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.

In Folland's Introduction to Partial Differential Equations:

A subset $S$ of ${\mathbb R}^n$ is called a hypersurface of class $C^k$($1\leq k\leq\infty$) if for every $x_0\in S$ there is an open set $V\subset{\mathbb R}^n$ containing $x_0$ and a real-valued function $\phi\in C^k(V)$ such that $\nabla\phi$ is nonvanishing on $S\cap V$ and $$ S\cap V=\{x\in V:\phi(x)=0\}.$$

In this case, by the implicit function theorem we can solve the equation $\phi(x)=0$ near $x_0$ for some coordinate $x_i$---for convenience, say $i=n$---to obtain $$x_n=\psi(x_1,\dots,x_{n-1})$$ for some $C^k$ function $\psi$. A neighborhood of $x_0$ in $S$ can then be mapped to a piece of the hyperplane $x_n=0$ by the $C^k$ transformation $$x\to(x',x_n-\psi(x'))\qquad (x'=(x_1,\dots,x_{n-1}))$$ This same neighborhood can also be represented in parametric form as the image of an open set in ${\mathbb R}^{n-1}$(with coordinate $x'$) under the map $$x'\to(x',\psi(x')).$$

Here is my question:

Is the above definition equivalent to say that $S$ is a $C^k$-differentiable manifold?

I learned from S.S. Chern 's Lectures on Differential Geometry the definition as following:

Suppose $M$ is an m-dimensional topological manifold. If a given set of coordinate charts ${\mathcal A} = \{(U,\phi_U),(V,\phi_V),(W,\phi_W),\cdots\}$ on $M$ satisfies the following conditions, then we call ${\mathcal A}$ a $C^r$-differentiable structure on $M$:
1). $\{U,V,W,\cdots\}$ is an open covering of $M$;
2). any two coordinate charts in ${\mathcal A}$ are $C^r$-compatible;
3). ${\mathcal A}$ is maximal, i.e., if a coordinate chart $(\tilde{U},\phi_{\tilde{U}})$ is $C^r$-compatible with all coordinate charts in ${\mathcal A}$, then $(\tilde{U},\phi_{\tilde{U}})\in{\mathcal A}$.
If a $C^r$-differentiable structure is given on $M$, then $M$ is called a $C^r$-differentiable manifold.

1) is not hard to find, 3) can be obtained once one has a covering by compatible charts. I am not able to get 2).

For some particular case, e.g., $S=S^1$ in ${\mathbb R}^{2}$, the answer is yes. However, for arbitrary $S$, I don't know how to find a covering of $S$ by compatible charts.

share|improve this question
    
@Ryan: Thanks for your response in MO. I move the question here. –  Jack Jun 11 '11 at 14:44
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

The version of the Implicit Function Theorem that I like best is a little simpler than the one you're using. It goes like this.

Let $U \subset \mathbb R^n$ be open and $f : U \to \mathbb R^m$ be a $C^k$-function on $U$.

Given $p \in U$ and $Df_p : \mathbb R^n \to \mathbb R^m$ be an onto linear function (equivalently the derivative matrix has rank $m$).

Then there exists a function $\phi : \mathbb R^n \to \mathbb R^{n-m}$ such that $f \oplus \phi : U \to \mathbb R^m \oplus \mathbb R^{n-m} \equiv \mathbb R^n$ is $C^k$ and its derivative at $p$ is an isomorphism (equiv. invertible matrix). So the implicit function theorem applies. Technically my definition is $(f \oplus \phi)(x) = (f(x), \phi(x))$. Usually $\phi$ is chosen to be a linear isomorphism between the kernel of $Df_p$ and $\mathbb R^{n-m}$.

So $f \oplus \phi_{|W}$ is a diffeomorphism onto its image, in particular $(f \oplus \phi)_{|W}^{-1}$ when restricted to $(f\oplus \phi)(W)$ intersected with $\mathbb R^m \times \{0\}^{n-m}$ is the parametrization of $f^{-1}(f(p))$ in the neighbourhood $W$ of $p$. i.e. the function you get from your version of the Implicit Function Theorem.

Anyhow, this formalism provides you with diffeomorphisms. And being a diffeomorphism is a transitive relation under composition. So if you get two charts this way, you can check compatibility by extending them from the `parametrization' ${(f \oplus \phi)_{|W}^{-1}}_{|\mathbb R^m \times \{0\}^{n-m}}$ to the diffeomorphism $(f \oplus \phi)_{|W}^{-1}$.

Also note that since the inverse function theorem preserves the order of differentiability, everything above is at least $C^k$.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks for your answer. I think your version of the Implicit Function Theorem is the same as this, right? –  Jack Jun 11 '11 at 16:29
    
I don't think so but perhaps I missed the point where they convert from $f$ to $f \oplus \phi$ i.e. replacing a function with another function whose domain and range have the same dimension. –  Ryan Budney Jun 11 '11 at 16:37
1  
You can find this version in Spivak's "Calculus on Manifolds" also many introductory manifolds textbooks, like Conlon's. –  Ryan Budney Jun 11 '11 at 16:38
    
Actually, the version of the implicit theorem I posted here is also from Folland's Introduction to PDE. As I understand, what matters here is the dimension of ${\mathbb R}^m$ in your answer. When $m=1$, I will get the version I put. –  Jack Jun 11 '11 at 16:44
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

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.