I observed some naive examples. Spheres, for example, when we cut out one point, can be embedded into $\mathbb{R}^n$. And if we cut out a measure zero set of a projective space, it can be embedded into the Euclidean space of the same dimension. So I wonder if all manifolds can be embedded into a same dimensional Euclidean space when we cut out a measure zero set? Can anyone prove it or disprove it by giving me some counterexamples?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ +1, interesting question! Another way of phrasing it is, how big can we make a chart? I tried to make a title that was easier to parse, but feel free to change it to something else if you want. $\endgroup$ Mar 6 '13 at 1:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Zev: In your phrasing, the question is a duplicate of both math.stackexchange.com/questions/11769/… and also of math.stackexchange.com/questions/18083/…. I'm not sure what the policy is on closing because something is provable equivalent to a duplicate ;-). $\endgroup$ Mar 6 '13 at 1:46
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ One way to get at this question is to put a Riemannian metric on the manifold and then to consider how big the cut locus of a point can be. I believe it is known that the cut-locus of a point has measure zero, although I forget the proof. If this is the case, you could always remove a measure zero set and then use the exponential map at a point to get the required embedding. $\endgroup$
    – treble
    Mar 6 '13 at 1:46
  • $\begingroup$ What is cut locus? $\endgroup$
    – lee
    Mar 6 '13 at 13:16
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Another idea would be to take a Morse function with a unique minimum. Then, take the union of all the ascending manifolds from higher index critical points. This is of codimension 1 and thus of measure 0. I'm pretty sure the complement is the ascending manifold of the minimum and thus diffeomorphic to a ball. Oh, wait, that's the link that Jason gave. Sorry. $\endgroup$
    – Sam Lisi
    Mar 20 '13 at 13:39

This question was essentially answered here, namely, that the cut-locus has measure zero (see the references provided in the link). I assume that your manifold $M$ is smooth, otherwise, I am not sure what notion of measure zero you would be using. I will also assume that $M$ is connected. (If not, apply this argument to each connected component.) Then, put a complete Riemannian metric on $M$, consider the cut-locus $C(p)$ of a point $p\in M$ and the open subset $U(p)=M\setminus C(p)$. The exponential map $\exp_p: T_pM\to M$ restricts to a diffeomorphism $V(p)\to U(p)$, where $V(p)\subset T_pM$ is a certain open subset (diffeomorphic to the open $n$-ball, where $n$ is the dimension of $M$).

One can ask a similar question in the context of connected $n$-dimensional topological manifolds $M$. Instead of removing a measure zero set, one can remove a closed nowhere dense subset. Then in all dimensions but 4 it follows from the results in the book by Kirby and Siebenmann that $M$ contains an open subset $U$ homeomorphic to $R^n$. (Maybe it was also known prior to their work, I am not sure.) I do not know what to say about dimension 4.

One last thing, Sullivan proved that every topological manifold $M$ of dimension $\ne 4$ admits a unique Lipschitz structure, i.e., an atlas where transition maps are locally Lipshitz. This implies that topological $n$-manifolds ($n\ne 4$) have a well-defined notion of measure zero sets (very indirect though). However, I do not know if the residual set in Kirby-Sibenmann will have measure zero in this sense, this goes well beyond my understanding of the work of their work and the one by Sullivan.

Edit. A better reference for topological manifolds (instead of Kirby-Siebenmann) is in my answer here, to papers by Brown (compact case) and Berlanga (noncompact case).

  • $\begingroup$ I know, that every manifold can be equipped with a Riemannian metric. But what ensures, that we can put a complete Riemannian metric on every manifold? $\endgroup$
    – hase_olaf
    May 18 '16 at 9:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @hase_olaf It is a theorem, and not a difficult one, that every Riemannian metric conformal to a complete one. Alternatively, take a pull back of the flat metrics using a proper embedding in Euclidean space (Whitney embedding theorem). The pull back will be complete. $\endgroup$ May 18 '16 at 13:16

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.