A Is Your Graph Homeomorphic to a Sphere?

AI Thread Summary
To determine if a graph represents a manifold, one approach involves analyzing the opposite edges of a vertex to establish homeomorphism with a 1-sphere for 2-manifolds. While this is straightforward in two dimensions, challenges arise in higher dimensions, suggesting the need for a more robust mathematical framework. The discussion highlights that graphs may not be suitable for this purpose due to their lack of variable dimensions. Instead, simplices, which generalize triangles to various dimensions, are proposed as a more effective tool for examining manifold properties. Ultimately, the goal is to verify whether the graph accurately represents a manifold structure.
kroni
Messages
79
Reaction score
10
Hello,

I want to prove that a graph represent a manifold, for this i take the opposites edges of a vertex (edge connected between vertex connected to the current vertex) and this subgraph need to be homeomorphic for example to the 1-sphere if i want a 2 manifold. This criterion ensure that my graph represent a manifold.

In 2 dimension its easy (opposite edge homeomorphic to S1) but i have difficulty with higher dimension. Do you know a strategy by using a mathematical approach to prove that ? i think using path based property or homotopy group ? but i am more a physician.

Thanks

Clément Deymier
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Graphs are the wrong tool to use, as they do not have variable dimension.

A tool that might do what you want is the Simplex, which is the generalisation of the notion of a triangle to higher and lower dimensions. It is described here.

A solid triangle is a 2-simplex (two-dimensional simplex). A 1-simplex is a line segment. A 3-simplex is a solid tetrahedron.

Just as the ring ##S^1## is homeomorphic to what we get by joining two 1-simplices at both ends, the hollow sphere ##S^2## is homeomorphic to what we get by joining ('sewing' or 'pasting') two 2-simplices (solid triangles) along their edges.

For two dimensions and higher, we need to sew the two simplices together in the most natural way, ie by laying them on top of one another and sewing the adjacent edges together. If we sew them with a different orientation we can get weird non-orientable manifolds.
 
I totally agree with that but i get a graph from a extremely complex software and i want to check if this graph represent a manifold.
 
kroni said:
i want to check if this graph represent a manifold
What does that mean?
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...

Similar threads

Back
Top