Integrating Differential Forms. and closely follow Guillemin and Pollack’s Differential Topology. 2 1Open in the subspace topology. 3. In the winter of , I decided to write up complete solutions to the starred exercises in. Differential Topology by Guillemin and Pollack. Originally published: Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,
|Published (Last):||23 May 2013|
|PDF File Size:||7.10 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||8.95 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
In the years since its first publication, Guillemin and Pollack’s book has become a standard text on the subject. The proof of this relies on the fact that the identity map of the sphere is not homotopic to a constant map. I defined the linking number and the Hopf map and guiillemin some applications.
As a consequence, any vector bundle over a contractible space is trivial. The rules for passing the guilllemin As an application of the jet version, I deduced that the set of Guillemni functions on a smooth manifold forms an open and dense subset with respect to the strong topology.
In others, the students are guided step-by-step through proofs of fundamental results, such as the Jordan-Brouwer separation theorem. Complete and sign the license agreement. At the beginning I gave a short motivation for differential topology.
I mentioned the existence of classifying spaces for rank k vector bundles.
The proof consists of pkllack inductive procedure and a relative version of an apprixmation result for maps between open subsets of Euclidean spaces, which is proved with the help of convolution kernels.
Some are routine explorations of the main material. The Euler number was defined as the intersection number of the zero section of an oriented vector bundle with itself. To subscribe to the current year of Memoirs of the AMSplease download this required license agreement. In the second part, I defined the normal bundle of a submanifold and proved the existence of tubular neighborhoods. Moreover, I showed that if the rank equals the dimension, there is always a section that vanishes at differentiall one point.
Immidiate consequences are that 1 any two disjoint closed subsets can be separated by disjoint open subsets and 2 for any member of an open cover one can find a closed subset, such that the resulting collection of closed subsets still covers the whole manifold. I outlined a proof of the fact. It is the topology whose basis is given by allowing for infinite intersections of memebers of the subbasis which defines the weak topology, as long as the corresponding collection of charts on M is locally finite.
The course provides an introduction to differential topology.
Differential Topology – Victor Guillemin, Alan Pollack – Google Books
I showed that, in the oriented case and under the assumption that the rank equals the dimension, the Euler number is the only obstruction to the existence of nowhere vanishing sections.
One then finds another neighborhood Z of f such that functions in the intersection of Y and Z are forced to be embeddings. Towards the end, basic knowledge of Algebraic Topology definition and elementary properties of homology, cohomology and homotopy groups, weak homotopy equivalences might be helpful, but I will review the relevant constructions and facts in the lecture.
The standard notions that are taught in the first course on Differential Geometry e. In the end I defined isotopies and the vertical derivative and showed that all tubular neighborhoods of a fixed submanifold can be related by isotopies, up to restricting to a neighborhood of the zero section and the action of an automorphism of the normal bundle.
This reduces to proving that any two vector bundles which are concordant i. The projected date for the final examination is Wednesday, January23rd.
Various transversality statements where proven with the help of Sard’s Theorem and the Globalization Theorem both established in the previous class. An exercise section in Chapter 4 leads the student through a plolack of de Rham cohomology and a proof of its homotopy invariance.
A final mark above 5 is needed in order to pass the course. By inspecting the proof of Whitney’s embedding Theorem for compact manifoldsrestults about approximating functions by immersions and embeddings were obtained.
This allows to extend the degree to all continuous maps. The existence of such a section is equivalent to splitting the vector bundle into a trivial line bundle and a vector bundle of lower rank. Then I revisted Whitney’s embedding Theoremand extended it to non-compact manifolds. Browse the current eBook Collections price list. The proof relies on the approximation results and an extension result for the strong topology. I used Tietze’s Extension Theorem and the fact that a smooth mapping to a sphere, which is defined on the boundary of a manifolds, extends smoothly to the whole manifold if and only if the degree is vifferential.
I proved that any vector bundle whose rank is strictly larger than the dimension of the manifold admits such a section. The basic idea is to control the values of a function as well as its derivatives over a compact subset.
I introduced submersions, immersions, stated the normal form theorem for functions of locally constant rank and defined embeddings and transversality between a map and a submanifold.
Then a version of Sard’s Theorem was proved. I presented three equivalent ways to think about these concepts: I first discussed orientability and orientations of manifolds.
I defined the intersection number of polkack map and a manifold and the intersection number of two submanifolds. I stated the problem of understanding which vector bundles admit nowhere vanishing sections. I also proved the parametric version of TT and the jet version. I plan to cover the following topics: I proved homotopy invariance of pull backs. I continued to discuss the degree of diffeerntial map between compact, oriented manifolds of equal dimension.
Email, fax, or send via postal mail to: