Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
https://doi.org/10.1...arrow_drop_down
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94...
Part of book or chapter of book . 1983 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94...
Part of book or chapter of book . 1983 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94...
Part of book or chapter of book . 1983 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Topics in Bifurcation Theory

Authors: David G. Schaeffer;

Topics in Bifurcation Theory

Abstract

In this lecture we consider the effects of symmetry on bifurcation problems. Even a simple reflectional symmetry can have important consequences. For example, recall the two problems with the elastic from Lectures 1 and 2 which exhibited pitchfork bifurcations. Why should the pitchfork ever be seen? After all, we saw in the last lecture that a bifurcation diagram which contains either a bifurcation point (i.e., a solution of (2.12)) or and the pitchfork has both. How does it happen that a natural mathematical description of these problems predicts this apparently very unstable phenomenon, a pitchfork? The answer lies in the fact that both these problems possessed a nontrivial reflectional symmetry: u → -u for the compression problem of Lecture 1, u(s) → u (π - s) for the shallow arch of Lecture 2. It turns out that the pitchfork is persistent within the class of functions admitting a nontrivial action of the group Z2. (This fact indicates some of the problems of generalizing Theorem 2.2 to cases where a symmetry group acts.) See Golubitsky and Schaeffer [1979b] for a proof of persistence; here we do not pursue it further.

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    3
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
3
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!