Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with connections
Search options not deleted
user 11538
Ehresmann connections; covariant derivatives; connections on vector bundles, principal bundles, ∞-bundles, submersions, bundle gerbes; holonomy and higher holonomy; parallel transport; torsion; curvature. See also the tags [principal-bundles], [vector-bundles], [gerbes], [curvature], [geodesics], [characteristic-classes], [torsion].
25
votes
6
answers
12k
views
pull-back connection
I have a question related to the definition of the pull-back connection, more specifically about its uniqueness or the canonical way to induce it.
The definition that one finds in general goes alon …
- 271
2
votes
pull-back connection
To Matt:
The relation $(F^*\nabla)_X=0$ does not satisfy Leibniz relation.
Meanwhile I found out the answer to my question (a friend clarified it for me).
It turns out that there is an isomorphism $ …
- 271