Could someone please tell me why is isomorphic to ?
Thank you so much.
Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+
is isomorphic to , not .
Originally Posted by Shanks is isomorphic to , not . Oh, thanks!
And could you please tell me why is that?
Originally Posted by Shanks is isomorphic to , not . Well, that depends on your notation. The one I have seen the most is in which case it is indeed true that
To prove it, try to generalize the proof of the stereographic projection used to build the Riemann sphere which can be found in any (good) book on basic complex analysis
View Tag Cloud