Chvátal graph: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
en>YFdyh-bot
m r2.7.3) (Robot: Adding pt:Grafo de Chvátal
 
en>Yobot
m External links: WP:CHECKWIKI error fixes / special characters in sortkey fixed using AWB (9427)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
What if I were tell you a secret that could change the way you look at "cold" calls.<br>What if that secret was something that would help you in other areas of your business, like networking, public speaking, meetings...the whole nine yards.<br>And what if I told you that the secret comes long before you pick up the phone, face a group, or even open your mouth?<br><br>Would you want to know what that secret is?<br>Before I give it all away, [http://Mondediplo.com/spip.php?page=recherche&recherche=let%27s+talk let's talk] about fear. Fear is both a motivator and a demolition derby, all in one. Think about when fear motivated you. For my colleague, fear happened when he lost pretty much everything dear to him: His job, his significant other, his house, his income...with the roots of that fear of loss going much farther back in his history.<br><br>I guess what I am suggesting to you is that you trace it back to what and where you were when fear kicked you in the knees and brought you down.<br>You're reading this, so you obviously survived. And no doubt scars were left, but as another colleague of mine says, "Maturity is a measure of how well you wear your scars." And yes, I am surrounded by a pretty remarkable team. This same colleague says that someone she loves deeply always says, "If that is the worst that has happened to you...may you be so lucky," and that if you are can say that about most things, you're doing pretty well.<br><br>The reason I suggest you trace it back is that it helps you put fears in perspective.<br>The next thing I suggest is that you take the phrase, "Fear of Cold Calling" and change it! That's the marvel of the English language, or any language. You can change the phrase, thereby changing the whole meaning.<br>For me, I would change it to, "Excitement about Sharing What I Have To Offer With Willing Ears". Why? Because this puts the focus where it needs  [http://tinyurl.com/nqbkz6z ugg outlet] to be: On what you are offering rather than the phone and the call.<br><br>If you are not elated about what you have to offer, you should fear that call. Because that means you  [http://tinyurl.com/nqbkz6z http://tinyurl.com/nqbkz6z] are unsure, and that lack of confidence will show up in your posture, expression, voice, and message.<br>Now, maybe you're asking, "What's posture and expression got to do with it. I'm on the phone, for Pete's sake. It's not like they can see me."<br><br>But the fact is, they can - and do see you--through your voice. Think of the last time you got a call from someone trying to sell you something. Did you hang up on them? Bet you had a pretty good picture in your head of who they were, what they looked like, etc.<br>Yeah. Don't be them.<br>Instead, script out what's exciting about what you want to offer the person you're "warm" calling. Who says it has to be cold. Turn the faucet the other way. Warm it up.<br><br>Next, accept that everyone isn't going to like you, your call, or your offer. So, put up your "Shift" shield. You can lose a letter there, if you  [http://tinyurl.com/nqbkz6z ugg boots] like, but the reason I say "shift" is that in life, no matter what, shift happens. The conversation can go one way or another, and you need to be prepared for either.<br><br>Of course, it's nicer if the shift is a positive shift and not that negative shift that we all could do without. But, while  [http://tinyurl.com/nqbkz6z ugg outlet] you can't always control the reaction of the person you're calling, you can control how you accept the shift. If  [http://tinyurl.com/nqbkz6z ugg boots] you have your "shift" shield up then anything [http://www.Reddit.com/r/howto/search?q=negative negative] that happens can slide right off it and not hit you personally.<br><br>Above all else, remember the best way to eliminate the fear of cold calling is to define for yourself before the call who the person and company is that you're calling, what are their greatest challenges, how your product or service can help them, and how to get a hold of you for more information.<br>So let's review:<br><br>1. Trace your fear - where did it begin? How can you change your perspective about it?<br>[http://tinyurl.com/nqbkz6z ugg boots sale] 2. Change the language of the fear to reflect something exciting and positive.<br>3. Put on your "shift shield" and let the negative stuff slide off<br>4. Make sure that YOU are excited about what you're offering and outlay the benefits to the person you're calling.<br><br>For me, personally, my business is business coaching. Not an easy thing to sell, by the way, since a lot of people don't know what a business coach is or does. But I do know that all business owners are challenged by management, time, team, and money, so my excitement comes in knowing that processes and strategies I have to offer them can help them improve and grow their company in a relatively short amount of time.<br><br>Knowing that I can help them is my ignition switch, so I look at the "call" as the key to turning that switch on!<br>So, now it's time for you to start your engines. The person you're calling is the key.
In [[differential geometry]] the '''Hitchin&ndash;Thorpe inequality''' is a famous relation which restricts the topology of [[4-manifold]]s that carry an [[Einstein manifold|Einstein metric]].
 
== Statement of the Hitchin&ndash;Thorpe inequality ==
Let ''M'' be a compact, oriented, smooth four-dimensional manifold.  If there exists a [[Riemannian metric]] on ''M'' which is an [[Einstein metric]], then following inequality holds
 
: <math>\chi(M) \geq \frac{3}{2}|\tau(M)|,</math>
 
where <math>\chi(M)</math> is the [[Euler characteristic]] of <math>M</math> and <math>\tau(M)</math> is the [[signature (topology)|signature]] of <math>M</math>. This inequality was first stated by John Thorpe<ref>J. Thorpe, ''Some remarks on on the Gauss-Bonnet formula'', J. Math. Mech. 18 (1969) pp. 779--786.</ref> in a footnote to a 1969 paper focusing
on manifolds of higher dimension. [[Nigel Hitchin]] then rediscovered the inequality, and gave a complete characterization <ref>N. Hitchin, ''On compact four-dimensional Einstein manifolds'', J. Diff. Geom. 9 (1974) pp. 435--442.</ref> of the equality  case  in 1974; he found that if <math>(M,g)</math> is an Einstein manifold with <math>\chi(M) = \frac{3}{2}|\tau(M)|,</math> then <math>(M,g)</math> must be a flat torus, a [[Calabi&ndash;Yau manifold]], or a quotient thereof.
 
== Idea of the proof ==
The main ingredients in the proof of the Hitchin&ndash;Thorpe inequality are the [[Ricci decomposition|decomposition]] of the [[Riemann curvature tensor]] and the [[Generalized Gauss-Bonnet theorem]].
 
== Failure of the converse ==
A natural question to ask is whether the Hitchin&ndash;Thorpe inequality provides a [[sufficient condition]] for the existence of Einstein metrics.  In 1995, [[Claude LeBrun]] and
Andrea Sambusetti  independently showed that the answer is no:  there exist infinitely many non-homeomorphic compact, smooth, oriented 4-manifolds ''M'' that carry no Einstein metrics but nevertheless satisfy
 
: <math>\chi(M) > \frac{3}{2}|\tau(M)|.</math>
 
LeBrun's examples <ref>[[Claude LeBrun|C. LeBrun]], ''Four-manifolds without Einstein Metrics'', Math. Res. Letters 3 (1996) pp. 133--147.</ref> are actually simply connected, and the relevant obstruction depends on the smooth structure of the manifold. By contrast,  Sambusetti's obstruction <ref>A. Sambusetti, ''An obstruction to the existence of Einstein metrics on 4-manifolds'', C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris 322 (1996) pp. 1213--1218.</ref> only applies to 4-manifolds with infinite fundamental group, but the volume-entropy estimate he uses to prove non-existence  only depends on the homotopy type of the manifold.
 
==Footnotes==
<references/>
 
== References ==
*{{cite book | first = Arthur L. | last = Besse | title = Einstein Manifolds | series = Classics in Mathematics | publisher = Springer | location = Berlin | year = 1987 | isbn = 3-540-74120-8}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Hitchin-Thorpe inequality}}
[[Category:Riemannian manifolds|Einstein manifolds]]
[[Category:Geometric inequalities]]
[[Category:4-manifolds|Einstein manifold]]

Latest revision as of 09:44, 20 August 2013

In differential geometry the Hitchin–Thorpe inequality is a famous relation which restricts the topology of 4-manifolds that carry an Einstein metric.

Statement of the Hitchin–Thorpe inequality

Let M be a compact, oriented, smooth four-dimensional manifold. If there exists a Riemannian metric on M which is an Einstein metric, then following inequality holds

χ(M)32|τ(M)|,

where χ(M) is the Euler characteristic of M and τ(M) is the signature of M. This inequality was first stated by John Thorpe[1] in a footnote to a 1969 paper focusing on manifolds of higher dimension. Nigel Hitchin then rediscovered the inequality, and gave a complete characterization [2] of the equality case in 1974; he found that if (M,g) is an Einstein manifold with χ(M)=32|τ(M)|, then (M,g) must be a flat torus, a Calabi–Yau manifold, or a quotient thereof.

Idea of the proof

The main ingredients in the proof of the Hitchin–Thorpe inequality are the decomposition of the Riemann curvature tensor and the Generalized Gauss-Bonnet theorem.

Failure of the converse

A natural question to ask is whether the Hitchin–Thorpe inequality provides a sufficient condition for the existence of Einstein metrics. In 1995, Claude LeBrun and Andrea Sambusetti independently showed that the answer is no: there exist infinitely many non-homeomorphic compact, smooth, oriented 4-manifolds M that carry no Einstein metrics but nevertheless satisfy

χ(M)>32|τ(M)|.

LeBrun's examples [3] are actually simply connected, and the relevant obstruction depends on the smooth structure of the manifold. By contrast, Sambusetti's obstruction [4] only applies to 4-manifolds with infinite fundamental group, but the volume-entropy estimate he uses to prove non-existence only depends on the homotopy type of the manifold.

Footnotes

  1. J. Thorpe, Some remarks on on the Gauss-Bonnet formula, J. Math. Mech. 18 (1969) pp. 779--786.
  2. N. Hitchin, On compact four-dimensional Einstein manifolds, J. Diff. Geom. 9 (1974) pp. 435--442.
  3. C. LeBrun, Four-manifolds without Einstein Metrics, Math. Res. Letters 3 (1996) pp. 133--147.
  4. A. Sambusetti, An obstruction to the existence of Einstein metrics on 4-manifolds, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris 322 (1996) pp. 1213--1218.

References

  • 20 year-old Real Estate Agent Rusty from Saint-Paul, has hobbies and interests which includes monopoly, property developers in singapore and poker. Will soon undertake a contiki trip that may include going to the Lower Valley of the Omo.

    My blog: http://www.primaboinca.com/view_profile.php?userid=5889534