Why Must the Image of U Be Open in \(\mathbf{R}^n\)?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dEdt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Charts Map Sets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the requirement that the image of a subset \( U \) under a mapping \( \phi \) be open in \( \mathbf{R}^n \) within the context of charts or coordinate systems in differential geometry. Participants explore the implications of this requirement from both a topological and a calculus perspective.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the openness of \( \phi(U) \) is motivated by the need to perform calculus on coordinate representations, similar to the requirement for open domains in Euclidean space.
  • Others argue that from a topological standpoint, defining \( \phi(U) \) as open leads to advantageous properties for topological manifolds, such as having a countable basis of pre-compact coordinate balls.
  • A participant questions whether \( \phi \) is defined as a diffeomorphism, noting that diffeomorphisms are typically both open and closed maps, which raises questions about the necessity of openness in this context.
  • Another participant clarifies that the notion of diffeomorphism applies to transition maps between coordinate domains and that coordinate maps do not need to be diffeomorphisms when first constructing a smooth atlas.
  • There is a discussion about the distinction between homeomorphisms and the requirements for the mapping \( \phi: U \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n \), with some asserting that while \( \phi(U) \) can be closed in itself, it must be open in \( \mathbf{R}^n \).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity and implications of the openness condition for \( \phi(U) \). There is no consensus on whether the requirement is strictly necessary or how it relates to the definitions of diffeomorphisms and homeomorphisms.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the definitions and properties of the mappings involved may depend on the specific context of the discussion, such as the construction of a smooth atlas or the nature of the mappings being considered.

dEdt
Messages
286
Reaction score
2
My textbook says that "a chart or coordinate system consists of a subset U of a set M, along with a one-to-one map \phi :U\rightarrow\mathbf{R}^n, such that the image \phi(U) is open in \mathbf{R}^n."

What's the motivation for demanding that the image of U under \phi be open?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We do calculus on the coordinate domains by doing calculus on the coordinate representations of the coordinate domains under the coordinate map so a primary motivation for making them open is the same reason we make domains of regions in euclidean space open when doing calculus. From a purely topological standpoint, there are many advantages because we can show the characterization of locally euclidean in terms of open subsets of euclidean space is equivalent to the characterization of locally euclidean in terms of open balls which leads to nice properties of topological manifolds such as having a countable basis of pre - compact coordinate balls (and even smooth ones if you have an atlas).
 
dEdt said:
My textbook says that "a chart or coordinate system consists of a subset U of a set M, along with a one-to-one map \phi :U\rightarrow\mathbf{R}^n, such that the image \phi(U) is open in \mathbf{R}^n."

What's the motivation for demanding that the image of U under \phi be open?

AFAIK, the map \phi is usually defined to be a diffeomorphism, which is a closed map (as well as an open map) . Doesn't your book define \phi that way?
 
Bacle do you mean a homeomorphism? The notion of diffeomorphism between smooth manifolds is defined using the diffeomorphic nature of the transition maps between coordinate domains so the notion of coordinate maps being diffeomorphisms doesn't make sense a priori when first constructing a smooth atlas for a manifold. Also, you can start with just injective mappings for the charts making up the differentiable structure and there is a naturally induced topology that makes them homeomorphisms anyways. See for example Do Carmo Riemannian Geometry chapter 0.
 
Right, I misread your question, my bad. I know we pre- and post- compose with chart maps to determine properties of maps between manifolds.
 
Bacle2 said:
AFAIK, the map \phi is usually defined to be a diffeomorphism, which is a closed map (as well as an open map) . Doesn't your book define \phi that way?

The map \phi:U\rightarrow \phi(U) is a homeomorphism. But the map \phi:U\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n does not need to be a homeomorphism. So while \phi(U) is certainly closed in itself, it needs not be open in \mathbb{R}^n. We do require it to be open in \mathbb{R}^n.
 
micromass said:
The map \phi:U\rightarrow \phi(U) is a homeomorphism. But the map \phi:U\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n does not need to be a homeomorphism. So while \phi(U) is certainly closed in itself, it needs not be open in \mathbb{R}^n. We do require it to be open in \mathbb{R}^n.

Please check my last post. I misread the question.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K