- Commit
- ecccb2fb7b42b48f1d1d512c86df398ed980f4f1
- Parent
- b6ab57dcfa158884f8cc35457c07ce28f8c24a47
- Author
- Pablo <pablo-escobar@riseup.net>
- Date
General corrections to last chapter
Riemannian Geometry course project on the manifold H¹(I, M) of class H¹ curves on a Riemannian manifold M and its applications to the geodesics problem
General corrections to last chapter
1 file changed, 43 insertions, 38 deletions
Status | File Name | N° Changes | Insertions | Deletions |
Modified | sections/structure.tex | 81 | 43 | 38 |
diff --git a/sections/structure.tex b/sections/structure.tex @@ -9,9 +9,9 @@ M)\)? Specifically, what is a class \(H^1\) curve in \(M\)? Given an interval \(I\), recall that a continuous curve \(\gamma : I \to \RR^n\) is called \emph{a class \(H^1\)} curve if \(\gamma\) is absolutely continuous, \(\dot \gamma(t)\) exists for almost all \(t \in I\) and -\(\dot\gamma \in L^2(I, \RR^n)\). It is a well known fact that the so called -\emph{Sobolev space \(H^1(I, \RR^n)\)} of all class \(H^1\) curves in \(\RR^n\) -is a Hilbert space under the inner product given by +\(\dot\gamma \in H^0(I, \RR^n) = L^2(I, \RR^n)\). It is a well known fact that +the so called \emph{Sobolev space \(H^1(I, \RR^n)\)} of all class \(H^1\) +curves in \(\RR^n\) is a Hilbert space under the inner product given by \[ \langle \gamma, \eta \rangle_1 = \int_0^1 \gamma(t) \cdot \eta(t) + \dot\gamma(t) \cdot \dot\eta(t) \; \dt @@ -33,12 +33,12 @@ Finally, we may define\dots From now on we fix \(I = [0, 1]\). \end{note} -We should note that every piece-wise smooth curve \(\gamma : I \to M\) is a -class \(H^1\) curve. This answer raises and additional question though: why +Notice in particular that every piece-wise smooth curve \(\gamma : I \to M\) is +a class \(H^1\) curve. This answer raises and additional question though: why class \(H^1\) curves? The classical theory of the calculus of variations -- as described in \cite[ch.~5]{gorodski} for instance -- is usually exclusively concerned with the study of piece-wise smooth curves, so the fact that we are -now interested a larger class of curves, highly non-smooth curves in fact, +now interested a larger class of curves -- highly non-smooth curves, in fact -- \emph{should} come as a surprise to the reader. To answer this second question we return to the case of \(M = \RR^n\). Denote @@ -46,15 +46,18 @@ by \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) the space of piece-wise curves in \(\RR^n\). As described in section~\ref{sec:introduction}, we would like \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) to be a Banach manifold under which both the energy functional and the length functional are smooth maps. As most function spaces, \({C'}^\infty(I, -\RR^n)\) admits several natural topologies. Perhaps the most obvious candidate -is the \(L^2\) topology, which is to say, the topology induced by the norm -\[ - \norm{\gamma}_\infty = \sup_t \norm{\gamma(t)} -\] +\RR^n)\) admits several natural topologies. Some of the most obvious candidates +are the uniform topology and the topology of \(H^0\) norm, which are the +topologies induces by the norms +\begin{align*} + \norm{\gamma}_\infty & = \sup_t \norm{\gamma(t)} \\ + \norm{\gamma}_0 & = \int_0^1 \norm{\gamma(t)}^2 \; \dt +\end{align*} +respectively. -The problem with this choice is that \(\ell : {C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n) \to \RR\) -is not a continuous map under the uniform topology. This can be readily seen by -approximating the curve +The problem with the first candidate is that \(\ell : {C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n) \to +\RR\) is not a continuous map under the uniform topology. This can be readily +seen by approximating the curve \begin{align*} \gamma : I & \to \RR^2 \\ t & \mapsto (t, 1 - t) @@ -95,20 +98,21 @@ natural candidate for a norm in \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) is \norm{\gamma}_1^2 = \norm{\gamma}_0^2 + \norm{\dot\gamma}_0^2, \] which is, of course, the norm induced by the inner product \(\langle \, , -\rangle_1\) -- here \(\norm{\cdot}_0\) denote the norm of \(H^0(I, \RR^n) = -L^2(I, \RR^n)\). +\rangle_1\) -- here \(\norm{\cdot}_0\) denote the norm of \(H^0(I, \RR^n)\). The other issue we face is one of completeness. Since \(\RR^n\) has a global -chart, we to expect \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) to be affine too. In other words, -it is natural to expect \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) to be Banach space. In -particular, \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) must be a normed Banach space. This is -unfortunately not the case for \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) the norm -\(\norm\cdot_1\), but we can consider its completion, which, by a classical -result by Lebesgue, just so happens to coincide with \(H^1(I, M)\). +chart, we expect \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) to be affine too. In other words, it +is natural to expect \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) to be Banach space. In +particular, \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) must be complete. This is unfortunately +not the case for \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) the norm \(\norm\cdot_1\), but we +can consider its completion. Lo and behold, a classical result by Lebesgue +establishes that this completion just so happens to coincide with \(H^1(I, +\RR^n)\). It's also interesting to note that the completion of \({C'}^\infty(I, \RR^n)\) -with respect to the norm \(\norm\cdot_\infty\) is the space \(C^0(I, \RR^n)\) -of all continuous curves \(I \to \RR^n\), and that the natural inclusions +with respect to the norms \(\norm\cdot_\infty\) and \(\norm\cdot_0\) are +\(C^0(I, \RR^n)\) and \(H^0(I, \RR^n)\), respectively, and that the natural +inclusions \begin{equation}\label{eq:continuous-inclusions-rn-curves} H^1(I, \RR^n) \longhookrightarrow C^0(I, \RR^n) @@ -216,9 +220,9 @@ We begin with a technical lemma. \begin{lemma}\label{thm:section-in-open-is-open} Let \(W \subset TM\) be an open neighborhood of the zero section in \(TM\). - Given \(\gamma \in {C'}^\infty(I, M)\), denote by \(W_{\gamma, t}\) the set \(W - \cap T_\gamma(t) M\) and let \(W_\gamma = \bigcup_t W_{\gamma, t}\). Then - \(H^1(W_\gamma) = \{ X \in H^1(\gamma^* TM) : X_t \in W_{\gamma, t} \; + Given \(\gamma \in {C'}^\infty(I, M)\), denote by \(W_{\gamma, t}\) the set + \(W \cap T_{\gamma(t)} M\) and let \(W_\gamma = \bigcup_t W_{\gamma, t}\). + Then \(H^1(W_\gamma) = \{ X \in H^1(\gamma^* TM) : X_t \in W_{\gamma, t} \; \forall t \}\) is an open subset of \(H^1(\gamma^* TM)\). \end{lemma} @@ -271,8 +275,11 @@ Finally, we find\dots U_\gamma \to H^1(\gamma^* TM))\}_{\gamma \in {C'}^\infty(I, M)}\) is an atlas for \(H^1(I, M)\) under the final topology of the maps \(\exp_\gamma\) -- i.e. the coarsest topology such that such maps are continuous. This atlas - gives \(H^1(\gamma^* TM)\) the structure of a \emph{separable} Banach - manifold. + gives \(H^1(I, M)\) the structure of a \emph{separable} Banach manifold + modeled after separable Hilbert spaces, with typical representatives + \(H^1(\gamma^* TM) \cong H^1(I, \RR^n)\)\footnote{Any trivialization of + $\gamma^* TM$ induces an isomorphism $H^1(\gamma^* TM) \isoto H^1(I, + \RR^n)$.}. \end{theorem} The fact that \(\exp_\gamma\) is bijective should be clear from the definition @@ -287,13 +294,8 @@ of this proof is showing that the transition maps \to H^1(\eta^* TM) \] are diffeomorphisms, as well as showing that \(H^1(I, M)\) is separable. We -leave this details we leave as an exercise to the reader -- see theorem 2.3.12 -of \cite{klingenberg} for a full proof. - -The charts \(\exp_\gamma^{-1}\) are modeled after separable Hilbert spaces, -with typical representatives \(H^1(\gamma^* TM) \cong H^1(I, -\RR^n)\)\footnote{Any trivialization of $\gamma^* TM$ induces an isomorphism -$H^1(\gamma^* TM) \isoto H^1(I, \RR^n)$.}. +leave this details as an exercise to the reader -- see theorem 2.3.12 of +\cite{klingenberg} for a full proof. It's interesting to note that this construction is functorial. More precisely\dots @@ -426,7 +428,7 @@ words, we'll show\dots \end{theorem} \begin{proof} - Given \(\gamma \in {C'}^\infty(I, M)\) and \(X \in H^1(\gamma^*)\), let + Given \(\gamma \in {C'}^\infty(I, M)\) and \(X \in H^1(\gamma^* TM)\), let \begin{align*} g_X^\gamma : H^0(\gamma^* TM) \times H^0(\gamma^* TM) & \to \RR \\ (Y, Z) & @@ -449,7 +451,10 @@ words, we'll show\dots \[ g_\gamma(X, Y) = g_0^\gamma(X, Y) - = \int_0^1 \langle (d \exp)_0 X_t, (d \exp)_0 Y_t \rangle \; \dt + = \int_0^1 + \langle + (d \exp)_{0_{\gamma(t)}} X_t, (d \exp)_{0_{\gamma(t)}} Y_t + \rangle \; \dt = \int_0^1 \langle X_t, Y_t \rangle \; \dt = \langle X, Y \rangle_0 \]