1
$\begingroup$

Let $f:U\longrightarrow \mathbf{C}$ be a holomorphic function, where $U$ is a Riemann surface, e.g., $U=\mathbf{C}$, $U=B(0,1)$ or $U$ is the complex upper half plane, etc.

For $a$ in $\mathbf{C}$, let $t_a:\mathbf{C} \longrightarrow \mathbf{C}$ be the translation by $a$, i.e., $t_a(z) = z-a$.

What is the difference between $df$ and $d(t_a\circ f)$ as differential forms on $U$?

My feeling is that $df = d(t_a\circ f)$, but why?

1 Answers 1

1

The forms will be different if $a\not=0$, namely if $\mathrm{d} f = w(z) \mathrm{d}z$ locally, then $\mathrm{d}\left( t_a \circ f\right) = w(z-a) \mathrm{d} z$.

Added: Above, I was using the following, unconventional definition for the composition, $(t_a \circ f)(z) = f(t_a(z)) = f(z-a)$.

The conventional definition, though, is $(t_a \circ f)(z) = t_a(f(z)) = f(z)-a$. With this definition $\mathrm{d} (t_a \circ f) = \mathrm{d}(f-a) = \mathrm{d} f$.

  • 0
    That's all I needed to hear. I've been confused about something for the past couple of days. I tried to ask about it before in this question http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/68282/differential-forms-and-a-chain-rule but didn't get any replies. Could you take a look at that question too, please?2011-09-30
  • 0
    Shouldn't that be $w(z) - a$?2011-09-30
  • 0
    No, $\mathrm{d} (t_a \circ f) = \mathrm{d}(f(z-a)) = w(z-a) \mathrm{d}(z-a) = w(z-a) \mathrm{d} z$. See wikipedia article on [functional composition](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Function_composition).2011-09-30
  • 0
    Sorry, are you saying that $(t_a \circ f)(z)$ isn't $f(z) - a$?2011-09-30
  • 0
    The definition of composition $(g \circ f)(z) = f(g(z))$. Now let $g=t_a$.2011-09-30
  • 0
    @shaye My gut intuition for interpreting $(t_a \circ f)(z)$ as $f(t_a(z))$ is non-conventional, I am afraid, which makes my answer wrong. Please accept my apologies, and see the updated answer.2011-09-30