|
|
![[parent]](http://images.planetmath.org:8080/images/uparrow.png) Viewing Message
|
|
|
| ``Re: Not a definition either (moving frame)''
by perucho on 2006-12-11 14:57:34 |
|
| In fact 3 days ago I sent to Wilfredo a private mail about the strange of this concept. Specifically I expressed him 3 considerations about such a definition.
1.- Varying a field smoothly in a neighborhood. What is that?
2.- Moving points located on vectors. What vectors? Vectors contained in the neighborhood $U$ or vectors defining all and each one of $n$ vector fields?
3.- "...moved from $P$ to $Q$ quite easily..." it doesn't mean nothing. That was changed by "...moved from $ P$ to $ Q$ with very simple calculations."(???)
Really that is a sincere and constructive criticism to Lando47 entry.
perucho |
| | [ reply | up | top ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
