Necessity of Differential Forms
All the undergraduate and graduate texts on analysis introduce Differential and integral calculus (I will assume this introduction of basic calculus/analysis).
Among them, some books also introduce differential forms. I then understand that knowledge of differential forms is not too necessary in (Real/complex) analysis.
On the other hand, the books, where differential forms are included, do not give any motivation for their consideration in the subsection in which they introduce it. They start the Definition like ...
...... this expression is called $1$-form; ......this expression is called 2 form .....
It is not mentioned in any book, for what purpose it is getting introduced? This really bothers me and gives a feeling like it is memorizing or copy-pasting from some old books, the definitions of differential forms and bombarding it on readers brains!
Even in many lectures, I heard that the concept of Differential forms is introduced just as a memorized definition and start games with it! No book explains what is their necessity in analysis?
I believe that almost all the mathematical concepts and especially differential forms have been introduced concerning at least some elementary problem or I feel using differential forms one can interpret some mathematical contexts in a better frame.
My question is
For the study of which elementary problems in analysis, differential forms are necessary?
real-analysis complex-analysis analysis soft-question
add a comment |
All the undergraduate and graduate texts on analysis introduce Differential and integral calculus (I will assume this introduction of basic calculus/analysis).
Among them, some books also introduce differential forms. I then understand that knowledge of differential forms is not too necessary in (Real/complex) analysis.
On the other hand, the books, where differential forms are included, do not give any motivation for their consideration in the subsection in which they introduce it. They start the Definition like ...
...... this expression is called $1$-form; ......this expression is called 2 form .....
It is not mentioned in any book, for what purpose it is getting introduced? This really bothers me and gives a feeling like it is memorizing or copy-pasting from some old books, the definitions of differential forms and bombarding it on readers brains!
Even in many lectures, I heard that the concept of Differential forms is introduced just as a memorized definition and start games with it! No book explains what is their necessity in analysis?
I believe that almost all the mathematical concepts and especially differential forms have been introduced concerning at least some elementary problem or I feel using differential forms one can interpret some mathematical contexts in a better frame.
My question is
For the study of which elementary problems in analysis, differential forms are necessary?
real-analysis complex-analysis analysis soft-question
3
Not entirely an answer to your question (it doesn't answer the importance in analysis) but for a more intuitive explanation, Tao gives an introduction to differential forms here: math.ucla.edu/~tao/preprints/forms.pdf and argues the algebraic laws of the differential forms derive from a roughly speaking more intuitive, what I would describe as: "infinitesimal geometry".
– Dair
Apr 27 '16 at 8:36
add a comment |
All the undergraduate and graduate texts on analysis introduce Differential and integral calculus (I will assume this introduction of basic calculus/analysis).
Among them, some books also introduce differential forms. I then understand that knowledge of differential forms is not too necessary in (Real/complex) analysis.
On the other hand, the books, where differential forms are included, do not give any motivation for their consideration in the subsection in which they introduce it. They start the Definition like ...
...... this expression is called $1$-form; ......this expression is called 2 form .....
It is not mentioned in any book, for what purpose it is getting introduced? This really bothers me and gives a feeling like it is memorizing or copy-pasting from some old books, the definitions of differential forms and bombarding it on readers brains!
Even in many lectures, I heard that the concept of Differential forms is introduced just as a memorized definition and start games with it! No book explains what is their necessity in analysis?
I believe that almost all the mathematical concepts and especially differential forms have been introduced concerning at least some elementary problem or I feel using differential forms one can interpret some mathematical contexts in a better frame.
My question is
For the study of which elementary problems in analysis, differential forms are necessary?
real-analysis complex-analysis analysis soft-question
All the undergraduate and graduate texts on analysis introduce Differential and integral calculus (I will assume this introduction of basic calculus/analysis).
Among them, some books also introduce differential forms. I then understand that knowledge of differential forms is not too necessary in (Real/complex) analysis.
On the other hand, the books, where differential forms are included, do not give any motivation for their consideration in the subsection in which they introduce it. They start the Definition like ...
...... this expression is called $1$-form; ......this expression is called 2 form .....
It is not mentioned in any book, for what purpose it is getting introduced? This really bothers me and gives a feeling like it is memorizing or copy-pasting from some old books, the definitions of differential forms and bombarding it on readers brains!
Even in many lectures, I heard that the concept of Differential forms is introduced just as a memorized definition and start games with it! No book explains what is their necessity in analysis?
I believe that almost all the mathematical concepts and especially differential forms have been introduced concerning at least some elementary problem or I feel using differential forms one can interpret some mathematical contexts in a better frame.
My question is
For the study of which elementary problems in analysis, differential forms are necessary?
real-analysis complex-analysis analysis soft-question
real-analysis complex-analysis analysis soft-question
asked Apr 27 '16 at 8:20
p Groupsp Groups
6,2181128
6,2181128
3
Not entirely an answer to your question (it doesn't answer the importance in analysis) but for a more intuitive explanation, Tao gives an introduction to differential forms here: math.ucla.edu/~tao/preprints/forms.pdf and argues the algebraic laws of the differential forms derive from a roughly speaking more intuitive, what I would describe as: "infinitesimal geometry".
– Dair
Apr 27 '16 at 8:36
add a comment |
3
Not entirely an answer to your question (it doesn't answer the importance in analysis) but for a more intuitive explanation, Tao gives an introduction to differential forms here: math.ucla.edu/~tao/preprints/forms.pdf and argues the algebraic laws of the differential forms derive from a roughly speaking more intuitive, what I would describe as: "infinitesimal geometry".
– Dair
Apr 27 '16 at 8:36
3
3
Not entirely an answer to your question (it doesn't answer the importance in analysis) but for a more intuitive explanation, Tao gives an introduction to differential forms here: math.ucla.edu/~tao/preprints/forms.pdf and argues the algebraic laws of the differential forms derive from a roughly speaking more intuitive, what I would describe as: "infinitesimal geometry".
– Dair
Apr 27 '16 at 8:36
Not entirely an answer to your question (it doesn't answer the importance in analysis) but for a more intuitive explanation, Tao gives an introduction to differential forms here: math.ucla.edu/~tao/preprints/forms.pdf and argues the algebraic laws of the differential forms derive from a roughly speaking more intuitive, what I would describe as: "infinitesimal geometry".
– Dair
Apr 27 '16 at 8:36
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Disclaimer: this is far from a complete answer and I'm hardly an expert on the topic
First one should say that differential forms certainly are not necessary for any problem the same way vector space are not necessary for any problem. They simply are a language which makes working with some problems easier.
I can give a few examples of "elementary" situations where differential forms can be used or are often used:
Stoke's theorem can be stated using differential forms generalizing several theorems from "classical" vector calculus (Gauß' theorem, Green's theorem, the classical Stoke's theorem, ...).- Brouwer's fixed-point theorem and the Hairy Ball theorem have quite elegant proofs using differential forms.
- The Bochner-Martinelli integral formula generalizes Cauchy's integral formula in higher dimensions and uses differential forms to integrate over the $2n-1$ dimensional boundary of an open set in $mathbb{C}^n$.
- Maxwell's equations in electrodynamics can be written down in a very natural way using differential forms.
You may not find these applications elementary and I guess they are not completely elementary. That is probably why differential forms are not usually taught in intrductory courses.
add a comment |
If you want to extend calculus to the setting of manifolds, then you need differential forms. They are the natural kind of object to integrate over a manifold.
The way that integration works is that you chop up the region that you're integrating over into tiny pieces, compute the contribution of each piece, then add up all those individual contributions.
So how do we integrate over a $k$ dimensional manifold? Chop it up into tiny pieces, in such a way that the $i$th piece is approximately a parallelopiped spanned by vectors $v^i_1,ldots,v^i_k$. The contribution of the $i$th piece can be viewed as being a function of these $k$ vectors. Thus, to compute the contribution of each piece of the manifold, what we need is a gadget that will assign to each point $p$ on our manifold a real-valued function $f_p(v_1,ldots,v_k)$. You can argue that $f_p$ should be alternating and multilinear, because chopping up the manifold more finely should not change the value of the integral (and because degenerate parallelopipeds should contribute $0$). We have now discovered the concept of a differential form.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1760778%2fnecessity-of-differential-forms%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Disclaimer: this is far from a complete answer and I'm hardly an expert on the topic
First one should say that differential forms certainly are not necessary for any problem the same way vector space are not necessary for any problem. They simply are a language which makes working with some problems easier.
I can give a few examples of "elementary" situations where differential forms can be used or are often used:
Stoke's theorem can be stated using differential forms generalizing several theorems from "classical" vector calculus (Gauß' theorem, Green's theorem, the classical Stoke's theorem, ...).- Brouwer's fixed-point theorem and the Hairy Ball theorem have quite elegant proofs using differential forms.
- The Bochner-Martinelli integral formula generalizes Cauchy's integral formula in higher dimensions and uses differential forms to integrate over the $2n-1$ dimensional boundary of an open set in $mathbb{C}^n$.
- Maxwell's equations in electrodynamics can be written down in a very natural way using differential forms.
You may not find these applications elementary and I guess they are not completely elementary. That is probably why differential forms are not usually taught in intrductory courses.
add a comment |
Disclaimer: this is far from a complete answer and I'm hardly an expert on the topic
First one should say that differential forms certainly are not necessary for any problem the same way vector space are not necessary for any problem. They simply are a language which makes working with some problems easier.
I can give a few examples of "elementary" situations where differential forms can be used or are often used:
Stoke's theorem can be stated using differential forms generalizing several theorems from "classical" vector calculus (Gauß' theorem, Green's theorem, the classical Stoke's theorem, ...).- Brouwer's fixed-point theorem and the Hairy Ball theorem have quite elegant proofs using differential forms.
- The Bochner-Martinelli integral formula generalizes Cauchy's integral formula in higher dimensions and uses differential forms to integrate over the $2n-1$ dimensional boundary of an open set in $mathbb{C}^n$.
- Maxwell's equations in electrodynamics can be written down in a very natural way using differential forms.
You may not find these applications elementary and I guess they are not completely elementary. That is probably why differential forms are not usually taught in intrductory courses.
add a comment |
Disclaimer: this is far from a complete answer and I'm hardly an expert on the topic
First one should say that differential forms certainly are not necessary for any problem the same way vector space are not necessary for any problem. They simply are a language which makes working with some problems easier.
I can give a few examples of "elementary" situations where differential forms can be used or are often used:
Stoke's theorem can be stated using differential forms generalizing several theorems from "classical" vector calculus (Gauß' theorem, Green's theorem, the classical Stoke's theorem, ...).- Brouwer's fixed-point theorem and the Hairy Ball theorem have quite elegant proofs using differential forms.
- The Bochner-Martinelli integral formula generalizes Cauchy's integral formula in higher dimensions and uses differential forms to integrate over the $2n-1$ dimensional boundary of an open set in $mathbb{C}^n$.
- Maxwell's equations in electrodynamics can be written down in a very natural way using differential forms.
You may not find these applications elementary and I guess they are not completely elementary. That is probably why differential forms are not usually taught in intrductory courses.
Disclaimer: this is far from a complete answer and I'm hardly an expert on the topic
First one should say that differential forms certainly are not necessary for any problem the same way vector space are not necessary for any problem. They simply are a language which makes working with some problems easier.
I can give a few examples of "elementary" situations where differential forms can be used or are often used:
Stoke's theorem can be stated using differential forms generalizing several theorems from "classical" vector calculus (Gauß' theorem, Green's theorem, the classical Stoke's theorem, ...).- Brouwer's fixed-point theorem and the Hairy Ball theorem have quite elegant proofs using differential forms.
- The Bochner-Martinelli integral formula generalizes Cauchy's integral formula in higher dimensions and uses differential forms to integrate over the $2n-1$ dimensional boundary of an open set in $mathbb{C}^n$.
- Maxwell's equations in electrodynamics can be written down in a very natural way using differential forms.
You may not find these applications elementary and I guess they are not completely elementary. That is probably why differential forms are not usually taught in intrductory courses.
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
0x5390x539
1,047316
1,047316
add a comment |
add a comment |
If you want to extend calculus to the setting of manifolds, then you need differential forms. They are the natural kind of object to integrate over a manifold.
The way that integration works is that you chop up the region that you're integrating over into tiny pieces, compute the contribution of each piece, then add up all those individual contributions.
So how do we integrate over a $k$ dimensional manifold? Chop it up into tiny pieces, in such a way that the $i$th piece is approximately a parallelopiped spanned by vectors $v^i_1,ldots,v^i_k$. The contribution of the $i$th piece can be viewed as being a function of these $k$ vectors. Thus, to compute the contribution of each piece of the manifold, what we need is a gadget that will assign to each point $p$ on our manifold a real-valued function $f_p(v_1,ldots,v_k)$. You can argue that $f_p$ should be alternating and multilinear, because chopping up the manifold more finely should not change the value of the integral (and because degenerate parallelopipeds should contribute $0$). We have now discovered the concept of a differential form.
add a comment |
If you want to extend calculus to the setting of manifolds, then you need differential forms. They are the natural kind of object to integrate over a manifold.
The way that integration works is that you chop up the region that you're integrating over into tiny pieces, compute the contribution of each piece, then add up all those individual contributions.
So how do we integrate over a $k$ dimensional manifold? Chop it up into tiny pieces, in such a way that the $i$th piece is approximately a parallelopiped spanned by vectors $v^i_1,ldots,v^i_k$. The contribution of the $i$th piece can be viewed as being a function of these $k$ vectors. Thus, to compute the contribution of each piece of the manifold, what we need is a gadget that will assign to each point $p$ on our manifold a real-valued function $f_p(v_1,ldots,v_k)$. You can argue that $f_p$ should be alternating and multilinear, because chopping up the manifold more finely should not change the value of the integral (and because degenerate parallelopipeds should contribute $0$). We have now discovered the concept of a differential form.
add a comment |
If you want to extend calculus to the setting of manifolds, then you need differential forms. They are the natural kind of object to integrate over a manifold.
The way that integration works is that you chop up the region that you're integrating over into tiny pieces, compute the contribution of each piece, then add up all those individual contributions.
So how do we integrate over a $k$ dimensional manifold? Chop it up into tiny pieces, in such a way that the $i$th piece is approximately a parallelopiped spanned by vectors $v^i_1,ldots,v^i_k$. The contribution of the $i$th piece can be viewed as being a function of these $k$ vectors. Thus, to compute the contribution of each piece of the manifold, what we need is a gadget that will assign to each point $p$ on our manifold a real-valued function $f_p(v_1,ldots,v_k)$. You can argue that $f_p$ should be alternating and multilinear, because chopping up the manifold more finely should not change the value of the integral (and because degenerate parallelopipeds should contribute $0$). We have now discovered the concept of a differential form.
If you want to extend calculus to the setting of manifolds, then you need differential forms. They are the natural kind of object to integrate over a manifold.
The way that integration works is that you chop up the region that you're integrating over into tiny pieces, compute the contribution of each piece, then add up all those individual contributions.
So how do we integrate over a $k$ dimensional manifold? Chop it up into tiny pieces, in such a way that the $i$th piece is approximately a parallelopiped spanned by vectors $v^i_1,ldots,v^i_k$. The contribution of the $i$th piece can be viewed as being a function of these $k$ vectors. Thus, to compute the contribution of each piece of the manifold, what we need is a gadget that will assign to each point $p$ on our manifold a real-valued function $f_p(v_1,ldots,v_k)$. You can argue that $f_p$ should be alternating and multilinear, because chopping up the manifold more finely should not change the value of the integral (and because degenerate parallelopipeds should contribute $0$). We have now discovered the concept of a differential form.
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
littleOlittleO
29.2k644109
29.2k644109
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1760778%2fnecessity-of-differential-forms%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
Not entirely an answer to your question (it doesn't answer the importance in analysis) but for a more intuitive explanation, Tao gives an introduction to differential forms here: math.ucla.edu/~tao/preprints/forms.pdf and argues the algebraic laws of the differential forms derive from a roughly speaking more intuitive, what I would describe as: "infinitesimal geometry".
– Dair
Apr 27 '16 at 8:36