# Why do people stick with Riemann-Integration when dealing with differential geometry?

I asked a question yesterday that is, "Is there an introductory differential geometry text using Lebesgue integration?"

Then, i got an answer that "since we are dealing with differential geometry we don't need to introduce Lebesgue integration".

However, let's look how one develops integration in differential geometry.

One first defines Riemann integration on a closed interval. Then, one defines Riemann integration on a closed cube in $\mathbb{R}^n$. Then, one expand the domain of integrable functions to a larger class using partition of unity.

Now, let's do the same thing starting from Lebesgue integration. The process of defining Riemann integration on a closed cube via iterated Riemann integration on a closed interval is merely Fubini's theorem. Hence, it is now a theorem in the view of Lebesgue integration. I believe other definitions(Riemann approach) above can be viewed as theorems here (Lebesgue approach).

The above illustrates why i think it would be much great to study differential geometry via Lebesgue integration. Am I not making sense? Is there really no differential geometry text using Lebesgue integration?

• If it isn't too much of a bother, could you relate "other definitions(Riemann approach)" to "theorems here (Lebesgue approach)"? – user122283 Mar 26 '14 at 2:41
• not introductory or anywhere near it. Various aspects of PDE on manifolds use weak solutions. Also, Brownian motion on manifolds, calculus of variations. – Will Jagy Mar 26 '14 at 2:42
• @Will do you know any text using Lebesgue integration approach, not necessarily introductory? (But rigorous) – John. p Mar 26 '14 at 2:44
• There are some now; we used Gilbarg and Trudinger. You might look at books by en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%BCrgen_Jost en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shing-Tung_Yau and others. What is your background??? – Will Jagy Mar 26 '14 at 2:49
• @Will I have studied Real analysis, Linear algebra and topology, but the only differential geometry text i have studied is "Spivak-Calculus on Manifolds". Would i have much trouble with this background? – John. p Mar 26 '14 at 2:54