Relation To The Real Projective Plane
The sphere, before being transformed, is not homeomorphic to the real projective plane, RP2. But the sphere centered at the origin has this property, that if point (x,y,z) belongs to the sphere, then so does the antipodal point (-x,-y,-z) and these two points are different: they lie on opposite sides of the center of the sphere.
The transformation T converts both of these antipodal points into the same point,
If this were true for only one or small subset of points of the sphere, then these points would just be double points. But since it is true of all points, then it is possible to consider the Roman surface to be homeomorphic to a "sphere modulo antipodes". However, these are not the only identifications that occur under this map. Consequently, the Roman surface is a quotient of the real projective plane RP2 = S2 / (x~-x). Furthermore, this quotient has the special property that it is locally injective, making this an immersion of RP2 into 3-space. It was previously stated that the Roman surface is homeomorphic to RP2, but this was in error.
Read more about this topic: Roman Surface
Famous quotes containing the words relation to the, relation to, relation, real and/or plane:
“Much poetry seems to be aware of its situation in time and of its relation to the metronome, the clock, and the calendar. ... The season or month is there to be felt; the day is there to be seized. Poems beginning “When” are much more numerous than those beginning “Where” of “If.” As the meter is running, the recurrent message tapped out by the passing of measured time is mortality.”
—William Harmon (b. 1938)
“To be a good enough parent one must be able to feel secure in one’s parenthood, and one’s relation to one’s child...The security of the parent about being a parent will eventually become the source of the child’s feeling secure about himself.”
—Bruno Bettelheim (20th century)
“The difference between objective and subjective extension is one of relation to a context solely.”
—William James (1842–1910)
“The real dividing line between early childhood and middle childhood is not between the fifth year and the sixth year—it is more nearly when children are about seven or eight, moving on toward nine. Building the barrier at six has no psychological basis. It has come about only from the historic-economic-political fact that the age of six is when we provide schools for all.”
—James L. Hymes, Jr. (20th century)
“Even though I had let them choose their own socks since babyhood, I was only beginning to learn to trust their adult judgment.. . . I had a sensation very much like the moment in an airplane when you realize that even if you stop holding the plane up by gripping the arms of your seat until your knuckles show white, the plane will stay up by itself. . . . To detach myself from my children . . . I had to achieve a condition which might be called loving objectivity.”
—Anonymous Parent of Adult Children. Ourselves and Our Children, by Boston Women’s Health Book Collective, ch. 5 (1978)