Explaining Orientation of Oriented Manifold

  • Thread starter Thread starter AKG
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Manifold
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the orientation of a boundary of an oriented manifold, specifically addressing how the orientation induced by the form dx ∧ dy is interpreted at the boundary of the manifold M, which is defined in a three-dimensional space. Participants are exploring the implications of this orientation in the context of the manifold's boundary in the plane z = 1.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to clarify the meaning of the orientation described in the problem, questioning how to interpret the induced orientation on the boundary. Some discuss the implications of restricting orientation from the manifold to its boundary and the role of outward normal vectors in determining this orientation.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided agreement on interpretations of the orientation, while others are exploring the nuances of how to assign orientations based on the choice of basis vectors and normal vectors. There is an ongoing examination of the conditions under which the orientation can be considered clockwise or counterclockwise, with references to specific mathematical properties and examples.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the problem, particularly regarding the lack of a unique way to restrict orientation to a boundary and the necessity of specifying conventions for outward normal vectors. There is also mention of the specific geometric context of the manifold and its boundary, which may influence the discussion.

AKG
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
2,561
Reaction score
4
The main problem I have with this question is just the wording:

If [itex]M[/itex] is an oriented manifold by means of the restriction of the form [itex]dx \wedge dy[/itex], describe explicitly the induced orientation on [itex]\partial M[/itex] -- i.e. clockwise or counterclockwise in the plane [itex]z = 1[/itex].

I don't understand the underlined part. Perhaps it means that the orientation for each [itex](x, y) \in M[/itex], [itex]\mu _{(x, y)}[/itex] is the one such that [itex]dx \wedge dy (x, y)[/itex] is the volume element of [itex]M_{(x, y)}[/itex] determined by the standard inner product and orientation [itex]\mu _{(x, y)}[/itex]. Am I interpreting it correctly, or am I reading much more into what's actually said there, and if it's the latter, what is the correct interpretation? Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, that's what it means.
 
yes i agree. you cannot restrict an orientation to a lower dimensional manifold, but you can restrict it to one of the same dimension. so dx^dy can be restricted to a 2 manifold.


then there is for the same reason no unique way to restrict an orientation to a boundary. you have to say how to treat the outward normal vector.



so you usually say something like; if v is a basis for the tangent space to the boundary M, and w is an outward normal vector, then we require (v,w) is an oriented basis for M. or you could say that (w,v) is an oriented basis for M. whatever.

once you decide it determines the orientation of the boundary.

but without knowing which convention they chose , i cannot answer the question you stated.

i do have some lengthy notes on the matter.
 
excerpt:
Induced orientation on a boundary.
Next we will show how to induce an orientation on ∆X, whenever X is oriented. It will follow in particular that the boundary of an orientable manifold is also orientable. This will give another proof that every sphere is orientable, since a sphere is the boundary of an orientable closed ball.

Assume for a moment the following result.
Lemma: If V in W is a subspace of a finite dimensional space, then orientations for any two of the spaces V,W, W/V, determines a unique orientation for the third space such that if B is a basis for V, and (A,B) is any extension to a basis for W, and hence å determines a basis A' for W/V, then sign(A')sign(B) = sign(A,B).
I.e. if we have assigned +1 to every basis in one equivalence class and -1 to every basis in the other equivalence class in two of these spaces, this equation tells how to assign these symbols to bases of the other space.

How to assign the boundary orientation
Let X be an oriented (n+1) manifold with boundary. At every boundary point p there is a unique outward unit normal vector np. At each such point p, np represents a basis vector of the normal space TpX/Tp∆X, which thus determines an orientation of that space. Now we can determine an orientation of Tp(∆X) as follows. A basis {v1,...,vn} is positively oriented if and only if the basis {n,v1,...,vn} is a positively oriented basis for TpX.
We claim this determines an orientation for ∆X.
 
Sorry, this was part b) to another question. Yes, M is a 2-dimensional manifold, it is the manifold {(x, y, z) in R³ : x² + y² = z < 1}, where the boundary is just the unit circle in the plane z=1 centered on the z-axis.

I've attached a picture of what I think is going on. The blue things are orientations on the "main part" of the manifold, and the red arrows are the outward pointing unit normals. The black arrow is the arrow for the boundary point that would have to be chosen in order for it and the red arrow together to have the same orientation as it would otherwise have. Is this right?
 

Attachments

  • oriented manifold.JPG
    oriented manifold.JPG
    5.1 KB · Views: 475
Suppose [itex]x \in \partial M[/itex], and [itex]\mu[/itex] (and hence [itex]\mu _x[/itex]) is given. Then if [itex]\{(e_1)_x\}[/itex] is a basis of [itex](\partial M) _x[/itex] and [itex]n(x) \in M_x[/itex] is the outward pointing normal vector at x, then if [itex][n(x), (e_1)_x] = \mu _x[/itex], then [itex][(e_1)_x] = (\partial \mu )_x[/itex] is the induced orientation. I need to find if [itex](e_1)_x[/itex] points clockwise or counterclockwise given [itex]\mu[/itex] (and hence each [itex]\mu _x[/itex]).

Since M is oriented, [itex]\mu[/itex] is conistent, so if I find that the orientation at some boundary point is clockwise, then it is clockwise for all points on the boundary. For each [itex]x \in M[/itex], there can be one of two orientations [itex]\mu _x[/itex], so I think what I need to do is say that if (for x on the boundary now) [itex]\mu _x = [(v_1)_x,\, (v_2)_x][/itex], then we're looking at the induced orientation at the boundary being counterclockwise, and if [itex]\mu _x = -[(v_1)_x, \, (v_2)_x][/itex], then the induced orientation is clockwise, right? So instead of one answer, I have to show how the answer depends on [itex]\mu _x[/itex]. Isn't this as simple as saying:

If [itex]\mu _x = [n(x), v_x][/itex] where [itex]v_x[/itex] is clockwise, then the induced orientation is clockwise, and otherwise the induced orientation is counterclockwise? Do I need to do anything with [itex]dx \wedge dy[/itex]? Oh, wait. I know that:

[tex](dx \wedge dy)(x)(n(x), v_x) > 0[/tex]

And I have to compute this to see whether the v that will satisfy this inequality (ensure that the left side is greater than 0) is clockwise or counterclockwise.

[tex](dx \wedge dy)(x)(n(x), v_x) > 0[/tex]

[tex](dx(x) \wedge dy(x))(n(x), v_x) > 0[/tex]

[tex](dx(x)n(x))(dy(x)v_x) - (dx(x)v_x)(dy(x)n(x)) > 0[/tex]

[tex]n_1v_2 - v_1n_2 > 0[/tex]

[tex]v_2 > v_1\left (\frac{n_2}{n_1}\right )[/tex]

I should be able to find n(x) separately, and this will give me [itex]v_x = (v_1, v_2, v_3)_x[/itex]. I think I would then think of placing the vector v with it's tail at x, and see whether it points clockwise along the unit circle in the z=1 plane, or counterclockwise. Is this the right approach?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K