Compactness of Tangent Bundle: Manifold M

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter math6
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Compact Manifold
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the compactness of the tangent bundle of a manifold, specifically addressing whether the tangent bundle TM of a compact manifold M is necessarily compact. Participants also explore the compactness of specific submanifolds within TM, such as the unit sphere bundle.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if M is compact, it does not necessarily imply that TM is compact, citing that TM consists of copies of R^n, which is not compact.
  • Others argue that the tangent unit sphere bundle of a compact manifold is compact, suggesting a distinction between the tangent bundle and its unit sphere bundle.
  • One participant mentions that the tangent bundle of the two-sphere is real projective 3-space, which is compact, while the tangent bundle of the circle is homeomorphic to an open cylinder, thus not compact.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between the compactness of a manifold and its tangent bundle, with some skepticism about claims that suggest a direct correlation.
  • Participants clarify misconceptions regarding the tangent bundles of specific manifolds, such as the Moebius band and the circle, emphasizing their dimensional properties and compactness.
  • A later reply questions the method of proving compactness, suggesting the use of local trivialization and open coverings, while another participant offers a more straightforward argument based on the properties of fibers in vector bundles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the compactness of the tangent bundle TM of a compact manifold M, with no consensus reached on the implications of compactness in this context. Some agree on the compactness of the tangent unit sphere bundle, while others challenge the relationship between the compactness of the manifold and its tangent bundle.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the need for rigorous definitions and the potential for unresolved mathematical steps regarding the compactness of tangent bundles and their submanifolds.

math6
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
hello friends :smile:
I have a question about the compactness of the tangent bundle: assume that the manifold M is compact, does it make necessarily TM compact ? if not TM, a submanifold of TM (precisely a submanifold of vector norm equal to 1) can be compact?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
TM is basically one copy of R^n glued on each point of M. Since R^n is not compact, how can TM be? (Find a rigorous version of this argument).

I'm not sure what you're asking in your second question.
 
math6 said:
hello friends :smile:
I have a question about the compactness of the tangent bundle: assume that the manifold M is compact, does it make necessarily TM compact ? if not TM, a submanifold of TM (precisely a submanifold of vector norm equal to 1) can be compact?

The tangent unit sphere bundle of a compact manifold is compact. It is not hard to prove this.
 
thnx friends. it is more clear now.
 
Indeed, Lavinia is correct, the tangent bundle of the two sphere is real projective 3 space, which is compact. However, obviously the tangent bundle of the circle is homeomorphic to the open cylinder (this is easy to see) and hence is not compact.

It doesn't seem that there is any relation to the compactness of a manifold and its tangent bundle (unless its tangent bundle is compact iff its tangent bundle is non-trivial. This I highly doubt to be true).[edit- the tangent bundle of the moebius band would be the moebius band again wouldn't it? So this would be a counter-example to this obviously wrong claim].
 
Jamma said:
Indeed, Lavinia is correct, the tangent bundle of the two sphere is real projective 3 space, which is compact. However, obviously the tangent bundle of the circle is homeomorphic to the open cylinder (this is easy to see) and hence is not compact.

It doesn't seem that there is any relation to the compactness of a manifold and its tangent bundle (unless its tangent bundle is compact iff its tangent bundle is non-trivial. This I highly doubt to be true).[edit- the tangent bundle of the moebius band would be the moebius band again wouldn't it? So this would be a counter-example to this obviously wrong claim].

The tangent bundle is never compact. The tangent sphere bundle of a compact manifold is always compact.

The tangent bundle of the 2 sphere is not RP^3. The tangent circle bundle is RP^3.

The tangent bundle to the Moebius band is not the Moebius band. It is a 4 dimensional manifold. The Moebius band is a surface.
 
Last edited:
Wow, I feel mega stupid.

Of course, you are right. I think that I read somewhere that the tangent sphere bundle of a sphere is RP^3 and my mind left out the "sphere" part (I must have somehow convinced myself that the bundle twists in such a way that it becomes non-compact :S). And the tangent bundle of a manifold of dimension n is a 2n dimensional manifold, so God knows where the Moebius band thing came from- sorry about that! :D
 
Quasar, could you give a more rigourous argument to what you mentioned? Obviously because the tangent space is a locally trivial fibre bundle, you can take a local trivialisation, cover that in a canonical way and finish it off to an open covering of TM which has no finite subcovering. Is this the method you had in mind?
 
Not really. Simply the fact that in the tangent bundle (or in any vector bundle for that matter) TM-->M, the fiber over a point is
a) closed
b) homeomorphic to R^n
Assume TM were compact and derive a contradiction.
 
  • #10
Ok, yeah, that's pretty obvious now :/ Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
9K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K