Sphere as an embedded submanifold

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jem05
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sphere
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving that a sphere is an embedded submanifold using the theorem that if φ: M → N is an embedding, then φ(M) is an embedded submanifold of N. Participants clarify that the n-sphere can be embedded in R^(n+1) through the inclusion map φ(x) = x, establishing that the n-sphere is a proper submanifold of Euclidean space. The conversation also touches on the tautological nature of the inclusion map as an embedding, confirming its validity in the context of submanifolds.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of manifold theory and definitions of embedded submanifolds
  • Familiarity with the inclusion map and its properties in topology
  • Knowledge of the n-sphere and its representation in Euclidean space
  • Basic concepts of subspace topology
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of embeddings in manifold theory
  • Study the relationship between submanifolds and their ambient manifolds
  • Explore examples of proper submanifolds in various topological spaces
  • Learn about the implications of the inclusion map in different contexts
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, particularly those specializing in topology and differential geometry, as well as students studying manifold theory and its applications.

jem05
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
hello,
i already have 2 ways using 2 theorems to prove that a sphere is an embedded submanifold.
i just want to check if i can prove it using this specific theorem:
let M and N be manifolds
if \phi : M --> N is an embedding, then \phi (M) is an embedded submanifold.
because i am having trouble finding this \phi.
thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Submanifold of what? It makes no sense to speak of a submanifold without referring to what manifold it's a submanifold of. For instance in your theorem you assert that \phi(M) is a submanifold of N.

If you don't care what manifold it's a submanifold of you can just use the rather trivial example of letting \phi : \mathbb{S}^n \to \mathbb{S}^n be the identity, and then getting that \mathbb{S}^n is a submanifold of itself (or do you perhaps only want to deal with proper submanifolds?).
 
yeah sorry, i forgot to mention in the theorem, a submanifold of N, as you said.
and i do want it a proper submanifold,
i guessed N might be R^3, for instance.
 
Well in that case you know the n-sphere is a subset of the (n+1)-dimensional Euclidean space \mathbb{S}^n \subseteq \mathbb{R}^{n+1}. \mathbb{R}^{n+1} is of course a manifold so we just define \phi : \mathbb{S}^n \to \mathbb{R}^{n+1} to be the inclusion \phi(x)=x. This is an embedding.
 
" Well in that case you know the n-sphere is a subset of the (n+1)-dimensional Euclidean space .S^n is of course a manifold so we just define Phi: S^n -->R^(n+1) to be the inclusion Phi(x)=x . This is an embedding." (Sorry,I don't know well how to use
quoting function)

I think this is somewhat tautological, i.e., that if A is a subset of X, A given
the subspace topology, then the inclusion map of A in X is an embedding
into X, but I may be wrong:

Given a space X, and a subspace A of X, the inclusion map i:A-->X is always an
embedding:

i) Let U be open in X. Then i^-1(U)=U/\A , open in subspace of A in X.

ii) Let V open in (A, subspace) . Then V=W/\A ; W open in X
then i(V) is open in the subspace topology of X.
 
Bacle said:
I think this is somewhat tautological, i.e., that if A is a subset of X, A given
the subspace topology, then the inclusion map of A in X is an embedding
into X, but I may be wrong:
This is correct. I'm sorry if I somehow conveyed with my post that it was a non-trivial fact. jem05 was asking for an embedding from the n-sphere into some larger topological space, so I just provided the simplest one I could think of.
 
ramshop wrote, in part:

" This is correct. I'm sorry if I somehow conveyed with my post that it was a non-trivial fact. jem05 was asking for an embedding from the n-sphere into some larger topological space, so I just provided the simplest one I could think of. "

No problem. It is the only one I can think of myself, other than maybe the cube, or
minor variations of it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
654
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K