• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,064 questions , 2,215 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,734 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Mathematical expression for map from $[0,1]$ to $S^2$

+ 4 like - 3 dislike

A topological space is called arcwise connected if, for any points $x,y\in X$, there exists a continuous map $f: [0,1]\rightarrow X$ such that $f(0)=x$ and $f(1)=y$. Although it is intuitively understandable but how does such a map mathematically look like for $S^2$?

According to this definition is there way to show that $SU(2)$ is connected but $O(3)$ is not? As I continuously change the group parameters (up to their allowed ranges) can I show in the first case that I can reach all points on the $SU(2)$ manifold and in case of $O(3)$ I cannot exhaust all points? Only this can prove the nature of connectedness, in this definition, Right?

This post imported from StackExchange Mathematics at 2014-10-05 10:04 (UTC), posted by SE-user Roopam Sinha
asked Oct 5, 2014 in Closed Questions by Roopam Sinha (25 points) [ no revision ]
closed Jun 22, 2015 as per community consensus

Undergrad level question, voted to close, but one way to show that a Lie group is connected and construct explicit connecting curves is using the exponential map, so that every point x can be written (nonuniquely) as exp(A) for A in the Lie algebra. The Lie algebra is a real vector space, you can connect any two points using straight lines, so x and y connect by tx + (1-t)y in the vector space, and then exponentiating exp(tA + (1-t)B) interpolates exp(A) and exp(B).

SO(3) and SU(2) are both connected. O(3) is disconnected because there is a determinant for the rotation matrix which can be either +1 or -1. This is a complete answer, but I made it a comment because I voted to close this question.

Also, this is an early duplicate of the much clearer and well answered: http://physicsoverflow.org/24226/connectedness-of-%24o-3-%24-group-manifold , which is also technically undergrad level, but who cares, it's a well phrased question with clear answers.

2 Answers

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

(This answer was written to address the original version of the question, before the second paragraph was added.)

As an example, on $S^2$ it's always possible to define a coordinate patch

$$\psi:S^2\rightarrow R^3$$

using typical spherical coordinates $(r,\theta,\phi)$, defined such that $\psi(x)=(1,0,0)$ and $\psi(y)=(1,0,\phi_y)$. The coordinate patch can be defined everywhere on $S^2$ except in some neighborhoods of the poles. Like any coordinate patch, $\psi$ is injective (although it isn't surjective), so $\psi^{-1}$ is defined on $\psi$'s image. Then the simplest possible definition for the map $f$ using those coordinates would be

$$f(\lambda)=\psi^{-1}(1,0,\lambda \phi_y)\ .$$

There are of course many other possible ways to define $f$, which take the image of $f$ along different paths on $S^2$ between $x$ and $y$.

This post imported from StackExchange Mathematics at 2014-10-05 10:04 (UTC), posted by SE-user Red Act
answered Oct 5, 2014 by Red Act (10 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 2 dislike

$f:[0,1]\to S^2$ given by $f(x)=(\sin x\cos x,\cos^2 x,\sin x)\in S^2$, I think it is very easy to check now taking any two arbitrary point from sphere and connect by a path like $tx+(1-t)y;x,y\in S^2$

This post imported from StackExchange Mathematics at 2014-10-05 10:04 (UTC), posted by SE-user Une Femme Douce
answered Oct 5, 2014 by Une Femme Douce (-10 points) [ no revision ]

This is nonsense-- you just mapped a line to a particular curve in the spehre. The correct version of this argument uses the exponential map, or on the sphere, the manifold exponential map, not this, which is meaningless.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights