Question on what constitutes surfaces in R3












1












$begingroup$


Our lecturer gave us the following definition of a surface in $mathbb{R}^3$:
$Gamma$ Is a surface in $mathbb{R}^3$ if for all $yin Gamma$ there exists a coordinate patch $sigma : Dsubsetmathbb{R}^2 rightarrow mathbb{R}^3$ such that $y in text{Im}(sigma)subsetGamma$. From this definition, is it not inferred that the union of two surfaces is a surface? I am confused because he went on to mention that the union of the boundary of the unit sphere and the set ${(x,y,0)|x^2+y^2<1}$ is not a surface. Clearly these are both surfaces so why isn’t their union?






differential-geometry surfaces







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The union of two surfaces is hardly ever a surface.
    $endgroup$
    – Saucy O'Path
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:40










  • $begingroup$
    If the two surfaces are disjoint then their union may be a surface. Not connected but still a surface. Did your definition mention connectedness?
    $endgroup$
    – user25959
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:47












  • $begingroup$
    Nothing about connectedness, no
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:51










  • $begingroup$
    Depending on what you mean by coordinate patch, this is the definition of an embedded surface, or of an immersed surface, or even something else.
    $endgroup$
    – Michał Miśkiewicz
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:58
















1












$begingroup$


Our lecturer gave us the following definition of a surface in $mathbb{R}^3$:
$Gamma$ Is a surface in $mathbb{R}^3$ if for all $yin Gamma$ there exists a coordinate patch $sigma : Dsubsetmathbb{R}^2 rightarrow mathbb{R}^3$ such that $y in text{Im}(sigma)subsetGamma$. From this definition, is it not inferred that the union of two surfaces is a surface? I am confused because he went on to mention that the union of the boundary of the unit sphere and the set ${(x,y,0)|x^2+y^2<1}$ is not a surface. Clearly these are both surfaces so why isn’t their union?






differential-geometry surfaces







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The union of two surfaces is hardly ever a surface.
    $endgroup$
    – Saucy O'Path
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:40










  • $begingroup$
    If the two surfaces are disjoint then their union may be a surface. Not connected but still a surface. Did your definition mention connectedness?
    $endgroup$
    – user25959
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:47












  • $begingroup$
    Nothing about connectedness, no
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:51










  • $begingroup$
    Depending on what you mean by coordinate patch, this is the definition of an embedded surface, or of an immersed surface, or even something else.
    $endgroup$
    – Michał Miśkiewicz
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:58














1












1








1





$begingroup$


Our lecturer gave us the following definition of a surface in $mathbb{R}^3$:
$Gamma$ Is a surface in $mathbb{R}^3$ if for all $yin Gamma$ there exists a coordinate patch $sigma : Dsubsetmathbb{R}^2 rightarrow mathbb{R}^3$ such that $y in text{Im}(sigma)subsetGamma$. From this definition, is it not inferred that the union of two surfaces is a surface? I am confused because he went on to mention that the union of the boundary of the unit sphere and the set ${(x,y,0)|x^2+y^2<1}$ is not a surface. Clearly these are both surfaces so why isn’t their union?






differential-geometry surfaces







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Our lecturer gave us the following definition of a surface in $mathbb{R}^3$:
$Gamma$ Is a surface in $mathbb{R}^3$ if for all $yin Gamma$ there exists a coordinate patch $sigma : Dsubsetmathbb{R}^2 rightarrow mathbb{R}^3$ such that $y in text{Im}(sigma)subsetGamma$. From this definition, is it not inferred that the union of two surfaces is a surface? I am confused because he went on to mention that the union of the boundary of the unit sphere and the set ${(x,y,0)|x^2+y^2<1}$ is not a surface. Clearly these are both surfaces so why isn’t their union?






differential-geometry surfaces




differential-geometry surfaces






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 9 '18 at 23:00







Elo

















asked Dec 9 '18 at 22:37









EloElo

83




83












  • $begingroup$
    The union of two surfaces is hardly ever a surface.
    $endgroup$
    – Saucy O'Path
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:40










  • $begingroup$
    If the two surfaces are disjoint then their union may be a surface. Not connected but still a surface. Did your definition mention connectedness?
    $endgroup$
    – user25959
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:47












  • $begingroup$
    Nothing about connectedness, no
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:51










  • $begingroup$
    Depending on what you mean by coordinate patch, this is the definition of an embedded surface, or of an immersed surface, or even something else.
    $endgroup$
    – Michał Miśkiewicz
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:58


















  • $begingroup$
    The union of two surfaces is hardly ever a surface.
    $endgroup$
    – Saucy O'Path
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:40










  • $begingroup$
    If the two surfaces are disjoint then their union may be a surface. Not connected but still a surface. Did your definition mention connectedness?
    $endgroup$
    – user25959
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:47












  • $begingroup$
    Nothing about connectedness, no
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:51










  • $begingroup$
    Depending on what you mean by coordinate patch, this is the definition of an embedded surface, or of an immersed surface, or even something else.
    $endgroup$
    – Michał Miśkiewicz
    Dec 9 '18 at 22:58
















$begingroup$
The union of two surfaces is hardly ever a surface.
$endgroup$
– Saucy O'Path
Dec 9 '18 at 22:40




$begingroup$
The union of two surfaces is hardly ever a surface.
$endgroup$
– Saucy O'Path
Dec 9 '18 at 22:40












$begingroup$
If the two surfaces are disjoint then their union may be a surface. Not connected but still a surface. Did your definition mention connectedness?
$endgroup$
– user25959
Dec 9 '18 at 22:47






$begingroup$
If the two surfaces are disjoint then their union may be a surface. Not connected but still a surface. Did your definition mention connectedness?
$endgroup$
– user25959
Dec 9 '18 at 22:47














$begingroup$
Nothing about connectedness, no
$endgroup$
– Elo
Dec 9 '18 at 22:51




$begingroup$
Nothing about connectedness, no
$endgroup$
– Elo
Dec 9 '18 at 22:51












$begingroup$
Depending on what you mean by coordinate patch, this is the definition of an embedded surface, or of an immersed surface, or even something else.
$endgroup$
– Michał Miśkiewicz
Dec 9 '18 at 22:58




$begingroup$
Depending on what you mean by coordinate patch, this is the definition of an embedded surface, or of an immersed surface, or even something else.
$endgroup$
– Michał Miśkiewicz
Dec 9 '18 at 22:58










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

Let $S$ be the unit sphere ${(x, y, z) mid x^2+y^2+z^2=1}$ and $T = {(x, y, 0) mid x^2 +y^2<1}$ be the two surfaces you mention and let $Gamma = S cup T$. Then the point $e = (1, 0, 0)$ in $Gamma$ has no neighbourhood in $U$ that is homeomorphic with an open set $D$ of $Bbb{R}^2$. To prove this takes a little work, but it should be clear visually: any neighbourhood of $e$ in $Gamma$ looks locally like the union along their edges of three half-planes and no open subset of $Bbb{R}^2$ looks like that.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    So must the definition be ammended so that $text{Im}(sigma)$ must contain a neighbourhood of every point of $Gamma$?
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:32










  • $begingroup$
    I've changed the notation in my answer to match yours better. The definitions don't need changing. What I am saying is that there can't be a coordinate patch that maps to an open subset of $Gamma$ containing the point $e$.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:38










  • $begingroup$
    I mean the definition in my question. The condition that it maps to an ‘open subset of’ $Gamma$ isn’t implied by the definition in the original question
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:53










  • $begingroup$
    Or maybe I’m misunderstanding the implications of being mapped onto by a coordinate patch
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:57










  • $begingroup$
    I was assuming your definition of coordinate patch was a homeomorphism between an open subset of $\Bbb{R}^2$ and a neighbourhood in $Gamma$ (and if you have one of those, you can find a slight smaller coordinate patch that gives a homeomorphism with an open neighbourhood in $Gamma$). To go into this in more detail, you need to tell us exactly what definition of "coordinate patch" you are using.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:59













Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3033136%2fquestion-on-what-constitutes-surfaces-in-r3%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









0












$begingroup$

Let $S$ be the unit sphere ${(x, y, z) mid x^2+y^2+z^2=1}$ and $T = {(x, y, 0) mid x^2 +y^2<1}$ be the two surfaces you mention and let $Gamma = S cup T$. Then the point $e = (1, 0, 0)$ in $Gamma$ has no neighbourhood in $U$ that is homeomorphic with an open set $D$ of $Bbb{R}^2$. To prove this takes a little work, but it should be clear visually: any neighbourhood of $e$ in $Gamma$ looks locally like the union along their edges of three half-planes and no open subset of $Bbb{R}^2$ looks like that.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    So must the definition be ammended so that $text{Im}(sigma)$ must contain a neighbourhood of every point of $Gamma$?
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:32










  • $begingroup$
    I've changed the notation in my answer to match yours better. The definitions don't need changing. What I am saying is that there can't be a coordinate patch that maps to an open subset of $Gamma$ containing the point $e$.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:38










  • $begingroup$
    I mean the definition in my question. The condition that it maps to an ‘open subset of’ $Gamma$ isn’t implied by the definition in the original question
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:53










  • $begingroup$
    Or maybe I’m misunderstanding the implications of being mapped onto by a coordinate patch
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:57










  • $begingroup$
    I was assuming your definition of coordinate patch was a homeomorphism between an open subset of $\Bbb{R}^2$ and a neighbourhood in $Gamma$ (and if you have one of those, you can find a slight smaller coordinate patch that gives a homeomorphism with an open neighbourhood in $Gamma$). To go into this in more detail, you need to tell us exactly what definition of "coordinate patch" you are using.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:59


















0












$begingroup$

Let $S$ be the unit sphere ${(x, y, z) mid x^2+y^2+z^2=1}$ and $T = {(x, y, 0) mid x^2 +y^2<1}$ be the two surfaces you mention and let $Gamma = S cup T$. Then the point $e = (1, 0, 0)$ in $Gamma$ has no neighbourhood in $U$ that is homeomorphic with an open set $D$ of $Bbb{R}^2$. To prove this takes a little work, but it should be clear visually: any neighbourhood of $e$ in $Gamma$ looks locally like the union along their edges of three half-planes and no open subset of $Bbb{R}^2$ looks like that.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    So must the definition be ammended so that $text{Im}(sigma)$ must contain a neighbourhood of every point of $Gamma$?
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:32










  • $begingroup$
    I've changed the notation in my answer to match yours better. The definitions don't need changing. What I am saying is that there can't be a coordinate patch that maps to an open subset of $Gamma$ containing the point $e$.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:38










  • $begingroup$
    I mean the definition in my question. The condition that it maps to an ‘open subset of’ $Gamma$ isn’t implied by the definition in the original question
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:53










  • $begingroup$
    Or maybe I’m misunderstanding the implications of being mapped onto by a coordinate patch
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:57










  • $begingroup$
    I was assuming your definition of coordinate patch was a homeomorphism between an open subset of $\Bbb{R}^2$ and a neighbourhood in $Gamma$ (and if you have one of those, you can find a slight smaller coordinate patch that gives a homeomorphism with an open neighbourhood in $Gamma$). To go into this in more detail, you need to tell us exactly what definition of "coordinate patch" you are using.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:59
















0












0








0





$begingroup$

Let $S$ be the unit sphere ${(x, y, z) mid x^2+y^2+z^2=1}$ and $T = {(x, y, 0) mid x^2 +y^2<1}$ be the two surfaces you mention and let $Gamma = S cup T$. Then the point $e = (1, 0, 0)$ in $Gamma$ has no neighbourhood in $U$ that is homeomorphic with an open set $D$ of $Bbb{R}^2$. To prove this takes a little work, but it should be clear visually: any neighbourhood of $e$ in $Gamma$ looks locally like the union along their edges of three half-planes and no open subset of $Bbb{R}^2$ looks like that.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Let $S$ be the unit sphere ${(x, y, z) mid x^2+y^2+z^2=1}$ and $T = {(x, y, 0) mid x^2 +y^2<1}$ be the two surfaces you mention and let $Gamma = S cup T$. Then the point $e = (1, 0, 0)$ in $Gamma$ has no neighbourhood in $U$ that is homeomorphic with an open set $D$ of $Bbb{R}^2$. To prove this takes a little work, but it should be clear visually: any neighbourhood of $e$ in $Gamma$ looks locally like the union along their edges of three half-planes and no open subset of $Bbb{R}^2$ looks like that.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Dec 9 '18 at 23:36

























answered Dec 9 '18 at 23:24









Rob ArthanRob Arthan

29.2k42966




29.2k42966












  • $begingroup$
    So must the definition be ammended so that $text{Im}(sigma)$ must contain a neighbourhood of every point of $Gamma$?
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:32










  • $begingroup$
    I've changed the notation in my answer to match yours better. The definitions don't need changing. What I am saying is that there can't be a coordinate patch that maps to an open subset of $Gamma$ containing the point $e$.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:38










  • $begingroup$
    I mean the definition in my question. The condition that it maps to an ‘open subset of’ $Gamma$ isn’t implied by the definition in the original question
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:53










  • $begingroup$
    Or maybe I’m misunderstanding the implications of being mapped onto by a coordinate patch
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:57










  • $begingroup$
    I was assuming your definition of coordinate patch was a homeomorphism between an open subset of $\Bbb{R}^2$ and a neighbourhood in $Gamma$ (and if you have one of those, you can find a slight smaller coordinate patch that gives a homeomorphism with an open neighbourhood in $Gamma$). To go into this in more detail, you need to tell us exactly what definition of "coordinate patch" you are using.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:59




















  • $begingroup$
    So must the definition be ammended so that $text{Im}(sigma)$ must contain a neighbourhood of every point of $Gamma$?
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:32










  • $begingroup$
    I've changed the notation in my answer to match yours better. The definitions don't need changing. What I am saying is that there can't be a coordinate patch that maps to an open subset of $Gamma$ containing the point $e$.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:38










  • $begingroup$
    I mean the definition in my question. The condition that it maps to an ‘open subset of’ $Gamma$ isn’t implied by the definition in the original question
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:53










  • $begingroup$
    Or maybe I’m misunderstanding the implications of being mapped onto by a coordinate patch
    $endgroup$
    – Elo
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:57










  • $begingroup$
    I was assuming your definition of coordinate patch was a homeomorphism between an open subset of $\Bbb{R}^2$ and a neighbourhood in $Gamma$ (and if you have one of those, you can find a slight smaller coordinate patch that gives a homeomorphism with an open neighbourhood in $Gamma$). To go into this in more detail, you need to tell us exactly what definition of "coordinate patch" you are using.
    $endgroup$
    – Rob Arthan
    Dec 9 '18 at 23:59


















$begingroup$
So must the definition be ammended so that $text{Im}(sigma)$ must contain a neighbourhood of every point of $Gamma$?
$endgroup$
– Elo
Dec 9 '18 at 23:32




$begingroup$
So must the definition be ammended so that $text{Im}(sigma)$ must contain a neighbourhood of every point of $Gamma$?
$endgroup$
– Elo
Dec 9 '18 at 23:32












$begingroup$
I've changed the notation in my answer to match yours better. The definitions don't need changing. What I am saying is that there can't be a coordinate patch that maps to an open subset of $Gamma$ containing the point $e$.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 9 '18 at 23:38




$begingroup$
I've changed the notation in my answer to match yours better. The definitions don't need changing. What I am saying is that there can't be a coordinate patch that maps to an open subset of $Gamma$ containing the point $e$.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 9 '18 at 23:38












$begingroup$
I mean the definition in my question. The condition that it maps to an ‘open subset of’ $Gamma$ isn’t implied by the definition in the original question
$endgroup$
– Elo
Dec 9 '18 at 23:53




$begingroup$
I mean the definition in my question. The condition that it maps to an ‘open subset of’ $Gamma$ isn’t implied by the definition in the original question
$endgroup$
– Elo
Dec 9 '18 at 23:53












$begingroup$
Or maybe I’m misunderstanding the implications of being mapped onto by a coordinate patch
$endgroup$
– Elo
Dec 9 '18 at 23:57




$begingroup$
Or maybe I’m misunderstanding the implications of being mapped onto by a coordinate patch
$endgroup$
– Elo
Dec 9 '18 at 23:57












$begingroup$
I was assuming your definition of coordinate patch was a homeomorphism between an open subset of $\Bbb{R}^2$ and a neighbourhood in $Gamma$ (and if you have one of those, you can find a slight smaller coordinate patch that gives a homeomorphism with an open neighbourhood in $Gamma$). To go into this in more detail, you need to tell us exactly what definition of "coordinate patch" you are using.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 9 '18 at 23:59






$begingroup$
I was assuming your definition of coordinate patch was a homeomorphism between an open subset of $\Bbb{R}^2$ and a neighbourhood in $Gamma$ (and if you have one of those, you can find a slight smaller coordinate patch that gives a homeomorphism with an open neighbourhood in $Gamma$). To go into this in more detail, you need to tell us exactly what definition of "coordinate patch" you are using.
$endgroup$
– Rob Arthan
Dec 9 '18 at 23:59




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3033136%2fquestion-on-what-constitutes-surfaces-in-r3%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Berounka

Image
Berounka.mw-parser-output .entete.map{background-image:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7a/Picto_infobox_map.png")} Caractéristiques Longueur 139  km Bassin 8 861  km 2 Bassin collecteur Elbe Débit moyen ? Cours Source Confluence de la Mže et de la Radbuza · Localisation Pilsen · Altitude 305  m · Coordonnées 49° 45′ 13″ N, 13° 23′ 24″ E Confluence Vltava · Localisation Prague · Altitude 187  m · Coordonnées 49° 59′ 43″ N, 14° 24′ 04″ E Géographie Pays traversés   République tchèque modifier   La Berounka est une rivière de la République tchèque. Elle porte le nom de Mže depuis sa source en Allemagne près de la frontière jusqu'à sa confluence avec la Radbuza à Plzeň. Elle continue ensuite sous le nom de Berounka jusqu'à sa confluence avec la Vltava, près de Prague. La rivière est une destination prisée pour les amateurs de canoë, qui appréc...
Read more

Sphinx de Gizeh

Image
Pour les articles homonymes, voir Sphinx. Sphinx de Gizeh.mw-parser-output .entete.egypte-antique{background-image:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Picto_infobox_ancient_Egypt.png")} Site d'Égypte antique Le visage du sphinx de Gizeh. Noms en arabe أبو الهول , Abou al-Hôl Localisation Région Basse-Égypte Coordonnées 29° 58′ 31″ nord, 31° 08′ 16″ est Géolocalisation sur la carte : Égypte Sphinx de Gizeh modifier   Le sphinx de Gizeh est la statue thérianthrope qui se dresse devant les grandes pyramides du plateau de Gizeh, en Basse-Égypte. Sculpture monumentale monolithique la plus grande du monde [ 1 ] avec 73,5 mètres de longueur, 14 mètres de largeur et 20,22 mètres de hauteur, elle représente un sphinx couchant. Réalisée vers -2500, elle serait attribuée à Djédefrê, l'un des pharaons de la IV e  dynastie, représentant son père le pharaon Khéops. Sommaire 1 Étymologie 2 Desc...
Read more

Different font size/position of beamer's navigation symbols template's content depending on regular/plain...

Image
3 Let's suppose I'd like to divert the navigation symbols template (e.g. in order replace them by the frame numbers, see this bug report ;) I would be facing troubles regarding the font size/position, depending on regular/plain frames, as shown by the following MCE. How could I get rid of these troubles? documentclass{beamer} usetheme{PaloAlto} setbeamertemplate{navigation symbols}{insertframenumber/inserttotalframenumber} begin{document} begin{frame} frametitle{A regular frame} end{frame} begin{frame}[plain] frametitle{A plain frame} end{frame} end{document} beamer header-footer share | improve this question asked Dec 10 '18 a...
Read more