The Unapologetic Mathematician

Mathematics for the interested outsider

The Derivative

It turns out that the tangent bundle construction is actually a functor. Given a smooth map f:M\to N between smooth manifolds, we will get a smooth map f_*:\mathcal{T}M\to\mathcal{T}N. Yes, we’d usually write \mathcal{T}f for a functor’s action on a map, but the f_* notation is pretty classical.

So if we’re given a tangent vector v\in\mathcal{T}_pM we want to get a tangent vector f_*(v)\in\mathcal{T}_qN. And since we already have f sending points of M to points of N, it only makes sense to ask that q=f(p). That is, in terms of the tangent bundle projection functions, we can write f(\pi(v))=\pi(f_*(v)). In other words, the projection \pi:\mathcal{T}M\to M will be a natural transformation from the tangent bundle functor to the identity functor.

Anyway, this means that for each p\in M we’ll get a map f_{*p}:\mathcal{T}_pM\to\mathcal{T}_{f(p)}N. Since these are both vector spaces, it only stands to reason that we’d have a linear map. We haven’t yet established the connection between our “tangent vectors” and the geometric notion, but we do have a notion from multivariable calculus of a linear map that takes tangent vectors to tangent vectors: the Jacobian, which we saw as a certain extension of the notion of the derivative. We will find that our map f_* is the analogue of the same concept on manifolds, and so we will call it the derivative of f.

So here’s our definition: if f:U\to N is a differentiable map in some open set U\subseteq M and if p\in U, then we define our map f_{*p}:\mathcal{T}_pM\to\mathcal{T}_{f(p)}N by

\displaystyle\left[f_{*p}(v)\right](\phi)=v(\phi\circ f)

where \phi\in\mathcal{O}(V) is any smooth function on a neighborhood of f(p)\in N. That is, f_{*p}(v) is a linear functional on \mathcal{O}_{f(p)}; if \phi represents a germ at f(p) we can compose it with f to represent a germ at p, and then we can apply v itself to this germ. It should be immediately clear that this construction is linear in v.

About these ads

April 6, 2011 - Posted by | Differential Topology, Topology

16 Comments »

  1. [...] take the derivative and see what it looks like in terms of coordinates. Say we have a smooth manifold and a smooth map [...]

    Pingback by Derivatives in Coordinates « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 6, 2011 | Reply

  2. [...] of the Derivative We’ve said that the tangent bundle construction is a functor with the derivative as the action on morphisms. But we haven’t actually verified that it obeys the conditions of [...]

    Pingback by Functoriality of the Derivative « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 7, 2011 | Reply

  3. [...] we have a canonical tangent vector in , we can hit it with the derivative and see what happens. We get a tangent [...]

    Pingback by Curves « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 8, 2011 | Reply

  4. [...] Armstrong: Derivatives in Coordinates, The Derivative, Coordinate Vectors Span Tangent Spaces, Tangent Vectors at a [...]

    Pingback by Third Xamuel.com Linkfest | April 10, 2011 | Reply

  5. [...] to more general manifolds. We know that the proper generalization of the Jacobian is the derivative of a smooth map , where is an open region of an -manifold and is another -manifold. If the [...]

    Pingback by The Inverse Function Theorem « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 14, 2011 | Reply

  6. [...] map of manifolds is called an “immersion” if the derivative is injective at every point . Immediately we can tell that this can only happen if [...]

    Pingback by Immersions and Embeddings « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 18, 2011 | Reply

  7. [...] be a smooth map between manifolds. We say that a point is a “regular point” if the derivative has rank ; otherwise, we say that is a “critical point”. A point is called a [...]

    Pingback by Regular and Critical Points « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 21, 2011 | Reply

  8. [...] key observation is that the inclusion induces an inclusion of each tangent space by using the derivative . The directions in this subspace are those “tangent to” the submanifold , and so these [...]

    Pingback by Tangent Spaces and Regular Values « The Unapologetic Mathematician | April 26, 2011 | Reply

  9. [...] of increasing . That is, includes the interval into “at the point “, and thus its derivative carries along its tangent bundle. At each point of an (oriented) interval there’s a [...]

    Pingback by Integral Curves and Local Flows « The Unapologetic Mathematician | May 28, 2011 | Reply

  10. [...] be a smooth map between manifolds, with derivative , and let and be smooth vector fields. We can compose them as and , and it makes sense to ask if [...]

    Pingback by Maps Intertwining Vector Fields « The Unapologetic Mathematician | June 3, 2011 | Reply

  11. [...] from back to itself, and in particular it has the identity as a fixed point: . Thus the derivative sends the tangent space at back to itself: . But we know that this tangent space is canonically [...]

    Pingback by The Adjoint Representation « The Unapologetic Mathematician | June 13, 2011 | Reply

  12. [...] because smooth maps push points forward. It turns out that vectors push forward as well, by the derivative. And so we can define the pullback of a -form [...]

    Pingback by Pulling Back Forms « The Unapologetic Mathematician | July 13, 2011 | Reply

  13. [...] this pullback of we must work out how to push forward vectors from . That is, we must work out the derivative of [...]

    Pingback by An Example (part 3) « The Unapologetic Mathematician | August 24, 2011 | Reply

  14. [...] the derivative, we see [...]

    Pingback by The Tangent Space at the Boundary « The Unapologetic Mathematician | September 15, 2011 | Reply

  15. [...] forms are entirely made from contravariant vector fields, so we can pull back by using the derivative to push forward vectors and then [...]

    Pingback by Isometries « The Unapologetic Mathematician | September 27, 2011 | Reply

  16. [...] The orientation on a hypersurface consists of tangent vectors which are all in the image of the derivative of the local parameterization map, which is a singular [...]

    Pingback by (Hyper-)Surface Integrals « The Unapologetic Mathematician | October 27, 2011 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 232 other followers

%d bloggers like this: