3
$\begingroup$

I want to solve the following exercise from M. Spivak's Calculus on Manifolds:

If $M \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$ is an orientable $(n-1)$-dimensional manifold, show that there is an open set $A \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$ and a differentiable $g:A \to \mathbb{R}^1$ so that $M=g^{-1}(0)$ and $g'(x)$ has rank 1 for $x \in M$. Hint: Problem 5-4 does this locally. Use the orientation to choose consistent local solutions and use partitions of unity.

I don't understand why the orientation part is necessary. Once we express $M$ locally as the zero set of a function, why can't we just extend directly with partitions of unity?

EDIT:

Looking at Ted Shifrin's answer here we can represent $M$ as a zero set of some differentiable function without using any orientation argument.

Thank you!

EDIT2:

Now, I understand why the orientability part is important: If we have a differentiable function $g$ which defines $M$ as $g^{-1}(0)$ which has rank $1$ on $M$, then $\nabla g/\|g\|$ would give a continuous unit normal field, which can induce an orientation for $M$.

What I'm still having difficulties understanding is how to actually use a partition of unity to get a global result, and in particular, how can you guarantee that $M=g^{-1}(0)$ exactly? (the inclusion $g^{-1}(0) \subseteq M$ doesn't seem to be trivial)

Thanks again!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Ted Shifrin's answer was incomplete. (He was responding to a different question, so he didn't bother to write out the details of constructing a global defining function.) See my comment on his question. The upshot is that his argument doesn't work unless you assume the manifold is closed in $\mathbb R^n$, in which case it's automatically orientable. $\endgroup$ – Jack Lee Jun 2 '15 at 0:15
  • $\begingroup$ The natural solution to this is the function "signed distance". You need some tubular neighborhoods and such. Take a look at the book of Guillemin and Pollack on Differential Topology. $\endgroup$ – Orest Bucicovschi Jun 12 '15 at 11:13
5
+100
$\begingroup$

Let $\{U_\alpha\}$ be an open covering of $M$ and $\{g_\alpha:U_\alpha\to\mathbb{R}\}$ functions defining $M$ locally. The orientability guarantees that all $g_\alpha$'s can be chosen so that their gradients point to the same "side" of $M$. Without this condition, once you take partition of unity and sum all $g_\alpha$, you may get non-regular points.

More precisely: If $M$ is oriented there is a smooth non-vanishing normal vector field $N$ on the whole of $M$. When taking $g_\alpha$ like in the previous paragraph, we make sure that for each $\alpha$ we have $$\langle \nabla g_\alpha,N\rangle>0.$$Then we use a partition of unity and get a function $g$, whose gradient satisfies $$\langle \nabla g,N\rangle>0.$$In particular, the gradient does not vanish anywhere on $M$.

Edit: The use of the partition of unity is as follows. Let $\{\varphi_\alpha\}$ be a partition of unity subordinate to the covering $\{U_\alpha\}$. For every $\alpha$ we define$$h_\alpha:M\to\mathbb{R},\qquad h_\alpha(x)=\left\{\begin{array}{cl}\varphi_\alpha(x)g_\alpha(x)&x\in U_\alpha\\0&x\not\in U_\alpha\end{array}\right..$$It is not hard to verify that every $h_\alpha$ is differentiable. Then set $h=\sum h_\alpha$, and you got the function you desire.

The orientation allows us to choose all the $g_\alpha$'s such that whenever $p\in U_{\alpha_1}\cap U_{\alpha_2}$, the values $g_{\alpha_1}(p)$ and $g_{\alpha_2}(p)$ have the same sign. Hence, for any $p\not\in M$, $h(p)$ is a convex combination of non-zero numbers, all having the same sign. This shows $h^{-1}(0)\subset M$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Would you mind showing me what a complete proof looks like? Intuitively I get what you're saying, but I can't write it down. This is not a homework problem, I'm just reading through the textbook. $\endgroup$ – user1337 May 31 '15 at 12:23
  • $\begingroup$ @user1337 I added some details, have a look. $\endgroup$ – Amitai Yuval May 31 '15 at 18:39
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. How would you exactly use the partition of unity to glue these $g_\alpha s$ all together? $\endgroup$ – user1337 Jun 10 '15 at 16:02
  • $\begingroup$ @user1337 Please have a look at the edit. $\endgroup$ – Amitai Yuval Jun 10 '15 at 20:06
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks again. If possible, could you please extend on why "the orientation allows us to choose all the $g_\alpha$'s..."? $\endgroup$ – user1337 Jun 11 '15 at 13:07
2
$\begingroup$

As he says in the hint, you use orientation to choose CONSISTENT local solutions on which you can use partitions of unity.

The reason we need a consistent choice can be seen by thinking of an example. Consider the Moebius Band. If you make a local choice and use partitions of unity to pass the local choice around the band, you will eventually reach a point where you have made a local choice that does not agree with a local choice you have already made. This image, I think, clarifies the point I am trying to make.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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