Neighbourhood of a point where $(theta_1)_t_1 circ (theta_2)_t_2 circ cdots circ (theta_k)_t_k$ is defined

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
This is actually a detail in LeeâÂÂs smooth manifold 2nd ed p.234, 2nd paragraph in the Theorem 9.46. What i found is possibly a correction for the book. Forgive me if itâÂÂs not even close.
Let $M$ be a smooth manifold of dimension $n$ and $p in M$ be an arbitrary point and $U$ is a domain of a smooth chart centered at $p$. Suppose that we have $k$-tuple of smooth vector fields $(V_1, dots, V_k)$ defined on $U$. Let $theta_i$ denote the flow of $V_i$.
Before i state the problem that has bugged me, i want to note that actually; first, the chart $U$ above is a slice chart. Second the vector fields $(V_i)$ above is linearly independent and mutually commuting. But for the following problem, i think we will not use those assumptions. HereâÂÂs the problem
Lee claim that there exists $epsilon>0$ and a neighbourhood $Y$ of $p$ in $U$ such that the composition $(theta_1)_t_1 circ (theta_2)_t_2 circ cdots circ (theta_k)_t_k$ defined on $Y$ and maps $Y$ into $U$ whenever $|t_1|,dots,|t_k|$ are all less than $epsilon$.
After this claim, he also said that
To see this, just choose $epsilon_k>0$ and $U_k subseteq U$ such that $theta_k$ maps $(-epsilon_k,epsilon_k)times U_k$ into $U$, and then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i+1$. And then taking $epsilon = textmin epsilon_i$ and $Y=U_1$.
I did the suggested construction but i think the suggestion should be
To see this, just choose $epsilon_1>0$ and $U_1 subseteq U$ such that $theta_1$ maps $(-epsilon_1,epsilon_1)times U_1$ into $U$, and then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$. And then taking $epsilon = textmin epsilon_i$ and $Y=U_k$.
I may get this wrong. I hope somebody could clarify this for me. Is the suggestion is correct or it should be other way around as i did. Any help will be appreciated. Thank you
differential-geometry differential-topology smooth-manifolds
 |Â
show 8 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
This is actually a detail in LeeâÂÂs smooth manifold 2nd ed p.234, 2nd paragraph in the Theorem 9.46. What i found is possibly a correction for the book. Forgive me if itâÂÂs not even close.
Let $M$ be a smooth manifold of dimension $n$ and $p in M$ be an arbitrary point and $U$ is a domain of a smooth chart centered at $p$. Suppose that we have $k$-tuple of smooth vector fields $(V_1, dots, V_k)$ defined on $U$. Let $theta_i$ denote the flow of $V_i$.
Before i state the problem that has bugged me, i want to note that actually; first, the chart $U$ above is a slice chart. Second the vector fields $(V_i)$ above is linearly independent and mutually commuting. But for the following problem, i think we will not use those assumptions. HereâÂÂs the problem
Lee claim that there exists $epsilon>0$ and a neighbourhood $Y$ of $p$ in $U$ such that the composition $(theta_1)_t_1 circ (theta_2)_t_2 circ cdots circ (theta_k)_t_k$ defined on $Y$ and maps $Y$ into $U$ whenever $|t_1|,dots,|t_k|$ are all less than $epsilon$.
After this claim, he also said that
To see this, just choose $epsilon_k>0$ and $U_k subseteq U$ such that $theta_k$ maps $(-epsilon_k,epsilon_k)times U_k$ into $U$, and then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i+1$. And then taking $epsilon = textmin epsilon_i$ and $Y=U_1$.
I did the suggested construction but i think the suggestion should be
To see this, just choose $epsilon_1>0$ and $U_1 subseteq U$ such that $theta_1$ maps $(-epsilon_1,epsilon_1)times U_1$ into $U$, and then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$. And then taking $epsilon = textmin epsilon_i$ and $Y=U_k$.
I may get this wrong. I hope somebody could clarify this for me. Is the suggestion is correct or it should be other way around as i did. Any help will be appreciated. Thank you
differential-geometry differential-topology smooth-manifolds
1
I would start like you, bet then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$.
â Amitai Yuval
Sep 6 at 9:46
@AmitaiYuval Oh yes it should be $i$ to $i-1$. I miss typed. Let me fix.
â Sou
Sep 6 at 10:53
1
Well, you're certainly right that you can't have $Y=U_1$. Have you checked Jack Lee's errata for the book on his website?
â Ted Shifrin
Sep 7 at 3:57
1
@TedShifrin's right -- I've been on vacation all week. Blissfully unaware of my latest boo-boo.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:49
1
Ugh. This was wrong in the first edition, and I posted a correction. Then in the second edition, I decided to reverse the order of the flows, but forgot to fix the corrected part. I've now added a correction to my online list. Thanks for pointing it out.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:51
 |Â
show 8 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
This is actually a detail in LeeâÂÂs smooth manifold 2nd ed p.234, 2nd paragraph in the Theorem 9.46. What i found is possibly a correction for the book. Forgive me if itâÂÂs not even close.
Let $M$ be a smooth manifold of dimension $n$ and $p in M$ be an arbitrary point and $U$ is a domain of a smooth chart centered at $p$. Suppose that we have $k$-tuple of smooth vector fields $(V_1, dots, V_k)$ defined on $U$. Let $theta_i$ denote the flow of $V_i$.
Before i state the problem that has bugged me, i want to note that actually; first, the chart $U$ above is a slice chart. Second the vector fields $(V_i)$ above is linearly independent and mutually commuting. But for the following problem, i think we will not use those assumptions. HereâÂÂs the problem
Lee claim that there exists $epsilon>0$ and a neighbourhood $Y$ of $p$ in $U$ such that the composition $(theta_1)_t_1 circ (theta_2)_t_2 circ cdots circ (theta_k)_t_k$ defined on $Y$ and maps $Y$ into $U$ whenever $|t_1|,dots,|t_k|$ are all less than $epsilon$.
After this claim, he also said that
To see this, just choose $epsilon_k>0$ and $U_k subseteq U$ such that $theta_k$ maps $(-epsilon_k,epsilon_k)times U_k$ into $U$, and then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i+1$. And then taking $epsilon = textmin epsilon_i$ and $Y=U_1$.
I did the suggested construction but i think the suggestion should be
To see this, just choose $epsilon_1>0$ and $U_1 subseteq U$ such that $theta_1$ maps $(-epsilon_1,epsilon_1)times U_1$ into $U$, and then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$. And then taking $epsilon = textmin epsilon_i$ and $Y=U_k$.
I may get this wrong. I hope somebody could clarify this for me. Is the suggestion is correct or it should be other way around as i did. Any help will be appreciated. Thank you
differential-geometry differential-topology smooth-manifolds
This is actually a detail in LeeâÂÂs smooth manifold 2nd ed p.234, 2nd paragraph in the Theorem 9.46. What i found is possibly a correction for the book. Forgive me if itâÂÂs not even close.
Let $M$ be a smooth manifold of dimension $n$ and $p in M$ be an arbitrary point and $U$ is a domain of a smooth chart centered at $p$. Suppose that we have $k$-tuple of smooth vector fields $(V_1, dots, V_k)$ defined on $U$. Let $theta_i$ denote the flow of $V_i$.
Before i state the problem that has bugged me, i want to note that actually; first, the chart $U$ above is a slice chart. Second the vector fields $(V_i)$ above is linearly independent and mutually commuting. But for the following problem, i think we will not use those assumptions. HereâÂÂs the problem
Lee claim that there exists $epsilon>0$ and a neighbourhood $Y$ of $p$ in $U$ such that the composition $(theta_1)_t_1 circ (theta_2)_t_2 circ cdots circ (theta_k)_t_k$ defined on $Y$ and maps $Y$ into $U$ whenever $|t_1|,dots,|t_k|$ are all less than $epsilon$.
After this claim, he also said that
To see this, just choose $epsilon_k>0$ and $U_k subseteq U$ such that $theta_k$ maps $(-epsilon_k,epsilon_k)times U_k$ into $U$, and then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i+1$. And then taking $epsilon = textmin epsilon_i$ and $Y=U_1$.
I did the suggested construction but i think the suggestion should be
To see this, just choose $epsilon_1>0$ and $U_1 subseteq U$ such that $theta_1$ maps $(-epsilon_1,epsilon_1)times U_1$ into $U$, and then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$. And then taking $epsilon = textmin epsilon_i$ and $Y=U_k$.
I may get this wrong. I hope somebody could clarify this for me. Is the suggestion is correct or it should be other way around as i did. Any help will be appreciated. Thank you
differential-geometry differential-topology smooth-manifolds
differential-geometry differential-topology smooth-manifolds
edited Sep 6 at 12:49
asked Sep 6 at 3:19
Sou
2,8022820
2,8022820
1
I would start like you, bet then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$.
â Amitai Yuval
Sep 6 at 9:46
@AmitaiYuval Oh yes it should be $i$ to $i-1$. I miss typed. Let me fix.
â Sou
Sep 6 at 10:53
1
Well, you're certainly right that you can't have $Y=U_1$. Have you checked Jack Lee's errata for the book on his website?
â Ted Shifrin
Sep 7 at 3:57
1
@TedShifrin's right -- I've been on vacation all week. Blissfully unaware of my latest boo-boo.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:49
1
Ugh. This was wrong in the first edition, and I posted a correction. Then in the second edition, I decided to reverse the order of the flows, but forgot to fix the corrected part. I've now added a correction to my online list. Thanks for pointing it out.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:51
 |Â
show 8 more comments
1
I would start like you, bet then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$.
â Amitai Yuval
Sep 6 at 9:46
@AmitaiYuval Oh yes it should be $i$ to $i-1$. I miss typed. Let me fix.
â Sou
Sep 6 at 10:53
1
Well, you're certainly right that you can't have $Y=U_1$. Have you checked Jack Lee's errata for the book on his website?
â Ted Shifrin
Sep 7 at 3:57
1
@TedShifrin's right -- I've been on vacation all week. Blissfully unaware of my latest boo-boo.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:49
1
Ugh. This was wrong in the first edition, and I posted a correction. Then in the second edition, I decided to reverse the order of the flows, but forgot to fix the corrected part. I've now added a correction to my online list. Thanks for pointing it out.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:51
1
1
I would start like you, bet then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$.
â Amitai Yuval
Sep 6 at 9:46
I would start like you, bet then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$.
â Amitai Yuval
Sep 6 at 9:46
@AmitaiYuval Oh yes it should be $i$ to $i-1$. I miss typed. Let me fix.
â Sou
Sep 6 at 10:53
@AmitaiYuval Oh yes it should be $i$ to $i-1$. I miss typed. Let me fix.
â Sou
Sep 6 at 10:53
1
1
Well, you're certainly right that you can't have $Y=U_1$. Have you checked Jack Lee's errata for the book on his website?
â Ted Shifrin
Sep 7 at 3:57
Well, you're certainly right that you can't have $Y=U_1$. Have you checked Jack Lee's errata for the book on his website?
â Ted Shifrin
Sep 7 at 3:57
1
1
@TedShifrin's right -- I've been on vacation all week. Blissfully unaware of my latest boo-boo.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:49
@TedShifrin's right -- I've been on vacation all week. Blissfully unaware of my latest boo-boo.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:49
1
1
Ugh. This was wrong in the first edition, and I posted a correction. Then in the second edition, I decided to reverse the order of the flows, but forgot to fix the corrected part. I've now added a correction to my online list. Thanks for pointing it out.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:51
Ugh. This was wrong in the first edition, and I posted a correction. Then in the second edition, I decided to reverse the order of the flows, but forgot to fix the corrected part. I've now added a correction to my online list. Thanks for pointing it out.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:51
 |Â
show 8 more comments
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2907050%2fneighbourhood-of-a-point-where-theta-1-t-1-circ-theta-2-t-2-circ-c%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
1
I would start like you, bet then inductively choose $epsilon_i$ and $U_i$ such that $theta_i$ maps $(-epsilon_i,epsilon_i)times U_i$ into $U_i-1$.
â Amitai Yuval
Sep 6 at 9:46
@AmitaiYuval Oh yes it should be $i$ to $i-1$. I miss typed. Let me fix.
â Sou
Sep 6 at 10:53
1
Well, you're certainly right that you can't have $Y=U_1$. Have you checked Jack Lee's errata for the book on his website?
â Ted Shifrin
Sep 7 at 3:57
1
@TedShifrin's right -- I've been on vacation all week. Blissfully unaware of my latest boo-boo.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:49
1
Ugh. This was wrong in the first edition, and I posted a correction. Then in the second edition, I decided to reverse the order of the flows, but forgot to fix the corrected part. I've now added a correction to my online list. Thanks for pointing it out.
â Jack Lee
Sep 8 at 18:51