Can Smooth Functions be Extended on Manifolds?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the problem of extending a smooth function defined on an open subset of a smooth manifold to the entire manifold. Participants explore the conditions under which such an extension is possible, the role of neighborhoods, and the use of techniques like bump functions and partitions of unity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a problem involving extending a smooth function F defined on an open subset U of a manifold M to a smooth mapping on M.
  • Another participant questions the necessity of the open set U and the implications of extending F outside of U, expressing confusion about the role of neighborhoods.
  • Some participants agree that the setup is correct and suggest that the extension can be achieved using bump functions, emphasizing the need for a smooth transition from 1 inside a neighborhood V to 0 outside of U.
  • There is mention of the use of partitions of unity in such extensions, with a caution about needing closedness conditions for certain functions.
  • One participant highlights the construction of bump functions using products of translates and reflections of specific functions, suggesting a standard technique for such problems.
  • Another participant raises concerns about the ordering of sets V and U, questioning how an extension can occur if V is contained in U.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and confusion regarding the problem setup and the methods for extending the function. There is no consensus on the necessity of certain conditions or the implications of the relationships between U, V, and the extension F*.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the extension process may depend on specific conditions such as closedness and the properties of the function being extended. The discussion reflects various assumptions about the smoothness and behavior of functions outside the defined subsets.

JYM
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I have been stuck several days with the following problem.
Suppose M and N are smooth manifolds, U an open subset of M , and F: U → N is smooth. Show that there exists a neighborhood V of any p in U, V contained in U, such that F can be extended to a smooth mapping F*: M → N with F(q)=F*(q) for all q in V. [smooth means C-infinity].
I try to use charts to get a smooth map between Euclidean spaces and I know how to extend such maps. but I get a difficulty in transforming to the original problem. If you have some hint please well come. thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you sure this is the correct set-up? I do not understand the role of ##U##. You have ##p \in V \subseteq U \stackrel{F}{\longrightarrow} N## no information about ##F## outside of ##U## and want to extend ##F|_V##. What do you need ##U## for, and what if ##F## isn't smooth on ##M-U\;##? If we don't have to bother points not in ##U##, then we probably need to extend ##F## trivially outside of ##U##, independent of ##F##. But then, what do we need ##V## for? I'm confused.
 
Yes it is correct. It is given that the map F is smooth only on U.
 
JYM said:
Yes it is correct. It is given that the map F is smooth only on U.
Do you have a group action on ##M## which allows to transport ##U## to other neighborhoods?
As stated you could choose ##V=U##.
 
I new for the group action concept and the problem is before that. what i want to use is charts. i upload my trial.
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    19.8 KB · Views: 591
O.k. then it doesn't play a role what happens outside of ##U##. All we need is any smooth function extending ##F##. That's where the bump function comes into play. The w.l.o.g. assumption is only, because the language is easier this way. It works in all other cases the same way, we would only need two additional diffeomorphisms to "translate" the bump function into the general case back and forth. This would complicate the notation, but wouldn't change the statement. The restriction to ##V\subseteq U## is only to gain space for the bump function to change smoothly from ##1## inside ##V## and ##0## outside of ##U##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: JYM
I know this is generic but usually partitions of unity usually are used in these extensions. But I think you need a closedness condition, e.g., for 1/x , smooth on (0,1), which does not extend to the left.
 
WWGD said:
I know this is generic but usually partitions of unity usually are used in these extensions. But I think you need a closedness condition, e.g., for 1/x , smooth on (0,1), which does not extend to the left.
That's where ##V=(\frac{1}{4},\frac{3}{4})## comes into play: now it extends to the left, as nobody is interested in ##U=(0,1)## anymore.
 
fresh_42 said:
That's where ##V=(\frac{1}{4},\frac{3}{4})## comes into play: now it extends to the left, as nobody is interested in ##U=(0,1)## anymore.
But the order seems to be wrong. If V contained in U, how are we making an extension? Isn't it a restriction in this case?
 
  • #10
WWGD said:
But the order seems to be wrong. If V contained in U, how are we making an extension? Isn't it a restriction in this case?
That's what confused me, too, at the beginning but the picture cleared it. ##F^*## has little to do with ##F## except on ##V##. It is any smooth extension of ##F|_V##. The restriction from ##U## to ##V## is only needed to have space for the bump. The entire theorem could as well be stated as: We always have a smooth bump function ##F^*## whenever a function ##F## is smooth somewhere, extending it at (in a neighborhood of) this point.

Something like this:
upload_2018-4-5_17-45-0.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-4-5_17-45-0.png
    upload_2018-4-5_17-45-0.png
    1.7 KB · Views: 680
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Spinnor and JYM
  • #11
this is not an easy problem for a beginner but there is a standard technique for it. Using products of translates and reflections of the function e^(-1/x^2), one constructs a function that equals 1 on an interval around a given point and equals zero off a slightly larger interval, (bump function). then by taking products one does the same for a cube around a given point in n space. Then given that a manifold looks locally like an open cube, one gives the desired construction. a standard reference is perhaps spivak's calculus on manifolds.

see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bump_function
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: lavinia, Spinnor and jim mcnamara

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K