Timeline for Some quantities which definitions are (somehow) similar to the classical Divergence
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jun 15, 2020 at 7:27 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
Dec 31, 2014 at 5:15 | history | edited | Ali Taghavi |
edited tags
|
|
Dec 31, 2014 at 5:14 | comment | added | Ali Taghavi | @PeterMichor thank you very much for your interesting comment. | |
Dec 31, 2014 at 5:06 | history | edited | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 130 characters in body
|
Dec 30, 2014 at 18:14 | history | edited | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 21 characters in body
|
Dec 30, 2014 at 18:03 | history | edited | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
Dec 30, 2014 at 17:57 | history | edited | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 280 characters in body; edited tags
|
Dec 29, 2014 at 20:43 | answer | added | Deane Yang | timeline score: 2 | |
Dec 29, 2014 at 17:31 | comment | added | Peter Michor | $d^*$ involves a (pseudo-)Riemannian metric. Whereas $d$ is invariant under pullback by all mappings, in particular under diffeomorphisms, and commutes with with infinitesimal diffeomorphisms $L_X$, $d^*$ is only invariant under isometries of the Riemannian metric used. So the integral in your main question only vanishes for Killing vector fields $X$, in general. | |
Dec 29, 2014 at 16:43 | history | asked | Ali Taghavi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |