Timeline for Generalization of Darboux's Theorem
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 23, 2014 at 13:58 | history | edited | smyrlis |
edited tags
|
|
| Jan 21, 2014 at 13:29 | history | edited | Ricardo Andrade |
added top level tag
|
|
| Jan 21, 2014 at 12:53 | history | edited | Qfwfq | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
(notation)
|
| Dec 26, 2013 at 8:45 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | Related MSE post: Darboux's theorem of several variables. Dave L. Renfro's comment mentions some references. | |
| Dec 25, 2013 at 22:46 | vote | accept | smyrlis | ||
| Dec 25, 2013 at 22:46 | vote | accept | smyrlis | ||
| Dec 25, 2013 at 22:46 | |||||
| Dec 25, 2013 at 22:46 | vote | accept | smyrlis | ||
| Dec 25, 2013 at 22:46 | |||||
| Dec 25, 2013 at 9:56 | history | edited | Fernando Muro |
edited tags
|
|
| Dec 24, 2013 at 16:05 | answer | added | smyrlis | timeline score: 14 | |
| Dec 24, 2013 at 6:57 | comment | added | Ali Taghavi | Question 2(A Hilbert space analogy): Let $H$ be an infinite dimensional Hilbert space: is there a Frechet differentiable map $f:H \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ such that $\nabla f[H]$ is not a nice space (By nice space we mean "contractible or at least simply connected)? The motivation comes from the third part of your question and the fact that the punctured Hilbert space is always contractible. | |
| Dec 24, 2013 at 6:48 | comment | added | Ali Taghavi | @smyrlis your beautiful question is (indirectly) a motivation to give the following two questions: Question 1) Let $X$ be a topological space, by $CC(X,\mathbb{R})$ $(CC(X,\mathbb{C})$, we mean all functions from $X$ to $\mathbb{R}$ ($X$ to $\mathbb{C}$) which sendsopen con connected sets to connected sets, assume that $f,g \in CC(X,\mathbb{R}$, does this imply that $f+ig \in CC(X,\mathbb{C}$.Are $CC(X,\mathbb{R}$ and $CC(X, \mathbb{C}$, vector spaces? | |
| Dec 22, 2013 at 16:37 | comment | added | smyrlis | @LiviuNicolaescu: Homology group. I mean that the first is isomorphic to a subgroup of the second, unless one can define a natural imbedding. | |
| Dec 22, 2013 at 16:18 | comment | added | Gil Kalai | Very nice question! Related MO question mathoverflow.net/questions/135946/… related blog post gilkalai.wordpress.com/2008/08/20/… | |
| Dec 22, 2013 at 16:15 | comment | added | Ali Taghavi | I think the third part is dimension of homology | |
| Dec 22, 2013 at 15:49 | answer | added | Ali Taghavi | timeline score: 17 | |
| Dec 22, 2013 at 14:50 | comment | added | Liviu Nicolaescu | What does $H_k$ mean, homology or Hausdorff measure? | |
| Dec 22, 2013 at 14:45 | history | edited | smyrlis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 62 characters in body; edited tags
|
| Dec 22, 2013 at 14:38 | comment | added | Mark Meckes | Yes, I realized that silly mistake and deleted my comment just before you posted your response. | |
| Dec 22, 2013 at 14:37 | comment | added | smyrlis | @MarkMeckes $\nabla f[U]\subset \mathbb R^n$. | |
| Dec 22, 2013 at 14:09 | history | asked | smyrlis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |