The \Gamma-sets and \zeta-space.

Assume X is a smooth convex open manifold and \partial X is a convex regular polytope.

Def: An *\mathcal F-completion,* or *foliational completion* of a *block*, \mathcal B:=X\cup\partial X over its vertex set V, is \mathscr CX_V:=\cup_{v_{ij}\in V} \mathcal F_{v_{ij}} where i,j index the vertices. 

Example: Set X=(0,1)^n. Take a smooth foliation \mathcal F for every pair of points v_i,v_j\in \partial X=[0,1]^n-(0,1)^n satisfying \mathrm{sup~dist}_n(v_i,v_j)=\sqrt{r}. Let the leaves in each \mathcal F be mutually diffeomorphic to the class M=(0,\sqrt{n})\times S^{n-2} accumulating to v_i,v_j. We see that r=\lbrace 1,\sqrt{n} \rbrace. Allowing only r=\sqrt{n}, we can look at sections of \mathscr CX_V:

Def: A \Gamma-set on \mathscr CX_V is the union of all leaf intersections of the foliations i.e. 

\Gamma_{n}:= \lbrace \mathcal (\mathcal F_1 \cap \mathcal F_2)\cup (\mathcal F_2 \cap \mathcal F_3) \cup (\mathcal F_3 \cap \mathcal F_4) \cup \cdot\cdot\cdot \cup (\mathcal F_{n-1} \cap \mathcal F_{n})  \rbrace.

Then it follows trivially that for any given foliation, \Gamma_1=X^1=(0,1) and \Gamma_2=X^2=(0,1)^2. 

>What is \Gamma_3 equal to?

It seems that \Gamma_3 is equal to three mutually orthogonal planes but I want some reassurance that this is true. I don't know the structure of the \Gamma-sets for n>3.

The following is meant to provide context as to why I am defining these concepts above in the first place:

Personally I am interested in the \Gamma-sets because if you define vector fields on elements of the M-class, you can add the vectors along sections of the \Gamma-sets resulting in vector bundles that alternate orientation when traveling along a path on the \Gamma-set. Thus the \Gamma-sets tell you about the geometry.

Another reason I'm interested in the construction in general is because one inherits a notion of decay with \mathscr CX_V. Specifically, the M-class rapidly decays to zero when traveling in the direction prescribed by the vector fields placed on the M-class. This can be formalized analogous to rapid decay of elements of the Schwartz space \mathcal S(\Bbb R^n), which are functions, not surfaces. However it is not difficult to adapt this notion.

With this rapid decay we have a concept of a Schwartz space which plays nice with zeta functions because it is known that we can build zeta functions from elements in the Schwartz space.

   

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Automorphisms and zeta space

Image
Here I will operate under the assumption that \phi_s is a unique and well-posed solution to the following PDE. This means whatever conditions are needed for that to occur, will be imposed. s\frac{\partial^2}{\partial s^2}\phi_s(x)=\mp x\frac{\partial}{\partial x}\phi_s(x) for which we have our pre-assigned unique solution: \mathcal \phi_{s}:=\bigg\lbrace e^{\frac{\pm s}{\log x}}:s \in \Bbb R \bigg\rbrace We have singularities at s=0 and x=0,1 and this will be called a "cross singularity" or  CS. A natural idea would be to intialize some distribution on this CS and run time forward giving a wellposed analytic solution for all time. So we choose our pre-assigned solution \phi_s and run the solution back in time where we obtain what we wanted, at least qualitatively. We can throw out our solution for s<0 because it doesn't directly apply to the situation, and it does not rapidly decay. Meanwhile, for s>0 it is Schwartz i.e. has a rapid decay cr...
Read more

An introduction to the \mathcal F-completion, the Interface construction and the Gamma set

Image
I'll start off with a definition that might initially sound pretty abstract and maybe confusing. The point in defining things as I do is to make our lives easier later on. The goal is to focus on a symmetrical subspace of what I'll call the \mathcal F-completion. This subspace is called \mathcal I. So let's begin: Let X be a smooth, open, geodesically convex n -dimensional manifold with regular polytope boundary, and let V = \{v_i\} be a finite set of vertices in \partial X . A block is defined as \mathcal{B} := X \cup \partial X , where \partial X denotes the boundary. A foliational completion (or \mathcal{F}-completion) of a block \mathcal{B} is a structure obtained by extending foliations to accumulate at specific vertices in the boundary. Formally, for each pair of distinct vertices (v_i, v_j) \in V \times V , there exists a foliation \mathcal{F}_{v_{ij}} , whose leaves accumulate at v_i and v_j . The $\m...
Read more

A description of \zeta-space

Image
I would like to attempt to define a mathematical space I call \zeta-space.  \zeta-space has a description as the transversal intersection of two isometric pseudo-Riemannian manifolds (Lorentzian submanifolds) both equipped with the Lorentz metric. It is somewhat laborious to describe and derive \zeta because it is not a standard approach and \zeta does not have a clean representation so to speak. However it is a fundamentally important mathematical and physical object in its own right and should be studied. I define \zeta in the following way: \zeta:=\{\varphi_S \} \cap \{ \varphi_T \} Under this first level description, \zeta is the intersection between two class structures denoted as \varphi_S and \varphi_T. These class structures can be thought of as a family of functions and also as lines of constant time and constant space respectively: \varphi_S(x) = e^{\frac{S}{\log(x)}} \varphi_T(x) = e^{\frac{T}{\log(1-x)}} Here I view S,T as fund...
Read more