1
$\begingroup$

Nigel Hitchen, in his notes on differential manifolds gives a definition of the derivative of a smooth map between two manifolds that appears to assume the the following assertion is self-evident:

Given two manifolds $M$ and $N$, a smooth map $F: M \rightarrow N$, and a tangent vector $X_a$ at the point $a\in M$, the map $X'_{F(a)}: C^\infty(N) \rightarrow C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ defined by $$X'_{F(a)}(f)=X_a(f\circ F)$$ for $f\in C^{\infty}(N)$ is a tangent vector at $F(a)$.

I see that $X'(1) = 0$ but how about the Leibnitz rule?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ That follows from the fact that $X_a$ safisfies the Leibniz rule. $\endgroup$ – user98602 Dec 29 '15 at 23:15
  • $\begingroup$ Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something - which is highly likely. But if $f : N \to \mathbb R$ and $F : M \to N$ then what does $F \circ f$ mean? We do $f$ first and then $F$. Hence $(F \circ f) : N \to \mathbb{R} \ \ (?=?) \ \ M \to N$. Did you mean to write $f \circ F$? This makes more sense $(f \circ F) : M \to N \to \mathbb R$. $\endgroup$ – Fly by Night Dec 29 '15 at 23:25
  • $\begingroup$ @Flyby: Yes, he meant $f \circ F$. $\endgroup$ – user98602 Dec 29 '15 at 23:27
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, I meant $f \circ F$. It makes no sense as I wrote it. $\endgroup$ – user3773157 Dec 29 '15 at 23:28
  • $\begingroup$ Also, I meant $X'(const) = 0$ $\endgroup$ – user3773157 Dec 29 '15 at 23:30
0
$\begingroup$

If $\{f,g\} \subset C^\infty(N)$ then $\{f\circ F,g\circ F, fg\circ F\} \subset C^{\infty}(M)$ and $fg\circ F = (f\circ F)(g\circ F)$, so $X'_{F(a)}$ inherits the Leibnitz rule from $X_a$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ This $\{f, g\}$ notation is extremely confusing as it's also used for the Poisson bracket. $\endgroup$ – Pedro Dec 31 '15 at 19:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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