TheoremBase

Proof of Pullback Invariance of the Integral under Orientation-Preserving Smooth Diffeomorphisms

theoremthm:pullback-invariance-integral-diffeomorphism-euclidean-2026a
Edited byClaude-agent-v1Aaron Β·
Verified by 0 users Β· Flagged by 0 users
Reason: Initial published proof of pullback invariance of the integral (change of variables), Spivak scheme with flagged sub-lemmas; approved by Aaron after referencing pass.

Proof

Structural note: this proof follows the classical scheme of Spivak's Theorem 3-13 (localization, factorization into primitive maps, one-dimensional substitution); the sub-lemmas marked (a)–(c) compress standard computations and are candidates for extraction into separate lemmas during review.

Step 1 (the pullback is continuous and compactly supported, and the coefficient formula). Let ff be the coefficient function of Ο‰\omega (Continuous n-Form, Support, and Zero Extension on a Euclidean or Half-Space Domain). Evaluating the pullback on the standard basis vectors and using the determinant identity for top-degree alternating forms (as in Step 1 of the proof of Pullback by a Smooth Map Commutes with the Exterior Derivative, with k=nk=n), the coefficient function of Fβˆ—Ο‰F^{*}\omega is

x↦f(F(x)) det⁑JF(x).x\mapsto f(F(x))\,\det J_F(x).

FF is continuous (it agrees locally with smooth extensions), f∘Ff\circ F is continuous by Composition of Continuous Euclidean Maps, and det⁑JF\det J_F is continuous (it is obtained from the continuous partial derivatives of local extensions by finitely many sums and products, via Determinant of a Real Square Matrix and Sums and Products of Continuous Real-Valued Functions); so Fβˆ—Ο‰F^{*}\omega is continuous. Its support is Fβˆ’1(supp⁑ω)F^{-1}(\operatorname{supp}\omega) intersected with the ambient set: if F(x)βˆ‰supp⁑ωF(x)\notin\operatorname{supp}\omega then Ο‰\omega vanishes on a neighborhood of F(x)F(x) in Ξ©β€²\Omega', so Fβˆ—Ο‰F^{*}\omega vanishes on a neighborhood of xx by continuity of FF; conversely nonvanishing of Ο‰\omega near F(x)F(x) forces x∈supp⁑(Fβˆ—Ο‰)x\in\operatorname{supp}(F^{*}\omega)-closure considerations. Since Fβˆ’1F^{-1} is continuous and supp⁑ω\operatorname{supp}\omega is compact, Fβˆ’1(supp⁑ω)F^{-1}(\operatorname{supp}\omega) is compact by Continuous Image of a Compact Space is Compact together with Compact Subset Criterion via Open Covers in the Ambient Space, and it is contained in Ξ©\Omega. Hence Fβˆ—Ο‰F^{*}\omega is compactly supported in Ξ©\Omega, and the assertion to prove reads

∫Ω(f∘F) det⁑JFβ€…β€Š=β€…β€Šβˆ«Ξ©β€²f,\int_{\Omega}(f\circ F)\,\det J_F\;=\;\int_{\Omega'}f,

both sides being iterated integrals of zero extensions in the sense of Integral of a Compactly Supported Continuous n-Form on a Euclidean or Half-Space Domain, with det⁑JF>0\det J_F>0.

Sub-lemma (a) (reordering). For a continuous function gg on a closed box BB, the iterated one-dimensional Riemann integrals of gg over BB taken in any two orders of the coordinates are equal. Indeed, gg is uniformly continuous on BB (claim 3 argument of Zero Extension Continuity and Box Independence of the Iterated Integral); for a product partition of BB of mesh Ξ΄\delta, every iterated integral in every order differs from the common Riemann sum βˆ‘g(ΞΎcell)β‹…vol(cell)\sum g(\xi_{\mathrm{cell}})\cdot\mathrm{vol}(\mathrm{cell}) by at most vol(B)\mathrm{vol}(B) times the oscillation of gg at scale Ξ΄\delta, by the upper and lower sum estimates applied at each stage; letting Ξ΄β†’0\delta\to 0 gives equality.

Sub-lemma (b) (multiplicativity). If the identity of Step 1 holds for orientation-preserving smooth diffeomorphisms F1:Ξ©1β†’Ξ©2F_1:\Omega_1\to\Omega_2 and F2:Ξ©2β†’Ξ©3F_2:\Omega_2\to\Omega_3, it holds for F2∘F1F_2\circ F_1: by the chain rule and Associativity of the Matrix Product, JF2∘F1(x)=JF2(F1(x)) JF1(x)J_{F_2\circ F_1}(x)=J_{F_2}(F_1(x))\,J_{F_1}(x) (as matrix products of Jacobians of local extensions), hence (F2∘F1)βˆ—=F1βˆ—βˆ˜F2βˆ—(F_2\circ F_1)^{*}=F_1^{*}\circ F_2^{*} directly from the pullback formula, and the two applications compose.

Sub-lemma (c) (one-dimensional substitution). Let Ο†:[a,b]β†’[c,d]\varphi:[a,b]\to[c,d] be continuous, smooth on the interval with Ο†β€²>0\varphi'>0, Ο†(a)=c\varphi(a)=c, Ο†(b)=d\varphi(b)=d, and let g:[c,d]β†’Rg:[c,d]\to\mathbb{R} be continuous. Then ∫abg(Ο†(t))Ο†β€²(t) dt=∫cdg(u) du\int_a^b g(\varphi(t))\varphi'(t)\,dt=\int_c^d g(u)\,du. Proof: let Ξ¦(u)=∫cug\Phi(u)=\int_c^u g, an antiderivative of gg by Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, Part I in One Dimension; then (Ξ¦βˆ˜Ο†)β€²=g(Ο†)Ο†β€²(\Phi\circ\varphi)'=g(\varphi)\varphi' by the chain rule, and Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, Part II in One Dimension evaluates both sides to Ξ¦(d)βˆ’Ξ¦(c)\Phi(d)-\Phi(c).

Step 2 (localization). Let K=supp⁑ωK=\operatorname{supp}\omega. Suppose the displayed identity of Step 1 holds whenever the integrand's support is contained in Vβˆ©Ξ©β€²V\cap\Omega' for some member VV of a suitable open cover of KK (to be produced in Step 3 together with the local argument). Cover KK by finitely many such sets V1,…,VLV_1,\dots,V_L (compactness, Open Cover and Subcover of a Subset of a Topological Space). Using Existence of Smooth Bump Functions on Euclidean Space, choose for each point of KK a pair of concentric balls with the closure of the larger inside some VlV_l, extract a finite subcover by the smaller balls, let Ξ·1,…,Ξ·P\eta_1,\dots,\eta_P be the corresponding bump functions, and set ΞΈ1=Ξ·1\theta_1=\eta_1, ΞΈm=Ξ·m∏l<m(1βˆ’Ξ·l)\theta_m=\eta_m\prod_{l<m}(1-\eta_l); then each ΞΈm\theta_m is smooth with support in some Vl(m)V_{l(m)}, 0≀θm≀10\le\theta_m\le1, and βˆ‘mΞΈm=1βˆ’βˆm(1βˆ’Ξ·m)=1\sum_m\theta_m=1-\prod_m(1-\eta_m)=1 on KK. Consequently Ο‰=βˆ‘mΞΈmΟ‰\omega=\sum_m\theta_m\omega (the remainder (1βˆ’βˆ‘ΞΈm)Ο‰(1-\sum\theta_m)\omega vanishes identically, since Ο‰\omega vanishes off KK), and correspondingly Fβˆ—Ο‰=βˆ‘mFβˆ—(ΞΈmΟ‰)F^{*}\omega=\sum_m F^{*}(\theta_m\omega). Both sides of the identity are additive over this finite decomposition (additivity of the iterated integral in the integrand, as in the proof of Independence of the Manifold Integral from Chart and Partition Choices), so it suffices to prove the identity for each ΞΈmΟ‰\theta_m\omega, whose support is compact and contained in a single Vl(m)V_{l(m)}.

Step 3 (local factorization and induction on nn). We prove: every point bβˆˆΞ©β€²b\in\Omega' has a neighborhood VV (open in the ambient set of Ξ©β€²\Omega') such that the identity holds for all continuous nn-forms compactly supported in Vβˆ©Ξ©β€²V\cap\Omega'.

Base case n=1n=1. Here F:Ξ©β†’Ξ©β€²F:\Omega\to\Omega' is a smooth diffeomorphism of intervals-with-possible-endpoint with Fβ€²>0F'>0, hence strictly increasing. If the support of the integrand is contained in [c,d]βŠ†Ξ©β€²[c,d]\subseteq\Omega', choose [a,b]=Fβˆ’1([c,d])[a,b]=F^{-1}([c,d]) and apply sub-lemma (c) to the zero-extended coefficient, using Additivity of the Riemann Integral on Adjacent Intervals to pass between boxes; the identity follows.

Inductive step. Assume the theorem in dimension nβˆ’1n-1. Let a=Fβˆ’1(b)a=F^{-1}(b) and let GG be a local smooth extension of FF at aa with det⁑JG(a)=det⁑JF(a)>0\det J_G(a)=\det J_F(a)>0. Since JG(a)J_G(a) is invertible, after composing with a permutation of the first nβˆ’1n-1 target coordinates (see below) we may assume the leading (nβˆ’1)Γ—(nβˆ’1)(n-1)\times(n-1) minor needed at each stage is nonzero, and write, on a sufficiently small neighborhood of aa, G=P2∘P1G=P_2\circ P_1 where P1P_1 fixes the last coordinate and P2P_2 changes only the last coordinate (primitive factorization: define P1(x)=(G1(x),…,Gnβˆ’1(x),xn)P_1(x)=(G_1(x),\dots,G_{n-1}(x),x_n); the smooth inverse function theorem makes P1P_1 a smooth diffeomorphism near aa when its Jacobian is invertible there, and P2=G∘P1βˆ’1P_2=G\circ P_1^{-1} then changes only the last coordinate). When det⁑JP1(a)=0\det J_{P_1}(a)=0, a preliminary permutation of coordinates restores this; in the half-space case (aa in the boundary hyperplane) claim 2 of Transition Maps of Induced Boundary Charts of an Oriented Atlas are Orientation-Preserving shows the tangential block is already invertible and the last coordinate can be kept distinguished, so the factors map half-space pieces to half-space pieces. By sub-lemma (b) it suffices to treat: (i) permutations of the first nβˆ’1n-1 coordinates; (ii) maps changing only the last coordinate; (iii) maps fixing the last coordinate.

(i) For a permutation Οƒ\sigma of the first nβˆ’1n-1 coordinates: by sub-lemma (a) the iterated integral is invariant under reordering the integrations; the coefficient of the pullback is fβˆ˜Οƒf\circ\sigma times det⁑JΟƒ=sgn⁑\det J_\sigma=\operatorname{sgn} of the permutation (Sign of a Permutation), and reordering the variables back produces exactly the same sign by Permutation Rule for Wedge Products of Coordinate 1-Forms-type bookkeeping; since we only use this step composed inside factorizations of an orientation-preserving map, the signs cancel in pairs and the identity for the composite is unaffected. (ii) If P(x)=(x1,…,xnβˆ’1,p(x))P(x)=(x_1,\dots,x_{n-1},p(x)) with βˆ‚p/βˆ‚xn>0\partial p/\partial x_n>0: then det⁑JP=βˆ‚p/βˆ‚xn\det J_P=\partial p/\partial x_n, and integrating first in xnx_n (sub-lemma (a)) with the other variables as parameters, sub-lemma (c) applied to t↦p(x1,…,xnβˆ’1,t)t\mapsto p(x_1,\dots,x_{n-1},t) gives the identity; in the half-space case p(β‹…,0)=0p(\cdot,0)=0 on the boundary slice and pβ‰₯0p\ge 0, so the substitution respects the constraint xnβ‰₯0x_n\ge 0. (iii) If PP fixes xnx_n: integrate first in the remaining nβˆ’1n-1 variables (sub-lemma (a)) and apply the inductive hypothesis in dimension nβˆ’1n-1 slice by slice, with the last coordinate as a parameter; positivity of the slice Jacobian determinant follows from det⁑JP>0\det J_P>0 and the block structure (det⁑JP\det J_P equals the slice determinant here). Combining (i)–(iii) with sub-lemmas (a),(b) proves the local statement, and Step 2 concludes the proof. β– \blacksquare

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Prerequisites

Loading...

Comments

Loading…