On Wed, 23 Jan 2013, Hetware wrote: > On 1/21/2013 1:07 PM, Hetware wrote:
> > My questions pertain to the development beginning on page 142 with the > > paragraph starting "The main objective of the present section...", and > > runs through the formal statement of the "Converse of Poincare's > > Lemma" on page 145. > > > > http://books.google.com/books?id=ikPQFqxcyfMC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false > > > > I'm not getting the significance (or shall I say "spirit") of eq. > > 3.10. > > I believe I understand the mechanics of the expression. It is a sum > > of p (p-1)-forms. Each (p-1)-form in the sum "singles out" a > > particular x_r and omits the corresponding dx_r basis 1-form. > > > > Is there another way of describing what the operator O represents? > > > > I believe a function of the form O is sometimes called a "homotopy > > operator". Is that correct? > > Occasionally, I ask stupid questions. This is not such an occasion.
I don't go chasing through web references hoping to find some equation somewhere or other.