Understanding Lie algebra of matrix Lie group












1












$begingroup$


In my lecture, we gave a very sloppy (physics people ...) proof of the fact that the Lie algebra $mathfrak{g}$ of a matrix Lie group $G$ is a subspace of $text{Mat}_n(mathbb{F})$.
I am not satisfied and I would love to understand this fact in the language of differential geometry that I am learning right now.



What I know:



The Lie algebra $mathfrak{g}$ of a matrix Lie group $G$ is the set of all left-invariant vector fields on $G$. This set is isomorphic to the tangent space at the identity of the Lie group $G$. The elements $v$ of the tangent space at the identity are according to my definition of the tangent space real-valued functions
$$v:F(G)to mathbb{R}$$
where $F(M)$ is the set of all smooth-real valued functions on the manifold $G$. The tangent vectors are $mathbb{R}$ linear and fulfil a Leibniz rule and the tangent space at $p$, namely $T_pG$ is simply the set of all these tangent vectors.



What I want to know



Given the above definitions, how can I formally understand that the members of the tangent space at the identity of a matrix Lie group are matrices?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    In my lecture, we gave a very sloppy (physics people ...) proof of the fact that the Lie algebra $mathfrak{g}$ of a matrix Lie group $G$ is a subspace of $text{Mat}_n(mathbb{F})$.
    I am not satisfied and I would love to understand this fact in the language of differential geometry that I am learning right now.



    What I know:



    The Lie algebra $mathfrak{g}$ of a matrix Lie group $G$ is the set of all left-invariant vector fields on $G$. This set is isomorphic to the tangent space at the identity of the Lie group $G$. The elements $v$ of the tangent space at the identity are according to my definition of the tangent space real-valued functions
    $$v:F(G)to mathbb{R}$$
    where $F(M)$ is the set of all smooth-real valued functions on the manifold $G$. The tangent vectors are $mathbb{R}$ linear and fulfil a Leibniz rule and the tangent space at $p$, namely $T_pG$ is simply the set of all these tangent vectors.



    What I want to know



    Given the above definitions, how can I formally understand that the members of the tangent space at the identity of a matrix Lie group are matrices?










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1


      1



      $begingroup$


      In my lecture, we gave a very sloppy (physics people ...) proof of the fact that the Lie algebra $mathfrak{g}$ of a matrix Lie group $G$ is a subspace of $text{Mat}_n(mathbb{F})$.
      I am not satisfied and I would love to understand this fact in the language of differential geometry that I am learning right now.



      What I know:



      The Lie algebra $mathfrak{g}$ of a matrix Lie group $G$ is the set of all left-invariant vector fields on $G$. This set is isomorphic to the tangent space at the identity of the Lie group $G$. The elements $v$ of the tangent space at the identity are according to my definition of the tangent space real-valued functions
      $$v:F(G)to mathbb{R}$$
      where $F(M)$ is the set of all smooth-real valued functions on the manifold $G$. The tangent vectors are $mathbb{R}$ linear and fulfil a Leibniz rule and the tangent space at $p$, namely $T_pG$ is simply the set of all these tangent vectors.



      What I want to know



      Given the above definitions, how can I formally understand that the members of the tangent space at the identity of a matrix Lie group are matrices?










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      In my lecture, we gave a very sloppy (physics people ...) proof of the fact that the Lie algebra $mathfrak{g}$ of a matrix Lie group $G$ is a subspace of $text{Mat}_n(mathbb{F})$.
      I am not satisfied and I would love to understand this fact in the language of differential geometry that I am learning right now.



      What I know:



      The Lie algebra $mathfrak{g}$ of a matrix Lie group $G$ is the set of all left-invariant vector fields on $G$. This set is isomorphic to the tangent space at the identity of the Lie group $G$. The elements $v$ of the tangent space at the identity are according to my definition of the tangent space real-valued functions
      $$v:F(G)to mathbb{R}$$
      where $F(M)$ is the set of all smooth-real valued functions on the manifold $G$. The tangent vectors are $mathbb{R}$ linear and fulfil a Leibniz rule and the tangent space at $p$, namely $T_pG$ is simply the set of all these tangent vectors.



      What I want to know



      Given the above definitions, how can I formally understand that the members of the tangent space at the identity of a matrix Lie group are matrices?







      differential-geometry lie-groups lie-algebras tangent-spaces






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Dec 13 '18 at 0:13







      Marsl

















      asked Dec 12 '18 at 23:38









      MarslMarsl

      716




      716






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1












          $begingroup$

          A matrix Lie group is a closed subgroup of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$



          Now $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ is an open subset of the vector space $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n},$ and you may use:




          1. If $V$ is a vector space of dimension $n,$ any norm in $V$ determines a topology independent of the choice of the norm, and $V$ has a standard smooth structure making it into an $n$-dimensional manifold.

          2. If $V$ is a vector space with its standard manifold structure, the tangent space at a point $pin V$ is naturally isomorphic to $V,$ that is, there is a canonical isomorphism $varphi_V:V to T_pV:$ This isomorphism is such that if $L:Vto W$ is a linear map between two vector spaces then $dL_pcirc varphi_V=varphi_Wcirc L:Vto T_{Lp}W$ where $dL_p:T_pVto T_{Lp}W$ is the differential of $L$ at $p.$ This allow us to identify the tangent space $T_pV$ with $V$ itself.

          3. If $iota:Nto M$ is the inclusion of a submanifold $Nsubset M$ and $pin N$ then $diota_p:T_pNto T_pM$ gives a inclusion of $T_pN$ into $T_pM.$ If $N$ is an open submanifold of $M$ then $diota_p$ is an isomorphism, so we can identify $T_pN$ with $T_pM.$


          Now let $Gsubset text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ be a matrix Lie group and $Iin G$ be the identity. By 2, the tangent space $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n})$ is identified with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}$ itself. By 3, the tangent space $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{K}))$ can be identified with $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}),$ hence with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$ Hence by the first statement in 3, the tangent space $T_IG$ is a subspace of $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Hey, I really like your answer. It has exactly the stuff in it, I just learned in differential geometry. To clarify, I understand that by 3, you can identify $T_I(GL(n))$ with $T_I(mathbb{R}^{nxn})$ but then to argue about the closed subgroup $G$ you cannot use 3 again, can you? Or am I misunderstanding?
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 10:48












          • $begingroup$
            I'm using 3 again but only the first sentence: Since $G$ is a submanifold of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})$ then $T_I(G)$ is a subspace of $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})).$
            $endgroup$
            – positrón0802
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:09












          • $begingroup$
            I see, nice. One more question. What about matrix groups like $U(n)$ which is actually a closed subgroup of $GL(n,mathbb{C})$. Now, I feel, I cannot argue the same way, since the $mathbb{C}^{n times n}$ is a complex finite-dimensional vector space and thus not a manifold, so the whole argument via canonical isomorphisms doesnt work?
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:14










          • $begingroup$
            $mathbb{C}^{ntimes n}$ is also a real vector space, of dimension $(2n)^2,$ and is in fact diffeomorphic to $mathbb{R}^{2ntimes 2n}$ as a (real) manifold, since $mathbb{C}cong mathbb{R}^{2n}$ as topological spaces (with the standard topology).
            $endgroup$
            – positrón0802
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:21












          • $begingroup$
            You just make me realize that I should replace $mathbb{R}$ by $mathbb{K}$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$ in most parts of my answer, I'll edit it.
            $endgroup$
            – positrón0802
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:26



















          0












          $begingroup$

          You have to use another characterization of the tangent space (which is in natural bijection with your definition, alhough it is not wholly straightforward), that is:



          the tangent space of a manifold $M$ at a point $x$ is the quotient $S/sim$, where $S$ is the set of all smooth paths $gamma:[-a,b] rightarrow M$ mapping $0$ to $x$, where $a,b>0$, and $gamma_1 sim gamma_2$ iff in some chart around $x$ (ie in every chart around $x$) $gamma_1’(0)=gamma_2’(0)$.



          The bijection is given by $gamma longmapsto (f longmapsto d/dt(fcircgamma) (t=0)$.



          With this alternate definition, when your manifold is embedded in some vector space, the tangent space at some point is canonically embedded in the same vector space.



          Edit:



          0) I am using “derivations” as the name of tangent vectors according to your definition.
          1) The bijection is defined from the space of equivalence classes of paths to derivations of $F(M)$ at $x$: to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto frac{d}{dt}_{|t=0}(f circ gamma)$.



          You can for instance take $M=mathbb{R}^n$: then the equivalence classes are exactly given by the (usual linear) derivative of paths at $t=0$, and to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto d_x f(gamma’(0))$.



          2) When your manifold is embedded in a vector space $E$ (with a finite dimension), then two paths are equivalent iff they have same linear derivative at $t=0$ (as smooth functions from an interval to $E$). So you can represent each equivalence class in the tangent space by the underlying common derivative of the paths at $t=0$, which is a vector from $E$, and you get an embedding $T_x M rightarrow E$. Now, when $M$ is a matrix group, it is embedded in the space of square matrices, thus so are ots tangent spaces.



          3) The definition of the tangent space using derivations is pretty clean and satisfying (not that your physics people would care ;) ). It can however sometimes be inconvenient (when proving, say, that the tangent bundle exists as a manifold).






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for the answer. I kind of hoped for an answer that would circumvent the definition in terms of tangents to curves as I feel I dont understand it very well. Could you expand on how the $gamma'$ can be seen as matrices, as I dont really understand your explanation/the bijection you mention.
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 0:45










          • $begingroup$
            Hey, thanks for the edit. If I understand your answer correctly now, the answer to my question lies really in fact that my manifold is embedded in a vector space E whose tangent spaces is isomorphic to E and thus I also have an embedding $T_x Mto E$ as you write. I might miss something, but where is the explicit definition of the tangent spaces (be it in terms of derivations or tangents to curves) even important?
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 11:10










          • $begingroup$
            Not really, but at some rather close point you will have to give the set of all tangent spaces a manifold structure (you get the tangent bundle). And it is somewhat easier if you consider tangent paths.
            $endgroup$
            – Mindlack
            Dec 13 '18 at 11:35



















          0












          $begingroup$

          Let $gamma$ be a curve in the matrices; that is $gamma:(-epsilon,epsilon) rightarrow G$ such that $gamma(0)$ = $I$. We want to know the possible tangent vectors to these curves. From what everyone has said, we can view this as a curve into $mathbb{R}^{n^2}$. We know from calculus, that every v $in mathbb{R}^{n^2}$ is a possible tangent vector. So it may be easier to see that every matrix is a tangent vector when we view $gamma$ as a matrix curve.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3037396%2funderstanding-lie-algebra-of-matrix-lie-group%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            3 Answers
            3






            active

            oldest

            votes








            3 Answers
            3






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            1












            $begingroup$

            A matrix Lie group is a closed subgroup of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$



            Now $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ is an open subset of the vector space $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n},$ and you may use:




            1. If $V$ is a vector space of dimension $n,$ any norm in $V$ determines a topology independent of the choice of the norm, and $V$ has a standard smooth structure making it into an $n$-dimensional manifold.

            2. If $V$ is a vector space with its standard manifold structure, the tangent space at a point $pin V$ is naturally isomorphic to $V,$ that is, there is a canonical isomorphism $varphi_V:V to T_pV:$ This isomorphism is such that if $L:Vto W$ is a linear map between two vector spaces then $dL_pcirc varphi_V=varphi_Wcirc L:Vto T_{Lp}W$ where $dL_p:T_pVto T_{Lp}W$ is the differential of $L$ at $p.$ This allow us to identify the tangent space $T_pV$ with $V$ itself.

            3. If $iota:Nto M$ is the inclusion of a submanifold $Nsubset M$ and $pin N$ then $diota_p:T_pNto T_pM$ gives a inclusion of $T_pN$ into $T_pM.$ If $N$ is an open submanifold of $M$ then $diota_p$ is an isomorphism, so we can identify $T_pN$ with $T_pM.$


            Now let $Gsubset text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ be a matrix Lie group and $Iin G$ be the identity. By 2, the tangent space $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n})$ is identified with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}$ itself. By 3, the tangent space $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{K}))$ can be identified with $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}),$ hence with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$ Hence by the first statement in 3, the tangent space $T_IG$ is a subspace of $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Hey, I really like your answer. It has exactly the stuff in it, I just learned in differential geometry. To clarify, I understand that by 3, you can identify $T_I(GL(n))$ with $T_I(mathbb{R}^{nxn})$ but then to argue about the closed subgroup $G$ you cannot use 3 again, can you? Or am I misunderstanding?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 10:48












            • $begingroup$
              I'm using 3 again but only the first sentence: Since $G$ is a submanifold of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})$ then $T_I(G)$ is a subspace of $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})).$
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:09












            • $begingroup$
              I see, nice. One more question. What about matrix groups like $U(n)$ which is actually a closed subgroup of $GL(n,mathbb{C})$. Now, I feel, I cannot argue the same way, since the $mathbb{C}^{n times n}$ is a complex finite-dimensional vector space and thus not a manifold, so the whole argument via canonical isomorphisms doesnt work?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:14










            • $begingroup$
              $mathbb{C}^{ntimes n}$ is also a real vector space, of dimension $(2n)^2,$ and is in fact diffeomorphic to $mathbb{R}^{2ntimes 2n}$ as a (real) manifold, since $mathbb{C}cong mathbb{R}^{2n}$ as topological spaces (with the standard topology).
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:21












            • $begingroup$
              You just make me realize that I should replace $mathbb{R}$ by $mathbb{K}$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$ in most parts of my answer, I'll edit it.
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:26
















            1












            $begingroup$

            A matrix Lie group is a closed subgroup of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$



            Now $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ is an open subset of the vector space $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n},$ and you may use:




            1. If $V$ is a vector space of dimension $n,$ any norm in $V$ determines a topology independent of the choice of the norm, and $V$ has a standard smooth structure making it into an $n$-dimensional manifold.

            2. If $V$ is a vector space with its standard manifold structure, the tangent space at a point $pin V$ is naturally isomorphic to $V,$ that is, there is a canonical isomorphism $varphi_V:V to T_pV:$ This isomorphism is such that if $L:Vto W$ is a linear map between two vector spaces then $dL_pcirc varphi_V=varphi_Wcirc L:Vto T_{Lp}W$ where $dL_p:T_pVto T_{Lp}W$ is the differential of $L$ at $p.$ This allow us to identify the tangent space $T_pV$ with $V$ itself.

            3. If $iota:Nto M$ is the inclusion of a submanifold $Nsubset M$ and $pin N$ then $diota_p:T_pNto T_pM$ gives a inclusion of $T_pN$ into $T_pM.$ If $N$ is an open submanifold of $M$ then $diota_p$ is an isomorphism, so we can identify $T_pN$ with $T_pM.$


            Now let $Gsubset text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ be a matrix Lie group and $Iin G$ be the identity. By 2, the tangent space $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n})$ is identified with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}$ itself. By 3, the tangent space $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{K}))$ can be identified with $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}),$ hence with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$ Hence by the first statement in 3, the tangent space $T_IG$ is a subspace of $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Hey, I really like your answer. It has exactly the stuff in it, I just learned in differential geometry. To clarify, I understand that by 3, you can identify $T_I(GL(n))$ with $T_I(mathbb{R}^{nxn})$ but then to argue about the closed subgroup $G$ you cannot use 3 again, can you? Or am I misunderstanding?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 10:48












            • $begingroup$
              I'm using 3 again but only the first sentence: Since $G$ is a submanifold of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})$ then $T_I(G)$ is a subspace of $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})).$
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:09












            • $begingroup$
              I see, nice. One more question. What about matrix groups like $U(n)$ which is actually a closed subgroup of $GL(n,mathbb{C})$. Now, I feel, I cannot argue the same way, since the $mathbb{C}^{n times n}$ is a complex finite-dimensional vector space and thus not a manifold, so the whole argument via canonical isomorphisms doesnt work?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:14










            • $begingroup$
              $mathbb{C}^{ntimes n}$ is also a real vector space, of dimension $(2n)^2,$ and is in fact diffeomorphic to $mathbb{R}^{2ntimes 2n}$ as a (real) manifold, since $mathbb{C}cong mathbb{R}^{2n}$ as topological spaces (with the standard topology).
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:21












            • $begingroup$
              You just make me realize that I should replace $mathbb{R}$ by $mathbb{K}$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$ in most parts of my answer, I'll edit it.
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:26














            1












            1








            1





            $begingroup$

            A matrix Lie group is a closed subgroup of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$



            Now $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ is an open subset of the vector space $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n},$ and you may use:




            1. If $V$ is a vector space of dimension $n,$ any norm in $V$ determines a topology independent of the choice of the norm, and $V$ has a standard smooth structure making it into an $n$-dimensional manifold.

            2. If $V$ is a vector space with its standard manifold structure, the tangent space at a point $pin V$ is naturally isomorphic to $V,$ that is, there is a canonical isomorphism $varphi_V:V to T_pV:$ This isomorphism is such that if $L:Vto W$ is a linear map between two vector spaces then $dL_pcirc varphi_V=varphi_Wcirc L:Vto T_{Lp}W$ where $dL_p:T_pVto T_{Lp}W$ is the differential of $L$ at $p.$ This allow us to identify the tangent space $T_pV$ with $V$ itself.

            3. If $iota:Nto M$ is the inclusion of a submanifold $Nsubset M$ and $pin N$ then $diota_p:T_pNto T_pM$ gives a inclusion of $T_pN$ into $T_pM.$ If $N$ is an open submanifold of $M$ then $diota_p$ is an isomorphism, so we can identify $T_pN$ with $T_pM.$


            Now let $Gsubset text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ be a matrix Lie group and $Iin G$ be the identity. By 2, the tangent space $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n})$ is identified with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}$ itself. By 3, the tangent space $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{K}))$ can be identified with $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}),$ hence with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$ Hence by the first statement in 3, the tangent space $T_IG$ is a subspace of $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            A matrix Lie group is a closed subgroup of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$



            Now $text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ is an open subset of the vector space $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n},$ and you may use:




            1. If $V$ is a vector space of dimension $n,$ any norm in $V$ determines a topology independent of the choice of the norm, and $V$ has a standard smooth structure making it into an $n$-dimensional manifold.

            2. If $V$ is a vector space with its standard manifold structure, the tangent space at a point $pin V$ is naturally isomorphic to $V,$ that is, there is a canonical isomorphism $varphi_V:V to T_pV:$ This isomorphism is such that if $L:Vto W$ is a linear map between two vector spaces then $dL_pcirc varphi_V=varphi_Wcirc L:Vto T_{Lp}W$ where $dL_p:T_pVto T_{Lp}W$ is the differential of $L$ at $p.$ This allow us to identify the tangent space $T_pV$ with $V$ itself.

            3. If $iota:Nto M$ is the inclusion of a submanifold $Nsubset M$ and $pin N$ then $diota_p:T_pNto T_pM$ gives a inclusion of $T_pN$ into $T_pM.$ If $N$ is an open submanifold of $M$ then $diota_p$ is an isomorphism, so we can identify $T_pN$ with $T_pM.$


            Now let $Gsubset text{GL}(n,mathbb{K})$ be a matrix Lie group and $Iin G$ be the identity. By 2, the tangent space $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n})$ is identified with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}$ itself. By 3, the tangent space $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{K}))$ can be identified with $T_I(mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}),$ hence with $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$ Hence by the first statement in 3, the tangent space $T_IG$ is a subspace of $mathbb{K}^{ntimes n}.$







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Dec 13 '18 at 12:28

























            answered Dec 13 '18 at 0:49









            positrón0802positrón0802

            4,468520




            4,468520












            • $begingroup$
              Hey, I really like your answer. It has exactly the stuff in it, I just learned in differential geometry. To clarify, I understand that by 3, you can identify $T_I(GL(n))$ with $T_I(mathbb{R}^{nxn})$ but then to argue about the closed subgroup $G$ you cannot use 3 again, can you? Or am I misunderstanding?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 10:48












            • $begingroup$
              I'm using 3 again but only the first sentence: Since $G$ is a submanifold of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})$ then $T_I(G)$ is a subspace of $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})).$
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:09












            • $begingroup$
              I see, nice. One more question. What about matrix groups like $U(n)$ which is actually a closed subgroup of $GL(n,mathbb{C})$. Now, I feel, I cannot argue the same way, since the $mathbb{C}^{n times n}$ is a complex finite-dimensional vector space and thus not a manifold, so the whole argument via canonical isomorphisms doesnt work?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:14










            • $begingroup$
              $mathbb{C}^{ntimes n}$ is also a real vector space, of dimension $(2n)^2,$ and is in fact diffeomorphic to $mathbb{R}^{2ntimes 2n}$ as a (real) manifold, since $mathbb{C}cong mathbb{R}^{2n}$ as topological spaces (with the standard topology).
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:21












            • $begingroup$
              You just make me realize that I should replace $mathbb{R}$ by $mathbb{K}$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$ in most parts of my answer, I'll edit it.
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:26


















            • $begingroup$
              Hey, I really like your answer. It has exactly the stuff in it, I just learned in differential geometry. To clarify, I understand that by 3, you can identify $T_I(GL(n))$ with $T_I(mathbb{R}^{nxn})$ but then to argue about the closed subgroup $G$ you cannot use 3 again, can you? Or am I misunderstanding?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 10:48












            • $begingroup$
              I'm using 3 again but only the first sentence: Since $G$ is a submanifold of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})$ then $T_I(G)$ is a subspace of $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})).$
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:09












            • $begingroup$
              I see, nice. One more question. What about matrix groups like $U(n)$ which is actually a closed subgroup of $GL(n,mathbb{C})$. Now, I feel, I cannot argue the same way, since the $mathbb{C}^{n times n}$ is a complex finite-dimensional vector space and thus not a manifold, so the whole argument via canonical isomorphisms doesnt work?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:14










            • $begingroup$
              $mathbb{C}^{ntimes n}$ is also a real vector space, of dimension $(2n)^2,$ and is in fact diffeomorphic to $mathbb{R}^{2ntimes 2n}$ as a (real) manifold, since $mathbb{C}cong mathbb{R}^{2n}$ as topological spaces (with the standard topology).
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:21












            • $begingroup$
              You just make me realize that I should replace $mathbb{R}$ by $mathbb{K}$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$ in most parts of my answer, I'll edit it.
              $endgroup$
              – positrón0802
              Dec 13 '18 at 12:26
















            $begingroup$
            Hey, I really like your answer. It has exactly the stuff in it, I just learned in differential geometry. To clarify, I understand that by 3, you can identify $T_I(GL(n))$ with $T_I(mathbb{R}^{nxn})$ but then to argue about the closed subgroup $G$ you cannot use 3 again, can you? Or am I misunderstanding?
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 10:48






            $begingroup$
            Hey, I really like your answer. It has exactly the stuff in it, I just learned in differential geometry. To clarify, I understand that by 3, you can identify $T_I(GL(n))$ with $T_I(mathbb{R}^{nxn})$ but then to argue about the closed subgroup $G$ you cannot use 3 again, can you? Or am I misunderstanding?
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 10:48














            $begingroup$
            I'm using 3 again but only the first sentence: Since $G$ is a submanifold of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})$ then $T_I(G)$ is a subspace of $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})).$
            $endgroup$
            – positrón0802
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:09






            $begingroup$
            I'm using 3 again but only the first sentence: Since $G$ is a submanifold of $text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})$ then $T_I(G)$ is a subspace of $T_I(text{GL}(n,mathbb{R})).$
            $endgroup$
            – positrón0802
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:09














            $begingroup$
            I see, nice. One more question. What about matrix groups like $U(n)$ which is actually a closed subgroup of $GL(n,mathbb{C})$. Now, I feel, I cannot argue the same way, since the $mathbb{C}^{n times n}$ is a complex finite-dimensional vector space and thus not a manifold, so the whole argument via canonical isomorphisms doesnt work?
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:14




            $begingroup$
            I see, nice. One more question. What about matrix groups like $U(n)$ which is actually a closed subgroup of $GL(n,mathbb{C})$. Now, I feel, I cannot argue the same way, since the $mathbb{C}^{n times n}$ is a complex finite-dimensional vector space and thus not a manifold, so the whole argument via canonical isomorphisms doesnt work?
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:14












            $begingroup$
            $mathbb{C}^{ntimes n}$ is also a real vector space, of dimension $(2n)^2,$ and is in fact diffeomorphic to $mathbb{R}^{2ntimes 2n}$ as a (real) manifold, since $mathbb{C}cong mathbb{R}^{2n}$ as topological spaces (with the standard topology).
            $endgroup$
            – positrón0802
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:21






            $begingroup$
            $mathbb{C}^{ntimes n}$ is also a real vector space, of dimension $(2n)^2,$ and is in fact diffeomorphic to $mathbb{R}^{2ntimes 2n}$ as a (real) manifold, since $mathbb{C}cong mathbb{R}^{2n}$ as topological spaces (with the standard topology).
            $endgroup$
            – positrón0802
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:21














            $begingroup$
            You just make me realize that I should replace $mathbb{R}$ by $mathbb{K}$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$ in most parts of my answer, I'll edit it.
            $endgroup$
            – positrón0802
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:26




            $begingroup$
            You just make me realize that I should replace $mathbb{R}$ by $mathbb{K}$ where $mathbb{K}=mathbb{R}$ or $mathbb{C}$ in most parts of my answer, I'll edit it.
            $endgroup$
            – positrón0802
            Dec 13 '18 at 12:26











            0












            $begingroup$

            You have to use another characterization of the tangent space (which is in natural bijection with your definition, alhough it is not wholly straightforward), that is:



            the tangent space of a manifold $M$ at a point $x$ is the quotient $S/sim$, where $S$ is the set of all smooth paths $gamma:[-a,b] rightarrow M$ mapping $0$ to $x$, where $a,b>0$, and $gamma_1 sim gamma_2$ iff in some chart around $x$ (ie in every chart around $x$) $gamma_1’(0)=gamma_2’(0)$.



            The bijection is given by $gamma longmapsto (f longmapsto d/dt(fcircgamma) (t=0)$.



            With this alternate definition, when your manifold is embedded in some vector space, the tangent space at some point is canonically embedded in the same vector space.



            Edit:



            0) I am using “derivations” as the name of tangent vectors according to your definition.
            1) The bijection is defined from the space of equivalence classes of paths to derivations of $F(M)$ at $x$: to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto frac{d}{dt}_{|t=0}(f circ gamma)$.



            You can for instance take $M=mathbb{R}^n$: then the equivalence classes are exactly given by the (usual linear) derivative of paths at $t=0$, and to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto d_x f(gamma’(0))$.



            2) When your manifold is embedded in a vector space $E$ (with a finite dimension), then two paths are equivalent iff they have same linear derivative at $t=0$ (as smooth functions from an interval to $E$). So you can represent each equivalence class in the tangent space by the underlying common derivative of the paths at $t=0$, which is a vector from $E$, and you get an embedding $T_x M rightarrow E$. Now, when $M$ is a matrix group, it is embedded in the space of square matrices, thus so are ots tangent spaces.



            3) The definition of the tangent space using derivations is pretty clean and satisfying (not that your physics people would care ;) ). It can however sometimes be inconvenient (when proving, say, that the tangent bundle exists as a manifold).






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Thanks for the answer. I kind of hoped for an answer that would circumvent the definition in terms of tangents to curves as I feel I dont understand it very well. Could you expand on how the $gamma'$ can be seen as matrices, as I dont really understand your explanation/the bijection you mention.
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 0:45










            • $begingroup$
              Hey, thanks for the edit. If I understand your answer correctly now, the answer to my question lies really in fact that my manifold is embedded in a vector space E whose tangent spaces is isomorphic to E and thus I also have an embedding $T_x Mto E$ as you write. I might miss something, but where is the explicit definition of the tangent spaces (be it in terms of derivations or tangents to curves) even important?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 11:10










            • $begingroup$
              Not really, but at some rather close point you will have to give the set of all tangent spaces a manifold structure (you get the tangent bundle). And it is somewhat easier if you consider tangent paths.
              $endgroup$
              – Mindlack
              Dec 13 '18 at 11:35
















            0












            $begingroup$

            You have to use another characterization of the tangent space (which is in natural bijection with your definition, alhough it is not wholly straightforward), that is:



            the tangent space of a manifold $M$ at a point $x$ is the quotient $S/sim$, where $S$ is the set of all smooth paths $gamma:[-a,b] rightarrow M$ mapping $0$ to $x$, where $a,b>0$, and $gamma_1 sim gamma_2$ iff in some chart around $x$ (ie in every chart around $x$) $gamma_1’(0)=gamma_2’(0)$.



            The bijection is given by $gamma longmapsto (f longmapsto d/dt(fcircgamma) (t=0)$.



            With this alternate definition, when your manifold is embedded in some vector space, the tangent space at some point is canonically embedded in the same vector space.



            Edit:



            0) I am using “derivations” as the name of tangent vectors according to your definition.
            1) The bijection is defined from the space of equivalence classes of paths to derivations of $F(M)$ at $x$: to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto frac{d}{dt}_{|t=0}(f circ gamma)$.



            You can for instance take $M=mathbb{R}^n$: then the equivalence classes are exactly given by the (usual linear) derivative of paths at $t=0$, and to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto d_x f(gamma’(0))$.



            2) When your manifold is embedded in a vector space $E$ (with a finite dimension), then two paths are equivalent iff they have same linear derivative at $t=0$ (as smooth functions from an interval to $E$). So you can represent each equivalence class in the tangent space by the underlying common derivative of the paths at $t=0$, which is a vector from $E$, and you get an embedding $T_x M rightarrow E$. Now, when $M$ is a matrix group, it is embedded in the space of square matrices, thus so are ots tangent spaces.



            3) The definition of the tangent space using derivations is pretty clean and satisfying (not that your physics people would care ;) ). It can however sometimes be inconvenient (when proving, say, that the tangent bundle exists as a manifold).






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Thanks for the answer. I kind of hoped for an answer that would circumvent the definition in terms of tangents to curves as I feel I dont understand it very well. Could you expand on how the $gamma'$ can be seen as matrices, as I dont really understand your explanation/the bijection you mention.
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 0:45










            • $begingroup$
              Hey, thanks for the edit. If I understand your answer correctly now, the answer to my question lies really in fact that my manifold is embedded in a vector space E whose tangent spaces is isomorphic to E and thus I also have an embedding $T_x Mto E$ as you write. I might miss something, but where is the explicit definition of the tangent spaces (be it in terms of derivations or tangents to curves) even important?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 11:10










            • $begingroup$
              Not really, but at some rather close point you will have to give the set of all tangent spaces a manifold structure (you get the tangent bundle). And it is somewhat easier if you consider tangent paths.
              $endgroup$
              – Mindlack
              Dec 13 '18 at 11:35














            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            You have to use another characterization of the tangent space (which is in natural bijection with your definition, alhough it is not wholly straightforward), that is:



            the tangent space of a manifold $M$ at a point $x$ is the quotient $S/sim$, where $S$ is the set of all smooth paths $gamma:[-a,b] rightarrow M$ mapping $0$ to $x$, where $a,b>0$, and $gamma_1 sim gamma_2$ iff in some chart around $x$ (ie in every chart around $x$) $gamma_1’(0)=gamma_2’(0)$.



            The bijection is given by $gamma longmapsto (f longmapsto d/dt(fcircgamma) (t=0)$.



            With this alternate definition, when your manifold is embedded in some vector space, the tangent space at some point is canonically embedded in the same vector space.



            Edit:



            0) I am using “derivations” as the name of tangent vectors according to your definition.
            1) The bijection is defined from the space of equivalence classes of paths to derivations of $F(M)$ at $x$: to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto frac{d}{dt}_{|t=0}(f circ gamma)$.



            You can for instance take $M=mathbb{R}^n$: then the equivalence classes are exactly given by the (usual linear) derivative of paths at $t=0$, and to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto d_x f(gamma’(0))$.



            2) When your manifold is embedded in a vector space $E$ (with a finite dimension), then two paths are equivalent iff they have same linear derivative at $t=0$ (as smooth functions from an interval to $E$). So you can represent each equivalence class in the tangent space by the underlying common derivative of the paths at $t=0$, which is a vector from $E$, and you get an embedding $T_x M rightarrow E$. Now, when $M$ is a matrix group, it is embedded in the space of square matrices, thus so are ots tangent spaces.



            3) The definition of the tangent space using derivations is pretty clean and satisfying (not that your physics people would care ;) ). It can however sometimes be inconvenient (when proving, say, that the tangent bundle exists as a manifold).






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            You have to use another characterization of the tangent space (which is in natural bijection with your definition, alhough it is not wholly straightforward), that is:



            the tangent space of a manifold $M$ at a point $x$ is the quotient $S/sim$, where $S$ is the set of all smooth paths $gamma:[-a,b] rightarrow M$ mapping $0$ to $x$, where $a,b>0$, and $gamma_1 sim gamma_2$ iff in some chart around $x$ (ie in every chart around $x$) $gamma_1’(0)=gamma_2’(0)$.



            The bijection is given by $gamma longmapsto (f longmapsto d/dt(fcircgamma) (t=0)$.



            With this alternate definition, when your manifold is embedded in some vector space, the tangent space at some point is canonically embedded in the same vector space.



            Edit:



            0) I am using “derivations” as the name of tangent vectors according to your definition.
            1) The bijection is defined from the space of equivalence classes of paths to derivations of $F(M)$ at $x$: to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto frac{d}{dt}_{|t=0}(f circ gamma)$.



            You can for instance take $M=mathbb{R}^n$: then the equivalence classes are exactly given by the (usual linear) derivative of paths at $t=0$, and to the path $gamma$ you associate the derivation $D_{gamma}: f longmapsto d_x f(gamma’(0))$.



            2) When your manifold is embedded in a vector space $E$ (with a finite dimension), then two paths are equivalent iff they have same linear derivative at $t=0$ (as smooth functions from an interval to $E$). So you can represent each equivalence class in the tangent space by the underlying common derivative of the paths at $t=0$, which is a vector from $E$, and you get an embedding $T_x M rightarrow E$. Now, when $M$ is a matrix group, it is embedded in the space of square matrices, thus so are ots tangent spaces.



            3) The definition of the tangent space using derivations is pretty clean and satisfying (not that your physics people would care ;) ). It can however sometimes be inconvenient (when proving, say, that the tangent bundle exists as a manifold).







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Dec 13 '18 at 0:58

























            answered Dec 13 '18 at 0:14









            MindlackMindlack

            4,750210




            4,750210












            • $begingroup$
              Thanks for the answer. I kind of hoped for an answer that would circumvent the definition in terms of tangents to curves as I feel I dont understand it very well. Could you expand on how the $gamma'$ can be seen as matrices, as I dont really understand your explanation/the bijection you mention.
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 0:45










            • $begingroup$
              Hey, thanks for the edit. If I understand your answer correctly now, the answer to my question lies really in fact that my manifold is embedded in a vector space E whose tangent spaces is isomorphic to E and thus I also have an embedding $T_x Mto E$ as you write. I might miss something, but where is the explicit definition of the tangent spaces (be it in terms of derivations or tangents to curves) even important?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 11:10










            • $begingroup$
              Not really, but at some rather close point you will have to give the set of all tangent spaces a manifold structure (you get the tangent bundle). And it is somewhat easier if you consider tangent paths.
              $endgroup$
              – Mindlack
              Dec 13 '18 at 11:35


















            • $begingroup$
              Thanks for the answer. I kind of hoped for an answer that would circumvent the definition in terms of tangents to curves as I feel I dont understand it very well. Could you expand on how the $gamma'$ can be seen as matrices, as I dont really understand your explanation/the bijection you mention.
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 0:45










            • $begingroup$
              Hey, thanks for the edit. If I understand your answer correctly now, the answer to my question lies really in fact that my manifold is embedded in a vector space E whose tangent spaces is isomorphic to E and thus I also have an embedding $T_x Mto E$ as you write. I might miss something, but where is the explicit definition of the tangent spaces (be it in terms of derivations or tangents to curves) even important?
              $endgroup$
              – Marsl
              Dec 13 '18 at 11:10










            • $begingroup$
              Not really, but at some rather close point you will have to give the set of all tangent spaces a manifold structure (you get the tangent bundle). And it is somewhat easier if you consider tangent paths.
              $endgroup$
              – Mindlack
              Dec 13 '18 at 11:35
















            $begingroup$
            Thanks for the answer. I kind of hoped for an answer that would circumvent the definition in terms of tangents to curves as I feel I dont understand it very well. Could you expand on how the $gamma'$ can be seen as matrices, as I dont really understand your explanation/the bijection you mention.
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 0:45




            $begingroup$
            Thanks for the answer. I kind of hoped for an answer that would circumvent the definition in terms of tangents to curves as I feel I dont understand it very well. Could you expand on how the $gamma'$ can be seen as matrices, as I dont really understand your explanation/the bijection you mention.
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 0:45












            $begingroup$
            Hey, thanks for the edit. If I understand your answer correctly now, the answer to my question lies really in fact that my manifold is embedded in a vector space E whose tangent spaces is isomorphic to E and thus I also have an embedding $T_x Mto E$ as you write. I might miss something, but where is the explicit definition of the tangent spaces (be it in terms of derivations or tangents to curves) even important?
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 11:10




            $begingroup$
            Hey, thanks for the edit. If I understand your answer correctly now, the answer to my question lies really in fact that my manifold is embedded in a vector space E whose tangent spaces is isomorphic to E and thus I also have an embedding $T_x Mto E$ as you write. I might miss something, but where is the explicit definition of the tangent spaces (be it in terms of derivations or tangents to curves) even important?
            $endgroup$
            – Marsl
            Dec 13 '18 at 11:10












            $begingroup$
            Not really, but at some rather close point you will have to give the set of all tangent spaces a manifold structure (you get the tangent bundle). And it is somewhat easier if you consider tangent paths.
            $endgroup$
            – Mindlack
            Dec 13 '18 at 11:35




            $begingroup$
            Not really, but at some rather close point you will have to give the set of all tangent spaces a manifold structure (you get the tangent bundle). And it is somewhat easier if you consider tangent paths.
            $endgroup$
            – Mindlack
            Dec 13 '18 at 11:35











            0












            $begingroup$

            Let $gamma$ be a curve in the matrices; that is $gamma:(-epsilon,epsilon) rightarrow G$ such that $gamma(0)$ = $I$. We want to know the possible tangent vectors to these curves. From what everyone has said, we can view this as a curve into $mathbb{R}^{n^2}$. We know from calculus, that every v $in mathbb{R}^{n^2}$ is a possible tangent vector. So it may be easier to see that every matrix is a tangent vector when we view $gamma$ as a matrix curve.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              0












              $begingroup$

              Let $gamma$ be a curve in the matrices; that is $gamma:(-epsilon,epsilon) rightarrow G$ such that $gamma(0)$ = $I$. We want to know the possible tangent vectors to these curves. From what everyone has said, we can view this as a curve into $mathbb{R}^{n^2}$. We know from calculus, that every v $in mathbb{R}^{n^2}$ is a possible tangent vector. So it may be easier to see that every matrix is a tangent vector when we view $gamma$ as a matrix curve.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                0












                0








                0





                $begingroup$

                Let $gamma$ be a curve in the matrices; that is $gamma:(-epsilon,epsilon) rightarrow G$ such that $gamma(0)$ = $I$. We want to know the possible tangent vectors to these curves. From what everyone has said, we can view this as a curve into $mathbb{R}^{n^2}$. We know from calculus, that every v $in mathbb{R}^{n^2}$ is a possible tangent vector. So it may be easier to see that every matrix is a tangent vector when we view $gamma$ as a matrix curve.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                Let $gamma$ be a curve in the matrices; that is $gamma:(-epsilon,epsilon) rightarrow G$ such that $gamma(0)$ = $I$. We want to know the possible tangent vectors to these curves. From what everyone has said, we can view this as a curve into $mathbb{R}^{n^2}$. We know from calculus, that every v $in mathbb{R}^{n^2}$ is a possible tangent vector. So it may be easier to see that every matrix is a tangent vector when we view $gamma$ as a matrix curve.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Dec 13 '18 at 3:05









                Joel PereiraJoel Pereira

                75919




                75919






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3037396%2funderstanding-lie-algebra-of-matrix-lie-group%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Le Mesnil-Réaume

                    Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

                    web3.py web3.isConnected() returns false always