When is a foliated manifold a fibre bundle?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter center o bass
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fibre Manifold
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conditions under which a foliated manifold can be considered a fibre bundle. Participants explore the relationship between foliations and fibre bundles, particularly focusing on the properties of leaves and the necessary conditions for local trivialization.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a k-foliation of an n-manifold and questions what additional conditions are needed for the manifold to qualify as a fibre bundle, specifically whether the diffeomorphism of leaves is sufficient.
  • Another participant challenges the initial construction by asking for clarification on the base space, fiber, projection, trivialization, and structure group associated with fibre bundles.
  • A different participant explains that if a foliation exists, there is a chart that allows local representation of the manifold as a product involving the leaves, and they inquire about the conditions necessary for this representation to be a product rather than a subset.
  • One participant admits uncertainty regarding the conditions necessary for the transition from foliation to fibre bundle.
  • Another participant provides a counterexample, stating that leaves can be diffeomorphic without the foliation being a fibre bundle, citing the Mobius band and its relation to the Klein bottle.
  • A final participant references simple foliation and Ehresmann's lemma, suggesting a connection to the discussion but without elaboration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between foliations and fibre bundles, with some proposing conditions while others provide counterexamples. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the necessary conditions for a foliated manifold to be a fibre bundle.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for specific conditions regarding the diffeomorphism of leaves and local trivialization, but these conditions are not fully articulated or agreed upon. The discussion also touches on the implications of different structures in the context of fibre bundles.

center o bass
Messages
545
Reaction score
2
I k-foliation of a ##n##-manifold ##M## is a collection of disjoint, non-empty, submanifolds who's union is ##M##, such that we can find a chart ##(U,x^1, \ldots mx^k, y^{k+1}, \ldots, y^n)=(\phi, (x^\mu, y^\nu))## about any point with the property that setting the ##n-k## last coordinates equal to a constant determines a particular submanifold, and varying ##x^\mu## let's us move around on the surface.

Now I wonder, what conditions would one additionally have to impose for ##M## to become a fibre bundle? Is it's enough that the leaves (submanifolds) of the foliation are diffeomorphic to each other?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure what this construction has to do with fiber bundles. What is your base space? What is your fiber? What is your projection, and trivialization and structure group?
 
If one has a foliation, then there excists a chart ##(U,\phi)## with the property that ##\phi(U) = V \times W##, where the points in ##W## determines which leaf we are on. Now since these leaves are submanifold the chart defined by ##(U\cap S, \tilde \phi)=( U\cap S, x^\mu)## for a particular leaf S is a chart that takes ##U\cap S## to ##\phi(U\cap S) = V## where ##U\cap S## is an open subset of the leaf S. Hence, locally ##M \sim ((\text{subset of} \ S) \times W##. Now if we impose conditions so that this is instead the product ##S \times W##, and all the leafs is diffeomorphic to each other (in particular to ##S##), we have a local trivialization with fibre S. If we then construct the quotient ##B=M/S## (the manifold of fibres), we have a base-space. We need no structure group for it to be a fibre bundle..

So the question is really what conditions are necessary to impose in order for us to have a product ##S \times W## instead of ##\text{subset of} \ S) \times W## and for the leaves to be diffeomorphic to each other. Does the one imply the other, or do we have to impose other coniditions?
 
Ah, ok I get where you're going. Sadly, I do not know the answer to this question...sorry.
 
The leaves can be diffeomorphic without the foliation being a fiber bundle.

Example:

The Mobius band is foliated by circles but is not a circle bundle over a closed interval. This foliation extends to the Klein bottle where it is not a circle bundle over the circle.
 
See, simple foliation and Ehresmann's lemma
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K