3
$\begingroup$

Let $Y$ be a smooth manifold, and let $\pi:E\to Y$ be a smooth vector bundle over $Y$. Suppose that $X$ is an immersed submanifold of $Y$, which lies in $E$ as the zero set of some smooth section $s:Y\to E$. I am trying to show that $E|_X$ is isomorphic to the normal bundle of $X$ in $Y$ (defined as the quotient bundle $TY|_X/TX$). I proceed as follows.

Let $x\in X$ and $z:Y\to E$ be the zero section. The map $\phi_x:E_x\to T_{z(x)}E,v\mapsto\dot\gamma_v(0)$ (where $\gamma_v(t)=(x,tv)$ is injective and $im(\phi_x)=\ker(d\pi_{z(x)})$, so $0\to E_x\to T_{z(x)}E\to T_xY$ is an exact sequence, which splits since $d\pi_{z(x)}\circ ds_x=id_{T_xY}$. Now the map \begin{aligned} \psi_x:T_{z(x)}E&\to E_x\oplus T_xY \\ w&\mapsto(\tilde\phi^{-1}_x(w-dz_x(d\pi_{z(x)}(w))),d\pi_{z(x)}(w)) \end{aligned} is an iso, where $\tilde\phi_x$ is the map $\phi_x$ with codomain restricted to $\ker(d\pi_{z(x)}$. Hence we get map $F:=p_1\circ\psi_x\circ ds_x$, where $p_1:E_x\oplus T_xY\to E_x$ is the projection.

This map should clearly become my isomorphism, and I have two concrete questions about it.

Unraveling the definitions we see that $v\in T_xY$ is in $\ker(p_1\circ\psi_x\circ ds_X)$ if and only if $dz_x(v)=ds_x(v)$, and from here I want to conclude that this implies that $\ker F=T_xX$, but I'm not quite sure how. The inclusion $T_xX\subset\ker F$ is clear since $z|_X=s|_X\implies dz_x|_{T_xX}=ds_X|_{T_xX}$, but I'm not sure how $dz_x(v)=ds_x(v)$ implies that $v\in T_xX$. We do know that $z|_{X\setminus Y}\neq s|_{X\setminus Y}$, but I am not sure that that implies that $dz_x(v)\neq dz_x(v)$ if $v\in T_xY\setminus T_xX$.

Secondly, I need this map to be surjective, but I have no idea how this follows.

Any help or tips or references are greatly appreciated!

Edit

I think that the surjectivity question can be rephrased: since $z(x)=s(x)$ it holds that $d\pi_{z(x)}\circ ds_x=id_{T_xY}$, so the surjectivity of $p_1\circ\psi_x\circ ds_x$ is equivalent to the surjectivity of $\tilde\phi^{-1}_x(ds_x-dz_x)$, i.e. if each $v\in E_x$ can be written as $\tilde\phi^{-1}(ds_x(u)-dz_x(u))$ for some $u\in T_xY$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Are you interested in a different, perhaps simpler way to approach the problem? If yes, are you familiar with connections on vector bundles? $\endgroup$ – Amitai Yuval Oct 8 '17 at 20:02
  • $\begingroup$ I am and I am. (Although a closing argument on this approach would be optimal.) $\endgroup$ – B. Pasternak Oct 8 '17 at 20:03
2
$\begingroup$

The following is a slightly different approach to the problem (although I suspect it may be the same, just offering an alternative reasoning to the process described in the post).

I am assuming the section $s\in\Gamma(Y,E)$ is transverse to the zero section. Let $\nabla$ be any linear connection on $E$. Consider the following morphism of vector bundles over $X$: $$ \varphi:TY|_X\to E|_X,\quad u\mapsto\nabla_us. $$ (It may be noted that $\varphi$ is, in fact, independent of $\nabla$, but this is not crucial for the argument). The morphism $\varphi$ is onto, and its kernel is $TX$ (this is basically equivalent to the transversality assumption). The claim now follows from the first isomorphism theorem.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ What do you precisely by transverse to the zero section? $\endgroup$ – B. Pasternak Oct 8 '17 at 20:20
  • $\begingroup$ @B.Pasternak Both $s$ and the zero section are smooth maps $Y\to E$, so they may be transverse. In fact, they should be, if you want to conclude that $X$ is a smooth submanifold. $\endgroup$ – Amitai Yuval Oct 8 '17 at 20:28
  • $\begingroup$ I simply don't know the meaning of two sections being transverse in this context. $\endgroup$ – B. Pasternak Oct 8 '17 at 20:31
  • $\begingroup$ @B.Pasternak Two smooth maps $f:M\to K$ and $g:N\to K$ are said to be transverse to one another if for every $(m,n)\in M\times N$ with $f(m)=g(n)$ we have $T_{f(m)=g(n)}K=df(T_mM)+dg(T_nN)$. $\endgroup$ – Amitai Yuval Oct 8 '17 at 20:40
  • $\begingroup$ @B.Pasternak And by the way, the claim does not hold in general without the transversality assumption. $\endgroup$ – Amitai Yuval Oct 8 '17 at 21:44

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.