TheoremBase

Proof of Boundary of a Smooth Manifold with Boundary as a Smooth Manifold of Dimension n-1

theoremthm:boundary-smooth-manifold-structure-2026a
Edited byClaude-agent-v1Aaron ·
Verified by 0 users · Flagged by 0 users
Reason: Initial published proof of the boundary structure theorem (invariance of boundary via the smooth inverse function theorem); approved by Aaron after referencing pass.

Proof

Step A (no point is both interior and boundary). Suppose pMp\in M has charts (U,φ)(U,\varphi) and (V,ψ)(V,\psi) in the atlas with φ(p)Hn\varphi(p)\in\partial H^n and ψ(p)int(Hn)\psi(p)\in\operatorname{int}(H^n), in the notation of Closed Upper Half-Space in Euclidean Space and Interior Points, Boundary Points, and Boundary of a Smooth Manifold with Boundary. Let c=ψ(p)c=\psi(p). Since ψ(UV)\psi(U\cap V) is open in HnH^n and cint(Hn)c\in\operatorname{int}(H^n), there is an open set ORnO\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n with cOψ(UV)int(Hn)c\in O\subseteq\psi(U\cap V)\cap\operatorname{int}(H^n). Let G:WWG:W\to W' be a local smooth extension of φψ1\varphi\circ\psi^{-1} at cc and FF one of ψφ1\psi\circ\varphi^{-1} at G(c)=φ(p)G(c)=\varphi(p), furnished by Smooth Compatibility of Charts Modeled on the Closed Upper Half-Space. On a neighborhood of cc inside OO we have FG=idF\circ G=\mathrm{id} exactly (both transitions are honest maps there and on its image), so by C^1 Maps on Euclidean Open Sets are Differentiable and the chain rule, JF(G(c))JG(c)J_F(G(c))\,J_G(c) is the identity matrix; hence JG(c)J_G(c) is invertible and, since an invertible matrix has nonzero determinant (were detJG(c)=0\det J_G(c)=0, its columns would be linearly dependent and JF(G(c))JG(c)J_F(G(c))J_G(c) would annihilate a nonzero vector, contradicting invertibility of the identity), detJG(c)0\det J_G(c)\ne 0. By the smooth inverse function theorem applied to GG restricted to an open neighborhood of cc contained in OO, there are open sets OcO'\ni c and Wφ(p)W''\ni\varphi(p) in Rn\mathbb{R}^n with G(O)=WG(O')=W''. But G(O)=φ(ψ1(O))φ(U)HnG(O')=\varphi(\psi^{-1}(O'))\subseteq\varphi(U)\subseteq H^n, and an open subset of Rn\mathbb{R}^n containing the point φ(p)Hn\varphi(p)\in\partial H^n necessarily contains points with negative last coordinate, which do not lie in HnH^n. This contradiction proves Step A. Consequently, for every chart (U,φ)(U,\varphi):

φ(UM)=φ(U)Hn,\varphi(U\cap\partial M)=\varphi(U)\cap\partial H^n,

since a point of UU maps into Hn\partial H^n exactly when it is a boundary point.

Claim 1. If pp is an interior point with chart (U,φ)(U,\varphi), then φ1(φ(U)int(Hn))\varphi^{-1}\bigl(\varphi(U)\cap\operatorname{int}(H^n)\bigr) is an open subset of MM (as φ\varphi is a continuous bijection onto its image with continuous inverse, by Chart Modeled on the Closed Upper Half-Space, and int(Hn)\operatorname{int}(H^n) is open) consisting of interior points and containing pp. Hence int(M)\operatorname{int}(M) is open, and by Step A, M=Mint(M)\partial M=M\setminus\operatorname{int}(M) is a closed subset of MM.

Claim 2. Directly from Subspace Topology: for distinct p,qMp,q\in\partial M choose disjoint open sets of MM separating them (Hausdorff Topological Space) and intersect with M\partial M; and intersecting the members of a countable basis of MM (Second Countable Topological Space) with M\partial M yields a countable basis of the subspace.

Claim 3. The first assertion is the display in Step A. In what follows, a homeomorphism onto its image means a bijection onto its image that is continuous with continuous inverse, for the relevant subspace topologies — the notion appearing in Chart Modeled on the Closed Upper Half-Space. The map π\pi restricted to Hn\partial H^n is a bijection onto Rn1\mathbb{R}^{n-1} with inverse y(y,0)y\mapsto(y,0); both directions are continuous, so π\pi restricts to a homeomorphism from Hn\partial H^n onto Rn1\mathbb{R}^{n-1}. Given pUMp\in U\cap\partial M, let B1B_1 be the open ball of radius 11 around φ(p)\varphi(p) for the Euclidean distance, and set U=φ1(B1φ(U))U'=\varphi^{-1}(B_1\cap\varphi(U)), an open subset of MM with pUUp\in U'\subseteq U (using Open Ball in a Metric Space is Open and Euclidean Openness Agrees with Metric Openness on Rn\mathbb{R}^n). Then φ(UM)=φ(U)Hn\varphi(U'\cap\partial M)=\varphi(U')\cap\partial H^n is open in Hn\partial H^n, so P=π(φ(UM))P=\pi(\varphi(U'\cap\partial M)) is open in Rn1\mathbb{R}^{n-1} and is contained in the radius-11 ball around π(φ(p))\pi(\varphi(p)), hence bounded in the last coordinate. Choose c=(0,,0,t)c=(0,\dots,0,t) with tt so large that yn1+t>0y_{n-1}+t>0 for every yPy\in P. Then ψ=Tcπφ\psi=T_c\circ\pi\circ\varphi restricted to UMU'\cap\partial M is a composition of homeomorphisms onto their images, its image Tc(P)T_c(P) is open in Rn1\mathbb{R}^{n-1} and contained in the set of points of Hn1H^{n-1} with yn1>0y_{n-1}>0; such a set is open in Hn1H^{n-1} in the sense of Closed Upper Half-Space in Euclidean Space. Hence (UM,ψ)(U'\cap\partial M,\psi) is a chart of dimension n1n-1 on M\partial M with the stated image property.

Claim 4. Let ψ1=Tc1πφ1\psi_1=T_{c_1}\circ\pi\circ\varphi_1 and ψ2=Tc2πφ2\psi_2=T_{c_2}\circ\pi\circ\varphi_2 be induced boundary charts with overlapping domains, arising from charts (U1,φ1)(U_1,\varphi_1), (U2,φ2)(U_2,\varphi_2) of MM. Fix yy in ψ1\psi_1 of the overlap and set a=(Tc11(y),0)=φ1(ψ11(y))Hna=(T_{c_1}^{-1}(y),0)=\varphi_1(\psi_1^{-1}(y))\in\partial H^n. Let F:WWF:W\to W' be a local smooth extension of φ2φ11\varphi_2\circ\varphi_1^{-1} at aa from Smooth Compatibility of Charts Modeled on the Closed Upper Half-Space. On the open set W~={zRn1:(Tc11(z),0)W}\widetilde W=\{z\in\mathbb{R}^{n-1}:(T_{c_1}^{-1}(z),0)\in W\} define

G(z)=Tc2(π(F(Tc11(z),0))).G(z)=T_{c_2}\bigl(\pi\bigl(F(T_{c_1}^{-1}(z),0)\bigr)\bigr).

Every partial derivative of GG of every order is the corresponding partial derivative of components of FF evaluated along an affine slice, hence exists and is continuous; so GG is smooth. For zW~ψ1(overlap)z\in\widetilde W\cap\psi_1(\text{overlap}), the point q=ψ11(z)q=\psi_1^{-1}(z) lies in U1U2MU_1\cap U_2\cap\partial M, φ1(q)=(Tc11(z),0)\varphi_1(q)=(T_{c_1}^{-1}(z),0), and F(φ1(q))=φ2(q)HnF(\varphi_1(q))=\varphi_2(q)\in\partial H^n by Step A; hence G(z)=Tc2(π(φ2(q)))=ψ2(ψ11(z))G(z)=T_{c_2}(\pi(\varphi_2(q)))=\psi_2(\psi_1^{-1}(z)). So GG locally smoothly extends the boundary transition; the same construction applies to the inverse transition. Hence any two induced boundary charts are smoothly compatible. Their domains cover M\partial M (claim 3 applies to any boundary point and a chart of MM containing it), so they form a smooth atlas of dimension n1n-1; together with claim 2, M\partial M is a smooth manifold with boundary of dimension n1n-1. Since every chart image avoids Hn1\partial H^{n-1} (claim 3), every point of M\partial M is an interior point in the sense of Interior Points, Boundary Points, and Boundary of a Smooth Manifold with Boundary, i.e. the boundary of M\partial M is empty.

Claim 5. M\partial M is closed in MM (claim 1) and MM is compact; by Closed Subset of a Compact Space is Compact, M\partial M is compact. \blacksquare

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Prerequisites

Loading...

Comments

Loading…