8
$\begingroup$

I am trying to work out the details of following example from page 101 of Tu's An Introduction to Manifolds:

Example 9.3. Let $\Gamma$ be the graph of the function $f(x) = \sin(1/x)$ on the interval $]0, 1[$, and let $S$ be the union of $\Gamma$ and the open interval $I=\{(0,y)\in \mathbb{R^2} |−1<y<1\}$.

The subset $S$ of $\mathbb{R^2}$ is not a regular submanifold for the following reason: if $p$ is in the interval $I$, then there is no adapted chart containing $p$, since any sufficiently small neighborhood $U$ of $p$ in $\mathbb{R^2}$ intersects $S$ in infinitely many components.

Using Tu's definitions, I need to show that given a neighborhood $U$ of $p$, there exists no homeomorphism $\phi$ from $U$ onto an open set of $V \subset\mathbb{R^2}$ with the property that $U \cap S$ is the pre-image with respect to $\phi$ of the $x$ or $y$ axes intersected with $V$.

I am not sure where the fact that $U \cap S$ has infinitely many components comes into play. I tried to derive a contradiction using this fact; but even if restrict my attention to connected neighborhoods $U$ of $p$, the intersection of the connected set $\phi(U)$ with the $x$ or $y$ axes might have infinitely many components (I think), so there's no contradiction with the fact that homeomorphism preserves components.

I would appreciate any help!

$\endgroup$
8
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ denote the $x$-axis. Assume that $U\ni p$ is open and $\phi(U)$ is an open subset of $\mathbb R^2$ with $\phi:U\to \phi(U)$ a homeomorphism. If $\phi(U)$ intersects $X$ in several components, let $C$ denote the connected component containing $\phi(p)$. Since $\phi(U)$ is open, $\phi(U)\cap X$ is open in $X$. But $X\approx\mathbb R$ is locally connected, therefore components of open subsets are open. So $C$ is open and $X-C$ is closed in $X$. Since $X$ is closed in $\mathbb R^2$, $X-C$ is closed in $\mathbb R^2$ and $\phi(U)-(X-C)$ is open.
Applying $\phi$ we get a homeomorphism $\phi^{-1}(\phi(U)-(X-C))\approx \phi(U)-(X-C)$, the later of which intersects the $x$-axis in just a single component, which is a contradiction.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Very helpful answer, thank you. $\endgroup$ – yuval Aug 4 '13 at 0:30
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @yuval: I realized that a much simpler and more general solution exists: Whenever $(U,\phi)$ is a chart about a point $p$, then by the openness of $\phi(U)$ there is a ball $B_\epsilon(\phi(p))$ contained in $\phi(U)$. If $\phi(p)\in X$, then clearly this ball intersects $X$ in a connected set, and this ball can be used as a coordinate chart. $\endgroup$ – Stefan Hamcke Aug 4 '13 at 14:40
0
$\begingroup$

Let $U\supset U'$ where $U'$ is open in $\mathbb R^2$ and $p\in U'\cap I.$ Then $U'\cap S= (\{0\}\times J)\cup (\cup F)$ where $J$ is a non-empty open subset of $]-1,1[$ and $F$ is a non-empty family of subsets of $\{(x,\in 1/x):x\in ]0,1[\},$ and each member of $F$ is homeomorphic to a non-empty open interval of $\mathbb R.$

Suppose $\phi:U\to V$ is a homeomorphism with $\phi( U\cap S) = V\cap (\mathbb R \times\{0\}).$

Now $\phi$ maps any subspace of $U\cap S$ homeomorphically onto its image. So $\phi(\{0\}\times J) = K\times \{0\}$ where $K$ is a non-empty open subset of $\mathbb R .$ And for each $f\in F,$ we have $\phi(f)=G_f\times \{0\}$ where $G_f$ is a non-empty subset of $\mathbb R,$ with $G_f$ disjoint from $K.$

But then $\phi (\{0\}\times J)$ is disjoint from the closure of $\phi(\cup F),$ and since $\phi|_{U'\cap S}\to \phi(U'\cap S)$ is a homeomorphism, that implies that $\{0\}\times J$ is disjoint from the closure of $\cup F,$ and hence that $\{0\}\times J$ is open in the space $\Gamma \cup I$, which is FALSE.

$\endgroup$

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.