In Bott & Tu, a tubular neighborhood of a submanifold $S\subset M$ is defined as an open neighborhood $T$ of $S$ in $M$ such that $T$ is diffeomorphic to a vector bundle of rank $\mathrm{codim}\,S$ such that $S$ is diffeomorphic to the zero section. They then claim such tubular neighborhoods always exist and that the normal bundle $NS$ of $S$ in $M$ is the required bundle.

However, the tubular neighborhood states that $T$ is diffeomorphic to a neighborhood of the zero section in $NS$, not to the whole thing. Is it possible to "stretch" the image of $T$ in $NS$ so that it is diffeomorphic to all of $NS$? Spivak seems to have a proof in the compact case, but how does one show this in general, using the tubular neighborhood quoted above?

  • $\begingroup$ I suppose that you may choose your TN so that it works. If e.g. it is locally a product of a coordinate patch and a ball. In the non-compact case I suppose you have to worry about 'loose' ends accumulating at your submanifold (unless you exclude this explicitly). $\endgroup$
    – H. H. Rugh
    Jul 29 '16 at 22:46

Let $E$ be a vector bundle and denote by $Z$ the image of the zero section. Any open neighbourhood $U$ of $Z$ contains an open neighbourhood $V$ of $Z$ such that there is a diffeomorphism $V \to E$ which is the identity on $Z$.

The proof of this fact is easier if the manifold is compact, but it is also true in the non-compact case. See Proposition $2.8$ of these notes from Michael Usher.

Apply the above result to $E = NS$.

As Mike said, the neighbourhood $V$ is a disc bundle of fixed radius (with respect to some Riemannian metric) if the base is compact, or of smoothly decreasing radius if the base is non-compact. You then use the diffeomorphism between a disc and $\mathbb{R}^n $ in each fibre to construct the desired diffeomorphism.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It's also not substantially more difficult in the noncompact case. It's just that instead of being a disc bundle of fixed radius, $V$ is now a disc bundle of smoothing varying radius. $\endgroup$
    – user98602
    Jul 29 '16 at 22:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sure. Not conceptually more difficult, but more work is needed. $\endgroup$ Jul 29 '16 at 22:50

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.