Re: Multidimensional manifolds
- From: Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 21:18:32 -0500
Alen wrote:
On Sep 26, 7:31 am, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:The "^" introduces superscripts, and the "_" introduces subscripts [...]
I know, but that way of writing is often hard to read. I just think
using capitals and small letters can be easier.
But you omit which are sub- and which are super-scripts. That's important. I found your equation rather obscure. Conventions are important, as they assist communication; making up new ones is counter-productive unless they are a clear and obvious improvement. Yours is clearly worse than the usual nomenclature around here.
I studied Levi-Civita, which I thought was good, until he gets
to the Christoffel symbols and the horrendous Riemann
tensor. I am convinced there is a better way than that to
specify the geometry of a curved manifold.
Hmmm. Cartan introduced curvature 2-forms. I'm not sure they are any simpler. Indeed, there is no simple way to specify the geometry. Given a geometry (i.e. its metric), the Riemann tensor is unique, so no simpler way is possible (Cartan's 2-forms are equivalent).
Except, of course, for simpler situations. For instance in
2 dimensions things simplify a lot.
Tom Roberts
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Multidimensional manifolds
- From: Alen
- Re: Multidimensional manifolds
- References:
- Multidimensional manifolds
- From: Alen
- Re: Multidimensional manifolds
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: Multidimensional manifolds
- From: Alen
- Multidimensional manifolds
- Prev by Date: Re: How does a Faraday disk really work?
- Next by Date: Re: Now, about this metric thingie...
- Previous by thread: Re: Multidimensional manifolds
- Next by thread: Re: Multidimensional manifolds
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|