Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $M$ be a smooth manifold ($dim\ge 1$). Let $f:M\to\mathbb{R}$ be a positive continuous function. Prove there is a smooth map $g\in C^{\infty}(M)$ such that $0<g<f$.

I knew this would involve a partition of unity. I took a locally finite cover of $M$ by precompact open sets ${\bf U}=\{U_i\}_{i\in I}$. Since $f$ is continuous I know $f$ attains a minimum on each ${\rm cl}(U_i)$, say at $x_i$, and that this minimum is still positive. So I defined maps $g_i: U_i\to\mathbb{R}$ given as a constant maps: $g_i(x)=\epsilon_i$, where $\epsilon_i$ is chosen to be $0<\epsilon_i<f(x_i)$. But each $x\in M$ is contained in only finitely many $U_i$, so I defined $h(x)=\min{\{g_i(x)\;|\; x\in U_i\}}$. Now I take a partition of unity $\{\psi_i:M\to\mathbb{R}\}_{i\in I}$ subordinate to ${\bf U}$. My thinking is to smoothly stitch together these constant maps... but I'm not sure what to do from here. Should I define $g(x)=\sum_{i\in I}{\psi_i(x)\,h(x)}$? I know each of these sums will be finite because $supp(\psi_i)\subseteq U_i$, but does this function actually do what I want it to? I thought at first it would, but now it just looks like I'm multiplying by $1$ in a really fancy way...

Thanks for your help

share|cite|improve this question
The stitching together to make h a smooth function is tricky, since taking a min of smooth functions doesn't give you a smooth function. Otherwise, what you are doing is reasonable. I'd personally take a good cover of $M$ by coordinate charts so I could do the smoothing in $\mathbb{R}^n$, for simplicity. – Sam Lisi Oct 5 '11 at 19:26
up vote 7 down vote accepted

Do not start by fixing a covering ${\bf U}=\{U_i\}_{i\in I}$ of $M$ ! Here is how you might proceed.

For each $m\in M$ choose an open neigbourhood $ U_m$ of $m$ and a constant $\epsilon _m\gt0$ with $\epsilon_m \lt f$ on $ U_m$.
Then choose a partition of unity $(\phi _m)_{m\in M}$ subordinate to the covering $\mathcal U=(U_m)_{m\in M}$.
The map $g=\sum\limits_{m\in M} \epsilon_m \phi _m$ is of class $\mathcal C^\infty$ and satisfies, as required, $0\lt g\lt f$. That's all.

Warning I think the apparent difficulty of this exercise comes from the common misconception that if you have an open covering $(U_i)_{i\in I}$ of a paracompact manifold and you want a subordinate partition of unity $(\phi_i)_{i\in I}$, then you should impose something on the covering, like being locally finite or denumerable, or on the $U_i$'s, like being relatively compact.
This is actually not necessary at all: the $\phi_i$'s always exist, they are $\geq 0$, their supports form a locally finite collection of closed sets $supp(\phi_i)\subset U_i$ [even if the initial covering $(U_i)_{i\in I}$ was $not$ locally finite!] and of course $\sum\limits_{i\in I} \phi_i=1$.
This pleasantly general result is stated and proved correctly in John M. Lee's book, on page 55.

share|cite|improve this answer

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.