Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The Gauss–Bonnet theorem say that: If $\Sigma \subset M =\mathbb{R}^3$ is a compact 2-dimensional Riemannian manifold without boundary, then $$ \int_{\Sigma} K = 2\pi\chi_{\Sigma}$$

where $K$ is the Gaussian curvature of $\Sigma$ and $\chi_{\Sigma}$ is the Euler characteristic of $\Sigma$.

In Proposition 7 of http://arxiv.org/abs/0909.1665, $M^3$ is compact (thus $M\ne \mathbb{R}^3$), but they use Gauss-Bonnet. Why?

Moreover, in this case, $K$ is the curvature sectional or the product of principal curvatures of the surface?

Can someone suggest a reference? Thank you!

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 6 down vote accepted

Good question.

The answer is that Gauss-Bonnet does not actually require the hypothesis that $\Sigma$ is embedded (or even immersed) in $\mathbb{R}^3$. Rather, it is an intrinsic statement about abstract Riemannian 2-manifolds. See Robert Greene's notes here, or the Wikipedia page on Gauss-Bonnet, or perhaps John Lee's Riemannian Manifolds book.

Many texts on elementary differential geometry include the hypothesis that $\Sigma \subset \mathbb{R}^3$ because that is the context they're working in. That is, some books don't define abstract manifolds.

In this case, I would interpret $K$ as the sectional curvature. To be honest, I've never seen a definition of "principal curvature" outside the setting of $\mathbb{R}^N$, though my ignorance shouldn't be taken as definitive proof that the concept doesn't exist in more general settings.

Aside: More interesting to me, by the way, is the fact that $\Sigma$ is non-orientable (it is homeomorphic to $\mathbb{RP}^2$). I don't think I've seen a proof of Gauss-Bonnet for the non-orientable setting, but it's apparently not a difficult modification.

share|improve this answer
Hi Jesse. Indeed, integration on manifolds can be defined for compactly supported densities without the need of an orientation (but then, without the use of volume forms), cf. Nicolaescu - "Lectures on the Geometry of Manifolds" sec.3.4.1. Then for compact surfaces, since Gauß curvature is locally defined and a scalar field, there can be an analogue of Gauß-Bonnet in the nonorientable case. Nevertheless, it is not then a remarkable corollary to Atiyah-Singer or Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch, and other index results, since they depend on the surface to have a complex structure, thus an orientation. –  Javier Álvarez Nov 14 '12 at 10:13

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.