Not signed in (Sign In)

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).

nLab > Latest Changes: immersion of smooth manifolds

Bottom of Page

1 to 15 of 15

  1.  
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 21st 2012
    • (edited Feb 21st 2012)

    created immersion of smooth manifolds .

    Stated also the definition that f:X→Yf : X \to Y is an immersion precisely if the canonical morphism

    TX→X× YTY=:f *Y T X \to X \times_Y T Y =: f^* Y

    is an injection.

    This style of writing the conditon I have now also added to submersion (where this canonical morphism is a surjection) and to local diffeomorphism (where it is an iso).

    This way of stating the condition makes most manifest that with respect to the infinitesimal cohesion i:i : Smooth∞Grpd ↪\hookrightarrow SynthDiff∞Grpd we have

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeFeb 21st 2012

    (Note that \eqqcolon produces ≕\eqqcolon)

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 21st 2012

    Thanks!

    I sort of knew this, but I always forget and am to lazy to look it up. I will try to remember it from now on.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 21st 2012
    • (edited Feb 21st 2012)

    I need to add more discussion to this:

    formally unramified in the smooth context implies immersion, but superficially is stronger: it says not just that the map on tangent spaces is an injection, but also that the map on all “higher order tangents” (formal curves, as it were) is an injection. That shouldn’t change the statement, but needs to be discussed.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorStephan A Spahn
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2012
    • (edited Feb 24th 2012)
    X× YTY=:f *YX \times_Y T Y =: f^* Y

    Firstly I had some reservations against this notation (since forming ” f *ff^* f ” or the like won’t lead to any good) - but it has something to it. Has this object a name in the literature?

    How are higher order tangents τ\tau defined in the smooth context? If they were just τ=Hom(D,−)\tau=Hom(D,-) for the infinitesimal smooth loci (and not just the infinitesimal standard interval) then I think formally unramified coincides with immersion if every such DD is atomic (in that τ\tau is a right adjoint).

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2012

    Note that on the page in question it reads X× YTY≕f *TYX \times_Y T Y \eqqcolon f^* T Y and this is the standard notation for the pullback of a bundle by a smooth map. Indeed, it’s the pullback of the lower-right corner of the diagram just below.

  7. Ok, I just read the thread here.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 24th 2012
    • (edited Feb 24th 2012)

    How are higher order tangents defined in the smooth context?

    Good that you ask. I should have told you about that earlier.

    Here is how it goes:

    we say a (smooth) infinitesimal thickened point is an object in the opposite category of the full sub-category of ℝ\mathbb{R}-algebras

    InfinitesimalPoint↪Alg ℝ op InfinitesimalPoint \hookrightarrow Alg_{\mathbb{R}}^{op}

    on those whose uderlying vector space is of the form ℝ⊕V\mathbb{R} \oplus V with VV a finite dimensional ℝ\mathbb{R}-vector space and such that all elements ε∈V\epsilon \in V are niltpotent in the given algebra structure, i.e. such that there is n∈ℕn \in \mathbb{N} with ε n=0\epsilon^n = 0.

    The basic example is the ℝ\mathbb{R}-algebra version of the ring of dual numbers ℝ⊕εℝ\mathbb{R} \oplus \epsilon \mathbb{R}.

    By the Hadamard lemma this can be thought of as C ∞(ℝ)/⟨x 2⟩C^\infty(\mathbb{R})/\langle x^2\rangle, where the quotient is by the ideal of smooth functions that a products with the function x↦x 2x \mapsto x^2. This way one sees that all these infinitesimally thickened points can uniquely be thought of as smooth loci, formal duals of smooth algebras (there is a unique smooth algebra structure on an ℝ\mathbb{R}-algebra of the above form).

    So write 𝔻\mathbb{D} for the infinitesimal point corresponding to the ring of dual numbers. By definition we say that the ring of dual numbers is the smooth algebra of smooth functions on 𝔻\mathbb{D}:

    C ∞(𝔻):=C ∞(ℝ)/⟨x 2⟩. C^\infty(\mathbb{D}) := C^\infty(\mathbb{R})/\langle x^2\rangle \,.

    This means that a morphism of smooth loci v:𝔻→Xv : \mathbb{D} \to X is equivalently (by definition) a morphism of smooth algebras

    C ∞(𝔻)←C ∞(X):v *. C^\infty(\mathbb{D}) \leftarrow C^\infty(X) : v^* \,.

    Compare this to how a point x:*→Xx : * \to X is indeed the same thing as an algebra homomorphism

    ℝ=C ∞(*)←C ∞(X):x * \mathbb{R} = C^\infty(*) \leftarrow C^\infty(X) : x^*

    (given by evaluation of functions on that point).

    Exercise: convince yourself, for XX a smooth manifold, that morphisms v:𝔻→Xv : \mathbb{D} \to X are naturally identified with pairs: a point x∈Xx \in X together with a choice of tangent vector v∈T xXv \in T_x X.

    (Hint: you can just work with bare ℝ\mathbb{R}-algebras for this, don’t need to regard them as smooth algebras.)

    So this says that TX=Hom(𝔻,X)T X = Hom(\mathbb{D}, X) as sets, and also as smooth spaces if we form the internal hom TX=[𝔻,X]T X = [\mathbb{D}, X].

    Now let WW be any other “algebra of functional on an infinitesimally thickened point” as above (some algebra of the form ℝ⊕V\mathbb{R} \oplus V with VV nilpotent). Write DD for the corresponding infinitesimally thickened point. Then a “higher order tangent” in XX as given by this DD is a morphism of smooth loci

    ν:D→X, \nu : D \to X \,,

    hence an algebra homomorphism

    W←C ∞(X):ν *. W \leftarrow C^\infty(X) : \nu^* \,.

    Once you are happy with the above exercise, it is immediate to see in which sense and way these morphisms are “higher order tangents” on XX.

    I have to quit now and talk to people in Göttingen. I’ll try to get back to you later this eveneing.

  9. Thanks, Urs for showing this to me - and for introducing me to the subject of synthetic differential geometry in general!

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2018

    Re #1, how does the concept of ’formal immersion’ fit in? This is

    A formal immersion FF from MM to NN is an injective bundle map TM→TNT M \to T N.

    It seems to be easier to handle than the plain immersions, though in some case collections of each are weakly homotopy equivalent.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJul 23rd 2018

    Added a subsection on the relation to formal immersions.

    diff, v10, current

  12. hi, the image of x is f(x)=y and it was written f(y)

    Anonymous

    diff, v14, current

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorjim stasheff
    • CommentTimeOct 14th 2022
    Does n-lab have a page for homotopy of immersions? The obvious names I tried didn't combine the two parts.
    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeFeb 12th 2023

    came across this entry by chance, and ended up improving wording and typesetting a little

    diff, v15, current

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMay 16th 2024
    • (edited May 16th 2024)

    added a reference for the statement that immersions are locally embeddings (Boothby, III Thm. 4.12)

    diff, v18, current

1 to 15 of 15

  1.