16
$\begingroup$

I know there is no non-vanishing vector field on $S^2$, so I cannot comb the hair on a ball. (I am treating $S^2$ as a manifold without the ambient space $\mathbb R^3$, which amounts to demanding that the vector field is tangential to $S^2$ at every point if you prefer the Euclidean point of view.) Is this still impossible if the hair is unoriented? By unoriented hair I mean that instead of looking at a tangent vector at every point, I am looking at a tangent line. That is, is there a rank one subbundle of $TS^2$ (which is a line bundle on $S^2$)? Geometrical intuition suggests that there is not, but that is far from proof.

I am mostly interested in $S^2$, but I expect the answer is the same for all even-dimensional spheres just like in the oriented case.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I just found this older question on the topic. Should I close this as duplicate? $\endgroup$ – Joonas Ilmavirta May 2 '18 at 17:55
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ OT: holy semantic overloading batman $\endgroup$ – Kuba Ober May 2 '18 at 18:54
  • $\begingroup$ Presumably, you want a continuously varying subbundle. In which case, wouldn't picking a "forward" direction on one tangent line allow one to extend that orientation throughout the sphere? $\endgroup$ – Acccumulation May 2 '18 at 21:06
  • $\begingroup$ @Acccumulation Not necessarily. You can always locally orient the line bundle and thus get a non-vanishing vector field as you describe. This does not always happen globally, as the orientations might not match for topological reasons. The simplest example I could think of is considering a line bundle over the Möbius strip with all lines being "across" the strip. No local orientation of this line bundle can be extended to the whole manifold. $\endgroup$ – Joonas Ilmavirta May 2 '18 at 21:11
  • $\begingroup$ @JoonasIlmavirta But it does seem like, for orientable surfaces, unoriented hair can be combed only if oriented hair can be. $\endgroup$ – Acccumulation May 2 '18 at 21:29
14
$\begingroup$

An alternative way to see why this isn't true is to fix a Riemannian metric. If such a subbundle existed, then restricting to those vectors of norm $1$ would give a two-sheeted covering of $S^2$. If it were disconnected, there would be a nowhere zero vector field on $S^2$, a contradiction. If it were connected, $S^2$ would admit a connected two-sheeted covering, a contradiction with it being simply connected.

$\endgroup$
10
$\begingroup$

No. Line bundles on $S^2$ are classified by $H^1(S^2;\mathbb{Z}/2)=0$ which means that there is only the trivial line bundle $L$ on $S^2$. But then $L\oplus L$ is the trivial bundle hence not the tangent bundle of $S^2$.

An interesting question is if $TS^n$ splits as a direct sum $E\oplus F$ of low dimensional bundles. If $n$ is odd the Euler characteristic is zero, so there is a non-zero vector field. So let us assume $n$ is even.

If $E$ and $F$ are required to be orientable bundles this is not possible: The Euler class is multiplicative and $e(TS^n)$ is twice the generator of $H^n(S^n;\mathbb{Z})$ if $n$ is even and in particular it is non-zero. But if $E$ and $F$ are proper subbundles the euler classes $e(E)$ and $e(F)$ lie in some $H^i(S^n;\mathbb{Z})$ for $0<i<n$ hence $e(E)\cup e(F)=0$ which contradicts the fact that $e(E)\cup e(F)=e(TS^n)\not=0$.

A bundle is orientable iff its determinant bundle has a section, i.e. is a trivial line bundle. But we have seen that the sphere only admits the trivial line bundle. This implies that every bundle on $S^n$ is orientable and the previous argument shows that the tangent bundle cannot split at all.

This discussion btw does not imply that there are no non-trivial bundles on $S^n$ of rank $r<n$, and indeed there are some.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ And, of course, the same holds in any even dimension. $\endgroup$ – anomaly May 2 '18 at 15:48

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.