Timeline for De Rham cohomology and antiderivatives
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 30, 2010 at 16:18 | comment | added | Steve Huntsman | ...recall, e.g., $\int F' dx = F + C$, where really $C$ means an arbitrary constant and could be rewritten as $\mathbb{R}$. | |
| Mar 30, 2010 at 16:15 | comment | added | Steve Huntsman | I should have said "plus the kernel of $d$". | |
| Mar 30, 2010 at 15:58 | comment | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | Not really. I am only stating the only sensible "general formulation of the notion of antiderivative that incorporates basic information about de Rham (co)homology" I can think of. As Scott observed, antiderivatives are determined---when they exist---up to cocycle. This is not the same as being determined up to a cohomoloy class (consider, for example, the situation in $\mathbb R^n$ where there are very few cohomology classes...), and I do not know what "a form plus a cohomology group" means. | |
| Mar 30, 2010 at 15:53 | comment | added | Steve Huntsman | If I read this correctly you are saying that an antiderivative is a form plus a cohomology group. | |
| Mar 30, 2010 at 15:46 | history | answered | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | CC BY-SA 2.5 |