Talk:Aufgaben:Problem 10
I don't think the proof for asymmitry was sufficient, it was only shown that we can pull out a minus sign from every sum, but the sum are disordered after the permutation and have be put back together. to show that we get back \(-d\omega\) and not something different
Carl (talk) 14:01, 18 June 2015 (CEST)
I do not see a problem, what do you mean by disordered sum, where? He starts with dw(..k+1,k..) and gets back -dw(..k,k+1..), doesn't he? And this generalises to every permutation.
Mario (talk) 18:35, 30 June 2015 (CEST)
-> View histroy
Carl (talk) 21:34, 27 July 2015 (CEST)
Typos in a)?
I'm not too confident with this subject so I won't change nothing but in the prop from page 77 the summation index should run up to n instead of p. Further I think we should continue to label the V_j: ... \(V_j(x^{j_i})\) ... Thanks for the nice solution
Mario (talk) 15:55, 30 June 2015 (CEST)
I think your right on both, although you probably mean: \(V_i(x^{j_i})\) --> yepp, thats what I meant.
Carl (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2015 (CEST)
Another point. Unused as I am, it took me quite a while to get the meaning of what you mean by V(gX) in your warning, (or X1(gX2) respectively for the commutator). Maybe one could make a explanationary note that (as in other cases where you did explicitly note it) here X is not a vectorfield anymore but a function X(f) as the argument was omitted. Am I right? Well I just see that it is actually written in the task itself when defining [,]..
Mario (talk) 18:35, 30 June 2015 (CEST)
I didn't actually write the solution, but feel free to add explanation if you think they will help.
