Why in proof of proposition 6 of http://arxiv.org/abs/0909.1665, they claim that if a embedded surfaces $\Sigma^2 \subset (M^3,g)$ is homeomorphic to $\mathbb{RP}^2$, where $M$ is compact manifold, then, by uniformization theorem, there exist diffeomorphism $\phi: \mathbb{RP}^2 \rightarrow \Sigma$ such that $\phi^{*}g$ is conformal to standard metric on $\mathbb{RP}^2$?

Can someone help me?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Because there is a unique conformal structure on the projective plane. That's a consequence of the uniformization theorem. $\endgroup$ – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Dec 20 '12 at 5:59

I think that in the definition of class $\mathscr F$ "embedded" means "smoothly embedded", not just topologically. Otherwise they would not be talking about Gaussian curvature, etc of an arbitrary surface $\Sigma\in\mathscr F$. So, the surface $\Sigma$ carries a Riemannian metric and is homeomorphic to $\mathbb RP^2$. What does it mean to uniformize $\Sigma$?

Uniformization theorem for surfaces comes in several flavors. Sometimes it's understood just as the existence of a metric of constant curvature on topological surfaces. Other times, it's about biholomorphic equivalence of complex 1-manifolds (Riemann surfaces). Yet another version relates the constant curvature metric to a pre-existing Riemannian metric: namely, they are related by a conformal diffeomorphism such as $\phi$ above. Many sources focus on the orientable case because they care about complex structures. But non-orientable compact surfaces such as $\Sigma$ can be uniformized too. I think the book Teichmüller Theory by Hubbard covers uniformization from the geometric point of view that is most relevant here.


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.