Is it possible to define differentiable maps between topological spaces without using the idea of manifolds?
2026-05-02 14:55:52.1777733752
differentiable maps between topological spaces without using the idea of manifolds
336 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in DIFFERENTIAL-GEOMETRY
- Smooth Principal Bundle from continuous transition functions?
- Compute Thom and Euler class
- Holonomy bundle is a covering space
- Alternative definition for characteristic foliation of a surface
- Studying regular space curves when restricted to two differentiable functions
- What kind of curvature does a cylinder have?
- A new type of curvature multivector for surfaces?
- Regular surfaces with boundary and $C^1$ domains
- Show that two isometries induce the same linear mapping
- geodesic of infinite length without self-intersections
Related Questions in DIFFERENTIAL-TOPOLOGY
- Getting a self-homeomorphism of the cylinder from a self-homeomorphism of the circle
- what is Sierpiński topology?
- Bott and Tu exercise 6.5 - Reducing the structure group of a vector bundle to $O(n)$
- The regularity of intersection of a minimal surface and a surface of positive mean curvature?
- What's the regularity of the level set of a ''semi-nondegenerate" smooth function on closed manifold?
- Help me to prove related path component and open ball
- Poincarè duals in complex projective space and homotopy
- Hyperboloid is a manifold
- The graph of a smooth map is a manifold
- Prove that the sets in $\mathbb{R}^n$ which are both open and closed are $\emptyset$ and $\mathbb{R}^n$
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
On a general topological space: no, not in a way that is consistent with the common meaning. A self-homeomorphism of $\mathbb R^2$ can be nowhere differentiable: e.g., $F(x,y)= (x,y+f(x))$ where $f:\mathbb R^2\to\mathbb R^2$ is the Weierstrass function. If $\Phi:\mathbb R^2\to\mathbb R^n$ is a differentiable map, then $\Phi\circ F$ is nowhere differentiable: composition with $F $ completely destroys differentiability. On the other hand, being a homeomorphism, $F$ preserves all properties that can be defined in terms of topology. Hence, differentiability cannot be defined in terms of topology.
One can hope for better results with metric spaces, because on many spaces (including all $\mathbb R^n$) every metric-preserving bijection of the space is a diffeomorphism. Thus, a map preserving metric structure also preserves differentiability; this gives hope that metric structure can capture differentiability. And indeed, first-order derivatives can be made to work on many metric spaces that are not manifolds: see the survey Nonsmooth Calculus by Heinonen. The emphasis in this field is on the first-order weak derivatives (rather than classical/pointwise derivatives), which are more robust: e.g., they survive a bi-Lipschitz change of the metric. Thus, one can work with differentiable maps on topological spaces with a distinguished equivalence class of metrics, equivalence being bi-Lipschitz. This sort of structure falls in between the metric and topological spaces.