Let $M$ and $N$ be smooth manifolds with or without boundary and let $F : M \to N$ is a smooth map. Show that $dF_p : T_pM \to T_{F(p)}N$ is linear.

Now what I'd try to normally do to dhow that some map $f : V \to W$ between vector spaces is linear is to show $f(v + w) = f(v) + f(w)$ and $f(cv) = cf(v)$ for $v, w \in V$ and $c \in \mathbb{F}$ the base field for the vector spaces.

So pick $v, w \in T_pM$ and $c \in \mathbb{R}$. $v$ and $w$ are derivations at the point $p \in M.$ But I'm not sure what $v + w$ would even look like, in the sense that I don't know how to manipulate it. I'm sorry if this is somethign really basic but I don't know what $dF_p(v + w) = ???$. The only fact I can conclude at the moment about that is that $dF_p(v+w) \in T_{F(p)}N$. So $dF_p(v+w) \in T_{F(p)}N$ is itself a linear map from $C^{\infty}(N) \to \mathbb{R}$. And sure $v, w : C^{\infty}(M) \to \mathbb{R}$ and both are linear maps. And sure the differential satisfies the following rule :

enter image description here

And the operator $dF_p(v) : C^{\infty}(N) \to \mathbb{R}$ is linear, but I can't use any of those facts to show $dF_p : T_pM \to T_{F(p)}N$ is linear can I?

How can I show that $dF_p : T_pM \to T_{F(p)}N$ is linear.?


Just do it: $$\begin{align} dF_p(v_1+\lambda v_2)(f) &= (v_1+\lambda v_2)(f \circ F) \\ &= v_1(f\circ F) + \lambda v_2(f\circ F) \\ &= dF_p(v_1)(f) + \lambda dF_p(v_2)(f) \\ &= (dF_p(v_1)+\lambda dF_p(v_2))(f).\end{align}$$

  • $\begingroup$ But that's $dF_p(\alpha)$ 'acting' on $f$ for some $\alpha \in T_pM$. Why is is that to prove that $dF_p$ is linear we have to pick a smooth function $f \in C^{\infty}(N)$ , and show that $dF_p$ is linear in the sense of taking inputs of tangent vectors and 'acting' on other smooth functions on $N$? What I mean by this is why can't I just pick $v_1, v_2 \in T_pM$ and $\lambda \in \mathbb{R}$ and show $dF_p(v_1 + \lambda v_2) = dF_p(v_1) + \lambda dF_p(v_2)$ somehow? Like I would do for a normal linear map between vector spaces. $\endgroup$ – Perturbative Dec 6 '17 at 10:02
  • $\begingroup$ You want to prove that $dF_p(v_1+\lambda v_2) = dF_p(v_1)+\lambda dF_p(v_2) $ right? So it suffices to check that they act the same over any test function $f$. $\endgroup$ – Ivo Terek Dec 6 '17 at 10:04
  • $\begingroup$ Okay I get what you're saying now, so what you're saying is analgous to showing that two functions $f, g$ between sets $A, B$ are the same if and only if $f(x) = g(x)$ for $x \in A$ (i.e. their function evaluations for a given input are the same). In this case $dF_p(v_1 + \lambda v_2)$ and $dF_p(v_1) + \lambda dF_p(v_2)$ are both functions mapping $C^{\infty}(N) \to \mathbb{R}$, so to show that they are equivalent you have to pick a $f \in C^{\infty}(N)$ and show that $dF_p(v_1 + \lambda v_2)(f) = (dF_p(v_1) + \lambda dF_p(v_2))(f)$. $\endgroup$ – Perturbative Dec 6 '17 at 10:11
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that's pretty much it $\endgroup$ – Ivo Terek Dec 6 '17 at 10:12

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.