How can I use Klingenberg's Lemma to construct an alternative proof of Hadamard's theorem?

Hadamard's theorem

Let $M$ be a complete Riemannian manifold, simply connected, with sectional curvature $K(p,\sigma) \le 0$, for all $p \in M$ and for all $\sigma \subset T_p(M)$. Then $M$ is diffeomorphic to $\mathbb R^n$, $n = \dim M$; more precisely, $\exp_p : T_p M \to M$ is a diffeomorphism.

(do Carmo, Riemannian Geometry, p. 149)

Klingenberg's Lemma

Let $M$ be a complete Riemannian manifold with sectional curvature $K \le K_0$, where $K_0$ is a positive constant. Let $p,q \in M$ and let $\gamma_0$ and $\gamma_1$ be two different geodesics joining $p$ to $q$ with $\ell(\gamma_0) \le \ell(\gamma_1)$. Assume that $\gamma_0$ is homotopic to $\gamma_1$, that is, there exists a continuous family of curves $\alpha_t$, $t \in [0,1]$ such that $\alpha_0=\gamma_0$ and $\alpha_1=\gamma_1$. Then there exists $t_0 \in [0,1]$ such that $\ell(\gamma_0)+\ell(\alpha_{t_0}) \ge \frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{K_0}}$.

(do Carmo, Riemannian Geometry, pp, 235-236)

Attempted proof:

Since $M$ is complete, by the Hopf-Rinow Theorem (Theorem 2.8 of Chapter 7 in do Carmo), there exists a geodesic $\gamma$ joining $p,q \in M$. Since $M$ is simply connected, the geodesic is unique. Because if two such geodesics exist, then they would be homotopic, and Klingenberg's lemma would assert that there exist a sequence of curves of lengths $\ge \pi\sqrt n$ in this homotopy.


I am not sure how the fact that the geodesic being unique implies that $\exp_p : T_p M \to M$ is a diffeomorphism. However, if this implication is true, then I think that should complete my proof. At the very least least, I am aware that, since $M$ is (geodesically) complete, $\exp_p$ is defined for all $\sigma \in T_p(M)$.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Your statement of Klingenberg's lemma is messed up -- the hypothesis should be $K\le K_0$, not $K\ge K_0$. And more importantly, you've left out half of the hypothesis and all of the conclusion. $\endgroup$
    – Jack Lee
    May 16 '17 at 1:17

For a diffeomorphism, we must show surjective and injective.

Surjectiveness : For any $q\in M$, there is a minimizing geodesic from $p$ to $q$, i.e., $c(t)=\exp_p\ tv,\ |v|=1$. Hence $c({\rm dist}\ (p,q))=q$ so that the map $\exp_p$ is a surjective map.

Injectiveness : If $\exp_p\ v=\exp_p\ w=q\ \ast$, then we have two geodesics $c_1(t)=\exp_p\ tv,\ c_2(t)=\exp_p\ tw$ from $p$ to $q$. By uniqueness, $v=Cw$ for some $C$. And $\ast$ implies that $C=1$.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Of course you also need to show the differential is not zero. $\endgroup$
    – user99914
    May 16 '17 at 11:29

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.