $varphi(p)$, $mathrm{Jac}(tilde{f})_{varphi(p')}$ is also of maximal rank.



At this point, I would like to be able to say that $mathrm{Jac}(tilde{f})_{varphi(p')}$ represents the map $df_{p'} : T_{p'} M to T_{f(p')} N$ with respect to the bases $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ on $T_{p'} M$ and $frac{partial}{partial y_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial y_n}$ on $T_{f(p')} N$.



If I could, then I would be done. But, I went back to the definition of $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ as I've understood it above, and I'm not so sure that I am correct in saying so.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    2












    $begingroup$


    I am studying differential topology and I have some trouble understanding how coordinates are induced on the tangent space at any point.





    Let $M$ be an $n$-dimensional smooth manifold, and let $p in M$. Let $(U,varphi)$ be a coordinate chart around $p$, with coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$. The tangent space $T_p M$ is defined to be $(mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2)^*$, where $mathfrak{m}_p$ is the $Bbb{R}$-algebra of germs at $p$ that vanish at $p$.



    Now, we have the following lemma (whose proof I omit).




    Lemma. If $x_1,dots,x_n$ are coordinates around $p in M$ and $f in mathfrak{m}_p$, then there exist germs $g_1,dots,g_n$ at $p$ such that $f = sum_i x_i g_i$.




    Using this we can show that the images of the coordinates in $mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2$ form a basis for this vector space.
    Indeed, we have the following:





    1. $f in mathfrak{m}_p^2 iff g_i in mathfrak{m}_p$ for all $i = 1,dots,n$, since clearly $x_i in mathfrak{m}_p$ for all $i = 1,dots,n$.

    2. If $f = sum x_i g_i in mathfrak{m}_p$, then $f = sum x_i (g_i - g_i(0)) + sum g_i(0) x_i implies bar{f} = sum g_i(0) bar{x}_i$. Here, the bar indicates the image in $mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2$.


    Let $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ be the dual basis of $bar{x}_1,dots,bar{x}_n$. Then, we say that the coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ around $p$ induce the coordinates $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ on $T_p M$.





    If my understanding so far is correct, what this means is that I can talk about the coordinates $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ on $T_p M$ induced by $varphi$ only when the coordinates around $p$ given by $varphi$ are such that $varphi(p) = 0$. Otherwise, in the above construction it is no longer true that the coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ define germs at $p$ that vanish at $p$.



    So, in particular this means that although $(U,varphi)$ defines coordinates around every point $p' in U$, $varphi$ does not induce coordinates on $T_{p'} M$ if $varphi(p') neq 0$.



    Is this true? I would appreciate any helpful comments and answers in this regard.





    Further motivation.



    This line of thinking emerged while I was trying to solve the following problem.




    Exercise. Let $f : M to N$ be a smooth map between smooth manifolds. Show that the set of critical points of $f$ form a closed subset of $M$.




    The natural method in my opinion is to show that the complement, that is the set of regular points, is open in $M$. So if $p in M$ is a regular point, then $df_p : T_p M to T_{f(p)} N$ is of maximal rank. If suitable coordinate charts $(U,varphi)$ and $(V,psi)$ are chosen around $p$ and $f(p)$, respectively, defining coordinates $x_1,dots,x_m$ and $y_1,dots,y_n$, respectively, then $df_p$ is represented by the Jacobian of $tilde{f} equiv psi circ f circ varphi^{-1}$ at the point $varphi(p)$, with respect to the bases $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ on $T_p M$ and $frac{partial}{partial y_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial y_n}$ on $T_{f(p)} N$.
    Now, I know that for every $varphi(p')$ in a small enough neighbourhood around $varphi(p)$, $mathrm{Jac}(tilde{f})_{varphi(p')}$ is also of maximal rank.



    At this point, I would like to be able to say that $mathrm{Jac}(tilde{f})_{varphi(p')}$ represents the map $df_{p'} : T_{p'} M to T_{f(p')} N$ with respect to the bases $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ on $T_{p'} M$ and $frac{partial}{partial y_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial y_n}$ on $T_{f(p')} N$.



    If I could, then I would be done. But, I went back to the definition of $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ as I've understood it above, and I'm not so sure that I am correct in saying so.










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      2












      2








      2


      1



      $begingroup$


      I am studying differential topology and I have some trouble understanding how coordinates are induced on the tangent space at any point.





      Let $M$ be an $n$-dimensional smooth manifold, and let $p in M$. Let $(U,varphi)$ be a coordinate chart around $p$, with coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$. The tangent space $T_p M$ is defined to be $(mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2)^*$, where $mathfrak{m}_p$ is the $Bbb{R}$-algebra of germs at $p$ that vanish at $p$.



      Now, we have the following lemma (whose proof I omit).




      Lemma. If $x_1,dots,x_n$ are coordinates around $p in M$ and $f in mathfrak{m}_p$, then there exist germs $g_1,dots,g_n$ at $p$ such that $f = sum_i x_i g_i$.




      Using this we can show that the images of the coordinates in $mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2$ form a basis for this vector space.
      Indeed, we have the following:





      1. $f in mathfrak{m}_p^2 iff g_i in mathfrak{m}_p$ for all $i = 1,dots,n$, since clearly $x_i in mathfrak{m}_p$ for all $i = 1,dots,n$.

      2. If $f = sum x_i g_i in mathfrak{m}_p$, then $f = sum x_i (g_i - g_i(0)) + sum g_i(0) x_i implies bar{f} = sum g_i(0) bar{x}_i$. Here, the bar indicates the image in $mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2$.


      Let $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ be the dual basis of $bar{x}_1,dots,bar{x}_n$. Then, we say that the coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ around $p$ induce the coordinates $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ on $T_p M$.





      If my understanding so far is correct, what this means is that I can talk about the coordinates $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ on $T_p M$ induced by $varphi$ only when the coordinates around $p$ given by $varphi$ are such that $varphi(p) = 0$. Otherwise, in the above construction it is no longer true that the coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ define germs at $p$ that vanish at $p$.



      So, in particular this means that although $(U,varphi)$ defines coordinates around every point $p' in U$, $varphi$ does not induce coordinates on $T_{p'} M$ if $varphi(p') neq 0$.



      Is this true? I would appreciate any helpful comments and answers in this regard.





      Further motivation.



      This line of thinking emerged while I was trying to solve the following problem.




      Exercise. Let $f : M to N$ be a smooth map between smooth manifolds. Show that the set of critical points of $f$ form a closed subset of $M$.




      The natural method in my opinion is to show that the complement, that is the set of regular points, is open in $M$. So if $p in M$ is a regular point, then $df_p : T_p M to T_{f(p)} N$ is of maximal rank. If suitable coordinate charts $(U,varphi)$ and $(V,psi)$ are chosen around $p$ and $f(p)$, respectively, defining coordinates $x_1,dots,x_m$ and $y_1,dots,y_n$, respectively, then $df_p$ is represented by the Jacobian of $tilde{f} equiv psi circ f circ varphi^{-1}$ at the point $varphi(p)$, with respect to the bases $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ on $T_p M$ and $frac{partial}{partial y_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial y_n}$ on $T_{f(p)} N$.
      Now, I know that for every $varphi(p')$ in a small enough neighbourhood around $varphi(p)$, $mathrm{Jac}(tilde{f})_{varphi(p')}$ is also of maximal rank.



      At this point, I would like to be able to say that $mathrm{Jac}(tilde{f})_{varphi(p')}$ represents the map $df_{p'} : T_{p'} M to T_{f(p')} N$ with respect to the bases $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ on $T_{p'} M$ and $frac{partial}{partial y_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial y_n}$ on $T_{f(p')} N$.



      If I could, then I would be done. But, I went back to the definition of $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ as I've understood it above, and I'm not so sure that I am correct in saying so.










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I am studying differential topology and I have some trouble understanding how coordinates are induced on the tangent space at any point.





      Let $M$ be an $n$-dimensional smooth manifold, and let $p in M$. Let $(U,varphi)$ be a coordinate chart around $p$, with coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$. The tangent space $T_p M$ is defined to be $(mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2)^*$, where $mathfrak{m}_p$ is the $Bbb{R}$-algebra of germs at $p$ that vanish at $p$.



      Now, we have the following lemma (whose proof I omit).




      Lemma. If $x_1,dots,x_n$ are coordinates around $p in M$ and $f in mathfrak{m}_p$, then there exist germs $g_1,dots,g_n$ at $p$ such that $f = sum_i x_i g_i$.




      Using this we can show that the images of the coordinates in $mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2$ form a basis for this vector space.
      Indeed, we have the following:





      1. $f in mathfrak{m}_p^2 iff g_i in mathfrak{m}_p$ for all $i = 1,dots,n$, since clearly $x_i in mathfrak{m}_p$ for all $i = 1,dots,n$.

      2. If $f = sum x_i g_i in mathfrak{m}_p$, then $f = sum x_i (g_i - g_i(0)) + sum g_i(0) x_i implies bar{f} = sum g_i(0) bar{x}_i$. Here, the bar indicates the image in $mathfrak{m}_p/mathfrak{m}_p^2$.


      Let $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ be the dual basis of $bar{x}_1,dots,bar{x}_n$. Then, we say that the coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ around $p$ induce the coordinates $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ on $T_p M$.





      If my understanding so far is correct, what this means is that I can talk about the coordinates $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ on $T_p M$ induced by $varphi$ only when the coordinates around $p$ given by $varphi$ are such that $varphi(p) = 0$. Otherwise, in the above construction it is no longer true that the coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ define germs at $p$ that vanish at $p$.



      So, in particular this means that although $(U,varphi)$ defines coordinates around every point $p' in U$, $varphi$ does not induce coordinates on $T_{p'} M$ if $varphi(p') neq 0$.



      Is this true? I would appreciate any helpful comments and answers in this regard.





      Further motivation.



      This line of thinking emerged while I was trying to solve the following problem.




      Exercise. Let $f : M to N$ be a smooth map between smooth manifolds. Show that the set of critical points of $f$ form a closed subset of $M$.




      The natural method in my opinion is to show that the complement, that is the set of regular points, is open in $M$. So if $p in M$ is a regular point, then $df_p : T_p M to T_{f(p)} N$ is of maximal rank. If suitable coordinate charts $(U,varphi)$ and $(V,psi)$ are chosen around $p$ and $f(p)$, respectively, defining coordinates $x_1,dots,x_m$ and $y_1,dots,y_n$, respectively, then $df_p$ is represented by the Jacobian of $tilde{f} equiv psi circ f circ varphi^{-1}$ at the point $varphi(p)$, with respect to the bases $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ on $T_p M$ and $frac{partial}{partial y_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial y_n}$ on $T_{f(p)} N$.
      Now, I know that for every $varphi(p')$ in a small enough neighbourhood around $varphi(p)$, $mathrm{Jac}(tilde{f})_{varphi(p')}$ is also of maximal rank.



      At this point, I would like to be able to say that $mathrm{Jac}(tilde{f})_{varphi(p')}$ represents the map $df_{p'} : T_{p'} M to T_{f(p')} N$ with respect to the bases $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ on $T_{p'} M$ and $frac{partial}{partial y_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial y_n}$ on $T_{f(p')} N$.



      If I could, then I would be done. But, I went back to the definition of $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_m}$ as I've understood it above, and I'm not so sure that I am correct in saying so.







      definition differential-topology smooth-manifolds tangent-spaces






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 8 '18 at 19:08









      BrahadeeshBrahadeesh

      6,24242361




      6,24242361






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          There are several equivalent definitions of the tangent space. Consider $C_p(M)$ the $mathbb{R}$-algebra of germs at $p$ and define the tangent space of $M$ at $p$ as the dual space of the quotient $C_p(M)/(mathfrak{m}_p^2+mathbb{R})$, where the copy of $mathbb{R}$ in the denominator is the vector subspace of constant functions. With this definition, the value of $varphi(p)$ does not matter.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$





















            1












            $begingroup$

            Let $G_p$ be the set of germs at $p$. Let $(U,varphi)$ and $(V,psi)$ be coordinate charts around $p$, with coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ on $U$ and $y_1,dots,y_n$ on $V$. If $f : M to Bbb{R}$ is a smooth function such that
            $$
            frac{partial f}{partial x_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n,tag{$*$}
            $$

            then
            $$
            frac{partial f}{partial y_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
            $$

            Also, if $f_1,f_2 : M to Bbb{R}$ are smooth functions that agree on a small neighbourhood around $p$, then we have
            $$
            frac{partial f_1}{partial x_i}bigg|_p = frac{partial f_2}{partial x_i}bigg|_p quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
            $$

            Let $S_p$ be the subspace of stationary germs at $p$, that is, those germs at $p$ for which ($*$) hold. By the above remarks, $S_p$ is a well-defined subspace of $G_p$.



            Now, suppose $f in G_p$ and $x_1,dots,x_n$ are coordinates around $p$ with $(alpha_1,dots,alpha_n)$ the coordinates of $p$. Then, by the above Lemma, we have that
            $$
            f(x) = f(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) g_i(x) = f(p) - sum_{i=1}^n alpha_i g_i(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) (g_i(x) - g_i(p)) + sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) x_i.
            $$

            The first two terms of the right-most expression are constant germs and hence stationary germs. The third term is also a stationary germ, as can be seen by differentiating and applying the chain rule. Hence, if $bar{f}$ denotes the image of $f$ in $G_p / S_p$, we have that
            $$
            bar{f} = sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) bar{x}_i.
            $$





            So, we can still make sense of $bar{x}_1,dots,bar{x}_n$ and its dual basis $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ when $p$ does not have coordinates $(0,dots,0)$. Note that
            $G_p/S_p cong mathfrak{m}_p/(mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p)$ by the second isomorphism theorem, because $G_p = mathfrak{m}_p + S_p$. Moreover, $mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2$. So, there is no trouble in defining the tangent space $T_p M$ to be $(G_p / S_p)^*$.





            I obtained some supplementary course notes that briefly mention $T_p^* M := G_p/S_p = mathfrak{m}_p / mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p$, and $T_p M := (T_p^* M)^*$. I have only elaborated this in greater detail in my answer.



            Also, the expression for $f(x)$ that I have obtained here shows that $S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2 + Bbb{R}$, where $Bbb{R}$ denotes the subspace of constant germs. So, this answer can also be considered an elaboration of the answer by @DanteGrevino.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              It is more or less the proof that I have in mind. Good job filling the details! Let me know if something remains unclear.
              $endgroup$
              – Dante Grevino
              Dec 11 '18 at 16:02










            • $begingroup$
              Thank you @DanteGrevino :) I think I've finally got the hang of the definitions now.
              $endgroup$
              – Brahadeesh
              Dec 11 '18 at 16:03






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              I think there is a typo. $m_p cap S_p = {m_p}^2 $ You have written $m_p + S_p = {m_p}^2$
              $endgroup$
              – Error 404
              Dec 12 '18 at 16:21












            • $begingroup$
              @Error404 Thanks, corrected :)
              $endgroup$
              – Brahadeesh
              Dec 12 '18 at 16:25






            • 1




              $begingroup$
              @Error404 In most contexts, yes, but in the problem I described in the "Further motivation" section I want to be able to say that $frac{partial}{partial x_1}big|_{q},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}big|_{q}$ is a basis of $T_q M$ for all points $q in U$, where $(U,varphi)$ is a chart around $p$, and $varphi$ describes coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ in $U$ with $p equiv 0$. I cannot do this without the general definition of $T_p M$ as $(G_p / S_p)^*$.
              $endgroup$
              – Brahadeesh
              Dec 13 '18 at 10:21











            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',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            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%2f3031496%2fif-u-varphi-is-a-coordinate-chart-around-p-in-m-where-m-smooth-manifo%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            2












            $begingroup$

            There are several equivalent definitions of the tangent space. Consider $C_p(M)$ the $mathbb{R}$-algebra of germs at $p$ and define the tangent space of $M$ at $p$ as the dual space of the quotient $C_p(M)/(mathfrak{m}_p^2+mathbb{R})$, where the copy of $mathbb{R}$ in the denominator is the vector subspace of constant functions. With this definition, the value of $varphi(p)$ does not matter.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$


















              2












              $begingroup$

              There are several equivalent definitions of the tangent space. Consider $C_p(M)$ the $mathbb{R}$-algebra of germs at $p$ and define the tangent space of $M$ at $p$ as the dual space of the quotient $C_p(M)/(mathfrak{m}_p^2+mathbb{R})$, where the copy of $mathbb{R}$ in the denominator is the vector subspace of constant functions. With this definition, the value of $varphi(p)$ does not matter.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$
















                2












                2








                2





                $begingroup$

                There are several equivalent definitions of the tangent space. Consider $C_p(M)$ the $mathbb{R}$-algebra of germs at $p$ and define the tangent space of $M$ at $p$ as the dual space of the quotient $C_p(M)/(mathfrak{m}_p^2+mathbb{R})$, where the copy of $mathbb{R}$ in the denominator is the vector subspace of constant functions. With this definition, the value of $varphi(p)$ does not matter.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                There are several equivalent definitions of the tangent space. Consider $C_p(M)$ the $mathbb{R}$-algebra of germs at $p$ and define the tangent space of $M$ at $p$ as the dual space of the quotient $C_p(M)/(mathfrak{m}_p^2+mathbb{R})$, where the copy of $mathbb{R}$ in the denominator is the vector subspace of constant functions. With this definition, the value of $varphi(p)$ does not matter.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Dec 8 '18 at 20:29

























                answered Dec 8 '18 at 20:06









                Dante GrevinoDante Grevino

                993111




                993111























                    1












                    $begingroup$

                    Let $G_p$ be the set of germs at $p$. Let $(U,varphi)$ and $(V,psi)$ be coordinate charts around $p$, with coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ on $U$ and $y_1,dots,y_n$ on $V$. If $f : M to Bbb{R}$ is a smooth function such that
                    $$
                    frac{partial f}{partial x_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n,tag{$*$}
                    $$

                    then
                    $$
                    frac{partial f}{partial y_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
                    $$

                    Also, if $f_1,f_2 : M to Bbb{R}$ are smooth functions that agree on a small neighbourhood around $p$, then we have
                    $$
                    frac{partial f_1}{partial x_i}bigg|_p = frac{partial f_2}{partial x_i}bigg|_p quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
                    $$

                    Let $S_p$ be the subspace of stationary germs at $p$, that is, those germs at $p$ for which ($*$) hold. By the above remarks, $S_p$ is a well-defined subspace of $G_p$.



                    Now, suppose $f in G_p$ and $x_1,dots,x_n$ are coordinates around $p$ with $(alpha_1,dots,alpha_n)$ the coordinates of $p$. Then, by the above Lemma, we have that
                    $$
                    f(x) = f(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) g_i(x) = f(p) - sum_{i=1}^n alpha_i g_i(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) (g_i(x) - g_i(p)) + sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) x_i.
                    $$

                    The first two terms of the right-most expression are constant germs and hence stationary germs. The third term is also a stationary germ, as can be seen by differentiating and applying the chain rule. Hence, if $bar{f}$ denotes the image of $f$ in $G_p / S_p$, we have that
                    $$
                    bar{f} = sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) bar{x}_i.
                    $$





                    So, we can still make sense of $bar{x}_1,dots,bar{x}_n$ and its dual basis $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ when $p$ does not have coordinates $(0,dots,0)$. Note that
                    $G_p/S_p cong mathfrak{m}_p/(mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p)$ by the second isomorphism theorem, because $G_p = mathfrak{m}_p + S_p$. Moreover, $mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2$. So, there is no trouble in defining the tangent space $T_p M$ to be $(G_p / S_p)^*$.





                    I obtained some supplementary course notes that briefly mention $T_p^* M := G_p/S_p = mathfrak{m}_p / mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p$, and $T_p M := (T_p^* M)^*$. I have only elaborated this in greater detail in my answer.



                    Also, the expression for $f(x)$ that I have obtained here shows that $S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2 + Bbb{R}$, where $Bbb{R}$ denotes the subspace of constant germs. So, this answer can also be considered an elaboration of the answer by @DanteGrevino.






                    share|cite|improve this answer











                    $endgroup$













                    • $begingroup$
                      It is more or less the proof that I have in mind. Good job filling the details! Let me know if something remains unclear.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Dante Grevino
                      Dec 11 '18 at 16:02










                    • $begingroup$
                      Thank you @DanteGrevino :) I think I've finally got the hang of the definitions now.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 11 '18 at 16:03






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      I think there is a typo. $m_p cap S_p = {m_p}^2 $ You have written $m_p + S_p = {m_p}^2$
                      $endgroup$
                      – Error 404
                      Dec 12 '18 at 16:21












                    • $begingroup$
                      @Error404 Thanks, corrected :)
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 12 '18 at 16:25






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @Error404 In most contexts, yes, but in the problem I described in the "Further motivation" section I want to be able to say that $frac{partial}{partial x_1}big|_{q},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}big|_{q}$ is a basis of $T_q M$ for all points $q in U$, where $(U,varphi)$ is a chart around $p$, and $varphi$ describes coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ in $U$ with $p equiv 0$. I cannot do this without the general definition of $T_p M$ as $(G_p / S_p)^*$.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 13 '18 at 10:21
















                    1












                    $begingroup$

                    Let $G_p$ be the set of germs at $p$. Let $(U,varphi)$ and $(V,psi)$ be coordinate charts around $p$, with coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ on $U$ and $y_1,dots,y_n$ on $V$. If $f : M to Bbb{R}$ is a smooth function such that
                    $$
                    frac{partial f}{partial x_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n,tag{$*$}
                    $$

                    then
                    $$
                    frac{partial f}{partial y_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
                    $$

                    Also, if $f_1,f_2 : M to Bbb{R}$ are smooth functions that agree on a small neighbourhood around $p$, then we have
                    $$
                    frac{partial f_1}{partial x_i}bigg|_p = frac{partial f_2}{partial x_i}bigg|_p quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
                    $$

                    Let $S_p$ be the subspace of stationary germs at $p$, that is, those germs at $p$ for which ($*$) hold. By the above remarks, $S_p$ is a well-defined subspace of $G_p$.



                    Now, suppose $f in G_p$ and $x_1,dots,x_n$ are coordinates around $p$ with $(alpha_1,dots,alpha_n)$ the coordinates of $p$. Then, by the above Lemma, we have that
                    $$
                    f(x) = f(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) g_i(x) = f(p) - sum_{i=1}^n alpha_i g_i(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) (g_i(x) - g_i(p)) + sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) x_i.
                    $$

                    The first two terms of the right-most expression are constant germs and hence stationary germs. The third term is also a stationary germ, as can be seen by differentiating and applying the chain rule. Hence, if $bar{f}$ denotes the image of $f$ in $G_p / S_p$, we have that
                    $$
                    bar{f} = sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) bar{x}_i.
                    $$





                    So, we can still make sense of $bar{x}_1,dots,bar{x}_n$ and its dual basis $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ when $p$ does not have coordinates $(0,dots,0)$. Note that
                    $G_p/S_p cong mathfrak{m}_p/(mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p)$ by the second isomorphism theorem, because $G_p = mathfrak{m}_p + S_p$. Moreover, $mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2$. So, there is no trouble in defining the tangent space $T_p M$ to be $(G_p / S_p)^*$.





                    I obtained some supplementary course notes that briefly mention $T_p^* M := G_p/S_p = mathfrak{m}_p / mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p$, and $T_p M := (T_p^* M)^*$. I have only elaborated this in greater detail in my answer.



                    Also, the expression for $f(x)$ that I have obtained here shows that $S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2 + Bbb{R}$, where $Bbb{R}$ denotes the subspace of constant germs. So, this answer can also be considered an elaboration of the answer by @DanteGrevino.






                    share|cite|improve this answer











                    $endgroup$













                    • $begingroup$
                      It is more or less the proof that I have in mind. Good job filling the details! Let me know if something remains unclear.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Dante Grevino
                      Dec 11 '18 at 16:02










                    • $begingroup$
                      Thank you @DanteGrevino :) I think I've finally got the hang of the definitions now.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 11 '18 at 16:03






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      I think there is a typo. $m_p cap S_p = {m_p}^2 $ You have written $m_p + S_p = {m_p}^2$
                      $endgroup$
                      – Error 404
                      Dec 12 '18 at 16:21












                    • $begingroup$
                      @Error404 Thanks, corrected :)
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 12 '18 at 16:25






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @Error404 In most contexts, yes, but in the problem I described in the "Further motivation" section I want to be able to say that $frac{partial}{partial x_1}big|_{q},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}big|_{q}$ is a basis of $T_q M$ for all points $q in U$, where $(U,varphi)$ is a chart around $p$, and $varphi$ describes coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ in $U$ with $p equiv 0$. I cannot do this without the general definition of $T_p M$ as $(G_p / S_p)^*$.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 13 '18 at 10:21














                    1












                    1








                    1





                    $begingroup$

                    Let $G_p$ be the set of germs at $p$. Let $(U,varphi)$ and $(V,psi)$ be coordinate charts around $p$, with coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ on $U$ and $y_1,dots,y_n$ on $V$. If $f : M to Bbb{R}$ is a smooth function such that
                    $$
                    frac{partial f}{partial x_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n,tag{$*$}
                    $$

                    then
                    $$
                    frac{partial f}{partial y_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
                    $$

                    Also, if $f_1,f_2 : M to Bbb{R}$ are smooth functions that agree on a small neighbourhood around $p$, then we have
                    $$
                    frac{partial f_1}{partial x_i}bigg|_p = frac{partial f_2}{partial x_i}bigg|_p quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
                    $$

                    Let $S_p$ be the subspace of stationary germs at $p$, that is, those germs at $p$ for which ($*$) hold. By the above remarks, $S_p$ is a well-defined subspace of $G_p$.



                    Now, suppose $f in G_p$ and $x_1,dots,x_n$ are coordinates around $p$ with $(alpha_1,dots,alpha_n)$ the coordinates of $p$. Then, by the above Lemma, we have that
                    $$
                    f(x) = f(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) g_i(x) = f(p) - sum_{i=1}^n alpha_i g_i(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) (g_i(x) - g_i(p)) + sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) x_i.
                    $$

                    The first two terms of the right-most expression are constant germs and hence stationary germs. The third term is also a stationary germ, as can be seen by differentiating and applying the chain rule. Hence, if $bar{f}$ denotes the image of $f$ in $G_p / S_p$, we have that
                    $$
                    bar{f} = sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) bar{x}_i.
                    $$





                    So, we can still make sense of $bar{x}_1,dots,bar{x}_n$ and its dual basis $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ when $p$ does not have coordinates $(0,dots,0)$. Note that
                    $G_p/S_p cong mathfrak{m}_p/(mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p)$ by the second isomorphism theorem, because $G_p = mathfrak{m}_p + S_p$. Moreover, $mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2$. So, there is no trouble in defining the tangent space $T_p M$ to be $(G_p / S_p)^*$.





                    I obtained some supplementary course notes that briefly mention $T_p^* M := G_p/S_p = mathfrak{m}_p / mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p$, and $T_p M := (T_p^* M)^*$. I have only elaborated this in greater detail in my answer.



                    Also, the expression for $f(x)$ that I have obtained here shows that $S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2 + Bbb{R}$, where $Bbb{R}$ denotes the subspace of constant germs. So, this answer can also be considered an elaboration of the answer by @DanteGrevino.






                    share|cite|improve this answer











                    $endgroup$



                    Let $G_p$ be the set of germs at $p$. Let $(U,varphi)$ and $(V,psi)$ be coordinate charts around $p$, with coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ on $U$ and $y_1,dots,y_n$ on $V$. If $f : M to Bbb{R}$ is a smooth function such that
                    $$
                    frac{partial f}{partial x_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n,tag{$*$}
                    $$

                    then
                    $$
                    frac{partial f}{partial y_i}bigg|_{p} = 0 quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
                    $$

                    Also, if $f_1,f_2 : M to Bbb{R}$ are smooth functions that agree on a small neighbourhood around $p$, then we have
                    $$
                    frac{partial f_1}{partial x_i}bigg|_p = frac{partial f_2}{partial x_i}bigg|_p quad text{ for all } quad i = 1,dots,n.
                    $$

                    Let $S_p$ be the subspace of stationary germs at $p$, that is, those germs at $p$ for which ($*$) hold. By the above remarks, $S_p$ is a well-defined subspace of $G_p$.



                    Now, suppose $f in G_p$ and $x_1,dots,x_n$ are coordinates around $p$ with $(alpha_1,dots,alpha_n)$ the coordinates of $p$. Then, by the above Lemma, we have that
                    $$
                    f(x) = f(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) g_i(x) = f(p) - sum_{i=1}^n alpha_i g_i(p) + sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - alpha_i) (g_i(x) - g_i(p)) + sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) x_i.
                    $$

                    The first two terms of the right-most expression are constant germs and hence stationary germs. The third term is also a stationary germ, as can be seen by differentiating and applying the chain rule. Hence, if $bar{f}$ denotes the image of $f$ in $G_p / S_p$, we have that
                    $$
                    bar{f} = sum_{i=1}^n g_i(p) bar{x}_i.
                    $$





                    So, we can still make sense of $bar{x}_1,dots,bar{x}_n$ and its dual basis $frac{partial}{partial x_1},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}$ when $p$ does not have coordinates $(0,dots,0)$. Note that
                    $G_p/S_p cong mathfrak{m}_p/(mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p)$ by the second isomorphism theorem, because $G_p = mathfrak{m}_p + S_p$. Moreover, $mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2$. So, there is no trouble in defining the tangent space $T_p M$ to be $(G_p / S_p)^*$.





                    I obtained some supplementary course notes that briefly mention $T_p^* M := G_p/S_p = mathfrak{m}_p / mathfrak{m}_p cap S_p$, and $T_p M := (T_p^* M)^*$. I have only elaborated this in greater detail in my answer.



                    Also, the expression for $f(x)$ that I have obtained here shows that $S_p = mathfrak{m}_p^2 + Bbb{R}$, where $Bbb{R}$ denotes the subspace of constant germs. So, this answer can also be considered an elaboration of the answer by @DanteGrevino.







                    share|cite|improve this answer














                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer








                    edited Dec 12 '18 at 16:22

























                    answered Dec 11 '18 at 14:11









                    BrahadeeshBrahadeesh

                    6,24242361




                    6,24242361












                    • $begingroup$
                      It is more or less the proof that I have in mind. Good job filling the details! Let me know if something remains unclear.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Dante Grevino
                      Dec 11 '18 at 16:02










                    • $begingroup$
                      Thank you @DanteGrevino :) I think I've finally got the hang of the definitions now.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 11 '18 at 16:03






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      I think there is a typo. $m_p cap S_p = {m_p}^2 $ You have written $m_p + S_p = {m_p}^2$
                      $endgroup$
                      – Error 404
                      Dec 12 '18 at 16:21












                    • $begingroup$
                      @Error404 Thanks, corrected :)
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 12 '18 at 16:25






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @Error404 In most contexts, yes, but in the problem I described in the "Further motivation" section I want to be able to say that $frac{partial}{partial x_1}big|_{q},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}big|_{q}$ is a basis of $T_q M$ for all points $q in U$, where $(U,varphi)$ is a chart around $p$, and $varphi$ describes coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ in $U$ with $p equiv 0$. I cannot do this without the general definition of $T_p M$ as $(G_p / S_p)^*$.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 13 '18 at 10:21


















                    • $begingroup$
                      It is more or less the proof that I have in mind. Good job filling the details! Let me know if something remains unclear.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Dante Grevino
                      Dec 11 '18 at 16:02










                    • $begingroup$
                      Thank you @DanteGrevino :) I think I've finally got the hang of the definitions now.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 11 '18 at 16:03






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      I think there is a typo. $m_p cap S_p = {m_p}^2 $ You have written $m_p + S_p = {m_p}^2$
                      $endgroup$
                      – Error 404
                      Dec 12 '18 at 16:21












                    • $begingroup$
                      @Error404 Thanks, corrected :)
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 12 '18 at 16:25






                    • 1




                      $begingroup$
                      @Error404 In most contexts, yes, but in the problem I described in the "Further motivation" section I want to be able to say that $frac{partial}{partial x_1}big|_{q},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}big|_{q}$ is a basis of $T_q M$ for all points $q in U$, where $(U,varphi)$ is a chart around $p$, and $varphi$ describes coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ in $U$ with $p equiv 0$. I cannot do this without the general definition of $T_p M$ as $(G_p / S_p)^*$.
                      $endgroup$
                      – Brahadeesh
                      Dec 13 '18 at 10:21
















                    $begingroup$
                    It is more or less the proof that I have in mind. Good job filling the details! Let me know if something remains unclear.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Dante Grevino
                    Dec 11 '18 at 16:02




                    $begingroup$
                    It is more or less the proof that I have in mind. Good job filling the details! Let me know if something remains unclear.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Dante Grevino
                    Dec 11 '18 at 16:02












                    $begingroup$
                    Thank you @DanteGrevino :) I think I've finally got the hang of the definitions now.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Brahadeesh
                    Dec 11 '18 at 16:03




                    $begingroup$
                    Thank you @DanteGrevino :) I think I've finally got the hang of the definitions now.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Brahadeesh
                    Dec 11 '18 at 16:03




                    1




                    1




                    $begingroup$
                    I think there is a typo. $m_p cap S_p = {m_p}^2 $ You have written $m_p + S_p = {m_p}^2$
                    $endgroup$
                    – Error 404
                    Dec 12 '18 at 16:21






                    $begingroup$
                    I think there is a typo. $m_p cap S_p = {m_p}^2 $ You have written $m_p + S_p = {m_p}^2$
                    $endgroup$
                    – Error 404
                    Dec 12 '18 at 16:21














                    $begingroup$
                    @Error404 Thanks, corrected :)
                    $endgroup$
                    – Brahadeesh
                    Dec 12 '18 at 16:25




                    $begingroup$
                    @Error404 Thanks, corrected :)
                    $endgroup$
                    – Brahadeesh
                    Dec 12 '18 at 16:25




                    1




                    1




                    $begingroup$
                    @Error404 In most contexts, yes, but in the problem I described in the "Further motivation" section I want to be able to say that $frac{partial}{partial x_1}big|_{q},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}big|_{q}$ is a basis of $T_q M$ for all points $q in U$, where $(U,varphi)$ is a chart around $p$, and $varphi$ describes coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ in $U$ with $p equiv 0$. I cannot do this without the general definition of $T_p M$ as $(G_p / S_p)^*$.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Brahadeesh
                    Dec 13 '18 at 10:21




                    $begingroup$
                    @Error404 In most contexts, yes, but in the problem I described in the "Further motivation" section I want to be able to say that $frac{partial}{partial x_1}big|_{q},dots,frac{partial}{partial x_n}big|_{q}$ is a basis of $T_q M$ for all points $q in U$, where $(U,varphi)$ is a chart around $p$, and $varphi$ describes coordinates $x_1,dots,x_n$ in $U$ with $p equiv 0$. I cannot do this without the general definition of $T_p M$ as $(G_p / S_p)^*$.
                    $endgroup$
                    – Brahadeesh
                    Dec 13 '18 at 10:21


















                    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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3031496%2fif-u-varphi-is-a-coordinate-chart-around-p-in-m-where-m-smooth-manifo%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

                    Probability when a professor distributes a quiz and homework assignment to a class of n students.

                    Aardman Animations

                    Are they similar matrix