Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The (second) fundamental theorem of calculus says that

$$\int_a^b f'(x) dx = f(b) - f(a)$$

which can also be stated, if one knows enough about what's coming next, as:

The integral of the derivative of a function over an interval is the same as the function evaluated at the (signed) boundary of the interval.

where I had to insert the word 'signed' to make it clear that there's an implicit multiplication by $-1$ when you evaluate the function at the 'bottom' end of the integral. If we wrote the right-hand side of the expression as

$$f(b) + (-1) f(a)$$

then even a high-school student could probably be persuaded that this is the same as 'integrating' $f$ over the two points $b$ and $a$, with a multiplication by $-1$ attached to the evaluation at $a$.

The generalization of this is the generalized Stokes theorem:

$$\int_C dw = \int_{\partial C} w$$

where $w$ is a differential form, $d$ is the exterior derivative, $C$ is a manifold on which $dw$ is defined, and $\partial$ is the boundary operator, which maps a manifold $C$ to its boundary.

This can be made to look pretty suggestive by writing integration of a form over a manifold using inner product notation:

$$\langle C, w \rangle \equiv \int_Cw$$

in which case Stokes' theorem becomes

$$\langle C, dw \rangle = \langle \partial C, w \rangle$$

which looks suspiciously like $\partial$ is the Hermitian adjoint of $d$.

But is that really the case? Differential forms and manifolds seem pretty different to me. If they are, in fact, related in this way, is there a theory which expounds upon this relation, generalizes it, or puts it in context with other areas of mathematics?

share|improve this question
1  
Suggestion: have a look at text books on Geometric Measure Theory. –  user20266 Jan 5 '12 at 13:06
    
1  
Speaking as a physics major, your suggestive way of expressing Stokes' theorem is just about the most mesmerizing formula I've ever seen. –  David H May 29 '13 at 22:54
add comment

3 Answers

up vote 12 down vote accepted

Maybe this is the theory that you mean:

A manifold $M$ of dimension $m$ defines a $m$-current $[[M]]$, which is a functional on the space of smooth $m$-form in the following sense: $$[[M]](\omega)=\int_M\omega.$$ If $M$ is a manifold with boundary $\partial M$, then by Stoke's theorem the $m$-current $[[M]]$ and the $(m-1)$-current $[[\partial M]]$ is related by $$[[M]](d\omega)=\int_Md\omega=\int_{\partial M}\omega=[[\partial M]](\omega)$$ for any smooth $(m-1)$-form.

Personally, I first learned the theory of current from the lecture note of Demailly, which is available here.

share|improve this answer
    
Ah, beat me by a sec! –  Willie Wong Jan 5 '12 at 14:04
    
@Willie: haha. We mean essentially the same thing. –  Paul Jan 5 '12 at 14:06
add comment

You are looking at homological currents. Like Thomas mentioned in a comment, you should consult some textbooks on geometric measure theory. (The recent introductory book by Lin and Yang seems fairly accessible.)

A bit more discussion of related ideas can be found at this MathOverflow thread.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Let's assume your manifold $C$ with boundary $\partial C$ is given as a subset of a manifold $M$ without boundary. Let $\chi_C:M\mapsto\mathbb R$ be the characteristic function of $C$, i.e. $\chi_C(x)=1$ for $x\in C$ and $\chi_C(x)=0$ for $x\notin C$. Then clearly $$\langle C, w \rangle \equiv \int_Cw=\int_M\chi_Cw$$ Now let's look at $d(\chi_Cw)$. If $\chi_C$ would be a smooth function, we would have $d(\chi_Cw)=d\chi_C\wedge w+\chi_C\;dw$. Now let's interpret $d\chi_C$ in the sense of distributions such that $\int_Md\chi_C\wedge \phi=-\int_{\partial C}\phi$, then we can conclude $$\langle C, dw \rangle = \langle \partial C, w \rangle$$ from $\int_Md\phi=0$ for $\phi$ with compact support.


A totally different generalization of the fundamental theorem of calculus would be related to the joint cumulative distribution function $F(x_1,\ldots,x_n):=P(X_1\leq x_1,\ldots,X_n\leq x_N)$. This function $F$ is some sort of multivariable antiderivative, because it allows to compute $$\int_{a_1}^{b_1}\ldots\int_{a_n}^{b_n}f(x_1,\ldots,x_n)dx_1\ldots dx_n=\sum_{p_1\in\{a_1,b_1\}}\dots\sum_{p_n\in\{a_n,b_n\}}(-1)^?F(p_1,\ldots,p_n)$$ where $(-1)^?$ is either $1$ or $-1$, depending on whether the number of $p_i$ with $p_i=a_i$ is even or odd.

This formula can be generalized to allow integration over polygonal domains with only a finite (small) number of different angles.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.