What Determines the Degree of the Gauss Map in Differential Geometry?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Gauss map in differential geometry, specifically its properties, implications of the Gauss curvature, and the evaluation of the Brouwer degree associated with the map. Participants explore theoretical aspects, mathematical reasoning, and implications for compact surfaces.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the equation ##n^{*}\text{vol}^{2}_{S}=K\text{vol}^{2}_{M}## indicates that the Gauss map is a local diffeomorphism near points where the Gauss curvature ##K(p) \neq 0##.
  • It is proposed that the same equation implies that a point ##u \in M## is a regular point for the Gauss map if ##K(u) \neq 0##.
  • Some participants suggest that if the neighborhood ##U## is positively oriented, then ##n(U)## will be positively oriented on ##S^2## if and only if ##K > 0##.
  • One participant mentions that the Brouwer degree sums the number of points in the inverse image of a regular value, taking orientation into account, with positive curvature yielding a positive sign and negative curvature yielding a negative sign.
  • Another participant raises a question about a map from ##M^n## to ##S^n## with a non-vanishing vector field and its implications for the Brouwer degree being ##0##.
  • Some participants suggest using Stokes' theorem and the Implicit Function Theorem in relation to the discussion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the Gauss curvature and the evaluation of the Brouwer degree, indicating that multiple competing views remain. The discussion includes questions and speculative reasoning without consensus on certain points.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on the assumption that the surface is compact without boundary. The discussion also involves unresolved mathematical steps related to the application of theorems.

spaghetti3451
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
31
If ##M^{2} \subset \mathbb{R}^{3}## is a surface with given normal field, we define the Gauss (normal) map

$$n:M^{2} \rightarrow \text{unit sphere}\ S^{2}$$

by

$$n(p) = \textbf{N}(p), \qquad \text{the unit normal to $M$ at $p$}.$$

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It can be shown that

$$n^{*}\text{vol}^{2}_{S}=K\text{vol}^{2}_{M},$$

where ##\text{vol}^{2}_{S}## is the volume form in ##S^{2}##, ##\text{vol}^{2}_{M}## is the volume form of ##M^{2}## and ##K## is the Gauss curvature.

This means that

1. the Gauss map is a local diffeomorphism in the neighbourhood ##U## of any ##p \in M^{2}## at which ##K(p)\neq 0## (alternatively, ##u \in M## is a regular point for the Gauss map provided ##K(u)\neq 0##)
2. if ##U## is positively oriented then ##n(U)## will be positively oriented on ##S^2## iff ##K>0##.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let ##y \in V## be a regular value of ##\phi: M^{n} \rightarrow V^{n}##; that is, ##\phi_{*}## at ##\phi^{-1}(y)## is onto. For each ##x \in \phi^{-1}(y)##, ##\phi_{*}:M_{x}\rightarrow V_{y}## is also ##1:1##; that is, ##\phi_{*}## is an isomorphism. Put

$$\text{sign}\ \phi(x) := \pm 1$$

where the ##+## sign is used iff ##\phi_{*}:M_{x}\rightarrow V_{y}## is orientation-preserving. Then

$$\text{deg}(\phi)=\sum_{x \in \phi^{-1}(y)} \text{sign}\ \phi(x)$$

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Why does ##n^{*}\text{vol}^{2}_{S}=K\text{vol}^{2}_{M}## mean that the Gauss map is a local diffeomorphism in the neighbourhood ##U## of any ##p \in M^{2}## at which ##K(p)\neq 0##?

2. Why does ##n^{*}\text{vol}^{2}_{S}=K\text{vol}^{2}_{M}## mean that ##u \in M## is a regular point for the Gauss map provided ##K(u)\neq 0##?

3. Why does ##n^{*}\text{vol}^{2}_{S}=K\text{vol}^{2}_{M}## mean that, if ##U## is positively oriented then ##n(U)## will be positively oriented on ##S^2## iff ##K>0##?

4. How can we use these three facts to evaluate the Brouwer degree of the Gauss normal map?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The Gauss curvature is the determinant of the Gauss map. This and the Inverse Function Theorem is all you need for 1-3.

The Brouwer degree sums the number of points in the inverse image of a regular value with orientation taken into account. When the Gauss curvature is positive the orientation sign is +1. When the Gauss curvature is negative the sign is -1
Assume that the surface is compact without boundary. Then convince yourself that:

The pull back of any 2-form that integrates to 1 over the 2-sphere integrates over the surface to the Brouwer degree of the Gauss map.

In particular the pull back of 1/4π times the volume form of the unit sphere integrates to the Brouwer degree.

The the Brouwer degree is independent of the regular value.
 
Last edited:
Thanks!

Can you help me with another thing?

Let's say that you have a map from ##M^n## to ##S^n## such that the vector field ##\bf v## on ##M^n## can be extended to be a non-vanishing vector field on all of the interior region ##U^{n+1}## of ##M^n##.

I was wondering why this means that the Brouwer degree of the map from ##M^n## to ##S^n## is ##0##

Any ideas?
 
failexam said:
Thanks!

Can you help me with another thing?

Let's say that you have a map from ##M^n## to ##S^n## such that the vector field ##\bf v## on ##M^n## can be extended to be a non-vanishing vector field on all of the interior region ##U^{n+1}## of ##M^n##.

I was wondering why this means that the Brouwer degree of the map from ##M^n## to ##S^n## is ##0##

Any ideas?
Not sure what you are asking. Are you saying that the manifold is the boundary of a 1 higher dimensional manifold?
 
if lavinia's guess is correct, and i believe it is, then you should be able to use stokes' theorem.
 
mathwonk said:
if lavinia's guess is correct, and i believe it is, then you should be able to use stokes' theorem.

Also try the Implicit function Theorem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K