DOCSLIB.ORG

On the Concept of Genus in Topology and Complex Analysis Friedrich E

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On the Concept of Genus in Topology and Complex Analysis Friedrich E On the Concept of Genus in Topology and Complex Analysis Friedrich E. P. Hirzebruch and Matthias Kreck he English word “genus” hails from biology, where it is used to connote a grouping of organisms having com- mon characteristics. In mathematics the word is also used to group objects with Tcommon characteristics. The concept of genus arises in various mathematical contexts, such as number theory, as well as in the areas we consider Figure 1. in this article, topology and complex analysis. Even within the latter two areas there are various no- tions of genus that historically originated with the genus of an oriented surface. We begin with these (meaning compact without boundary), oriented 2 origins and afterward treat generalizations and surface F is obtained from the 2-sphere S by modifications. We provide no detailed definitions taking repeated connected sums with the torus, 1 1 and proofs; rather, our goal is to give the reader T = S × S . The number of tori added is a topo- an intuitive feeling for the concept of genera. logical invariant called the genus of F, g(F), which equals Clebsch’s p. The Genus of a Surface Riemann’s concept of surface is not easy to In his paper “Theorie der Abel’schen Functionen” summarize. It is something like a ramified cover- [20] Riemann studied the topology of surfaces. He ing of the plane, and he implicitly assumes that classified a surface by looking for simple closed a surface has a sort of differentiable structure, curves along which to cut in order to obtain a which is a great technical help. But the genus is simple presentation of the surface. He called the actually a topological invariant. One can prove this minimal number of such curves 2p and showed by using either the fundamental group or the first 2 that this invariant determines the surface. A few homology group H1(F). Specifically, H1(S ) = 0, years later, when Clebsch studied surfaces from and the formula a more algebraic geometric viewpoint, he called p H (F♯T ) ≅ H (F) ⊕ Z2, “das Geschlecht (genus)” of the surface. 1 1 In more modern terms one can formulate Rie- where ♯ stands for connected sum, implies that 2 mann’s insight as follows: every connected, closed a surface Fn obtained from S by connected sum with n tori has Friedrich E. P. Hirzebruch is professor emeritus at the 2n Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik, Bonn, Germany. His H1(Fn) ≅ Z . email address is [email protected]. The rank of the k-th homology group is called the Matthias Kreck is a professor at the Hausdorff Research k-th Betti number, Institute for Mathematics at the University of Bonn. His email address is [email protected]. bk(X) := rank(Hk(X)), June/July 2009 Notices of the AMS 713 and so we obtain the formula with countable basis has a triangulation, and then a proof in the combinatorial world is not difficult. g(F) = b1(F)/2. Instead of the Betti number one can use the What Is the Analytic Significance of the Euler characteristic, Genus? i e(X) := X(−1) bi(X), The main intention of Riemann’s topological i considerations was to study surfaces as objects to determine the genus of F, namely, b0(F) = in complex analysis: in modern terms, as complex b2(F) = 1, and so e(F) = 2 − b1(F) = 2 − 2g(F), manifolds of complex dimension 1, complex implying curves. A complex manifold is a topological g(F) = 1 − e(F)/2. manifold (meaning a topological Hausdorff space The Euler number itself can be computed with countable basis locally homeomorphic to Rn) combinatorially without referring to homology. together with an atlas whose coordinate changes Every surface has a triangulation (see next sec- are holomorphic maps. We note that in complex tion), which we can visualize by putting a net of dimension 1 a countable basis follows from the triangles over F existence of a complex structure [19]. On such a complex curve Riemann considered divisors D, which are finite formal linear combinations of points in the surface with coefficients in Z. Each meromorphic function on a closed surface (in the following we assume that the surfaces are closed) determines a divisor D by its zeroes and poles (counted with multiplicity). To each divisor we attach the sum of the coefficients called deg(D). Given D we can consider the vector space of meromorphic functions characterized by the property that its divisor plus the given divisor does not have negative multiplicities. This vector space is finite-dimensional, and its dimension is Figure 2. denoted by l(D). For a divisor D Riemann [20] proved his in- equality and then l(D) ≥ deg(D) + 1 − g. e(F) = number of vertices − number of edges This is the starting point of the famous Riemann- Roch theorem [21], which gives an equality using + number of triangles. the canonical divisor K: However, to show that the combinatorially defined l(D) − l(K − D) = deg(D) + 1 − g. Euler characteristic is a topological invariant needs a proof. Why is this an important result? If we look at the right-hand side of the equation, we see the sum What Is the Topological Significance of the of a very simple invariant of a divisor, its degree, Genus? and a topological invariant, 1 − g. However, the So far we have attached a topological invariant, a left-hand side is a complicated analytic invariant: certain characterization, to a surface: the genus. the difference of dimensions of certain function How powerful is this invariant? What is its topo- spaces, more precisely spaces of meromorphic logical significance? One can interpret Riemann as functions with restricted zeroes and poles. saying that a differentiable surface is determined by its genus. A modern proof of this can be ob- The Arithmetic Genus of Algebraic tained from elementary Morse theory [6], [7]. But a Varieties stronger statement is true: the genus characterizes It should be noted that the passage from dif- the homeomorphism type. This result was proved ferentiable structures to complex structures is a by Rado long after Riemann’s work: dramatic change, since there are in general many Theorem [19]. Two connected closed oriented sur- different complex structures on a given surface. faces F and F ′ are homeomorphic if and only if One has a moduli space of complex structures ′ which for g ≥ 2 is itself a complex manifold of g(F) = g(F ). complex dimension 3g − 3. For g = 0 the moduli This is not an easy result. The central step in space is a point, and for g = 1 it has complex Rado’s proof is to show that a topological surface dimension 1. 714 Notices of the AMS Volume 56, Number 6 One can proceed further and impose even more The Todd Genus refined structures on a surface, for example, com- The fourth definition of the arithmetic genus plex algebraic structures. Whereas topological and was given by J. A. Todd [24]. A canonical divi- smooth manifolds were intensively studied in the sor of a smooth projective algebraic variety of first half of the last century, complex manifolds dimension n is given as a divisor of a meromor- of dimension greater than 1 were not investigated phic n-form. It is an algebraic cycle of topological very much by complex analytic methods (of course codimension 2. Todd introduced geometric canon- the function theory of several complex variables ical cycles for all even codimensions. He defined in open domains in Cn was a subject of great polynomials in these cycles, where the product is interest). In contrast, algebraic varieties, the set of given by intersections. The n-th Todd polynomial zeroes of a family of polynomials, were the subject is of codimension 2n and represents for a variety of constant mathematical investigations, at least of dimension n a certain number called the Todd by constructing interesting examples and studying genus. Todd believed that his genus was the same their geometry. Many formulae were found that as the arithmetic genus, but rigorous justification of this fact came much later. led to interesting questions and conjectures. The Todd canonical classes represent homol- In this context another genus, the arithmetic ogy classes, and they are up to signs Poincaré genus, played an important role. In the early dual to the Chern classes of the tangent bundle of 1950s four definitions of the arithmetic genus of the variety [18]. More generally, Chern classes are a projective smooth algebraic variety V of com- defined for complex vector bundles. In contrast to plex dimension n were known. The first two are complex manifolds, where holomorphic maps play denoted by pa(V) and Pa(V). Severi conjectured a definitive role, complex vector bundles are pure- that these numbers agree and can be computed in ly topological objects; roughly speaking, they are terms of the dimension gi (V) of the vector space a family of complex k-dimensional vector spaces of holomorphic differential forms of degree i: parametrized by the points of a topological space X. There is also a topology on the disjoint union of pa(V) = Pa(V) = gn(V) − gn−1(V) these vector spaces, and the key property is that n−1 locally this family of vector spaces is homeomor- + · · · + (−1) g1(V). phic to a product U ×Ck, where U is an open subset The expression on the right-hand side is the third of X. The formal definition of Chern classes is too definition, which we recommend to the reader complicated for an article such as this one, but (actually in a slightly modified form described the basic idea behind them can be explained by below).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Introduction to Topology the Classification Theorem for Surfaces by E
    An Introduction to Topology An Introduction to Topology The Classification theorem for Surfaces By E. C. Zeeman Introduction. The classification theorem is a beautiful example of geometric topology. Although it was discovered in the last century*, yet it manages to convey the spirit of present day research. The proof that we give here is elementary, and its is hoped more intuitive than that found in most textbooks, but in none the less rigorous. It is designed for readers who have never done any topology before. It is the sort of mathematics that could be taught in schools both to foster geometric intuition, and to counteract the present day alarming tendency to drop geometry. It is profound, and yet preserves a sense of fun. In Appendix 1 we explain how a deeper result can be proved if one has available the more sophisticated tools of analytic topology and algebraic topology. Examples. Before starting the theorem let us look at a few examples of surfaces. In any branch of mathematics it is always a good thing to start with examples, because they are the source of our intuition. All the following pictures are of surfaces in 3-dimensions. In example 1 by the word “sphere” we mean just the surface of the sphere, and not the inside. In fact in all the examples we mean just the surface and not the solid inside. 1. Sphere. 2. Torus (or inner tube). 3. Knotted torus. 4. Sphere with knotted torus bored through it. * Zeeman wrote this article in the mid-twentieth century. 1 An Introduction to Topology 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Equivelar Octahedron of Genus 3 in 3-Space
    Equivelar octahedron of genus 3 in 3-space Ruslan Mizhaev ([email protected]) Apr. 2020 ABSTRACT . Building up a toroidal polyhedron of genus 3, consisting of 8 nine-sided faces, is given. From the point of view of topology, a polyhedron can be considered as an embedding of a cubic graph with 24 vertices and 36 edges in a surface of genus 3. This polyhedron is a contender for the maximal genus among octahedrons in 3-space. 1. Introduction This solution can be attributed to the problem of determining the maximal genus of polyhedra with the number of faces - . As is known, at least 7 faces are required for a polyhedron of genus = 1 . For cases ≥ 8 , there are currently few examples. If all faces of the toroidal polyhedron are – gons and all vertices are q-valence ( ≥ 3), such polyhedral are called either locally regular or simply equivelar [1]. The characteristics of polyhedra are abbreviated as , ; [1]. 2. Polyhedron {9, 3; 3} V1. The paper considers building up a polyhedron 9, 3; 3 in 3-space. The faces of a polyhedron are non- convex flat 9-gons without self-intersections. The polyhedron is symmetric when rotated through 1804 around the axis (Fig. 3). One of the features of this polyhedron is that any face has two pairs with which it borders two edges. The polyhedron also has a ratio of angles and faces - = − 1. To describe polyhedra with similar characteristics ( = − 1) we use the Euler formula − + = = 2 − 2, where is the Euler characteristic. Since = 3, the equality 3 = 2 holds true.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Glossary for AQA GCSE Biology Student Book
    Biology Glossary amino acids small molecules from which proteins are A built abiotic factor physical or non-living conditions amylase a digestive enzyme (carbohydrase) that that affect the distribution of a population in an breaks down starch ecosystem, such as light, temperature, soil pH anaerobic respiration respiration without using absorption the process by which soluble products oxygen of digestion move into the blood from the small intestine antibacterial chemicals chemicals produced by plants as a defence mechanism; the amount abstinence method of contraception whereby the produced will increase if the plant is under attack couple refrains from intercourse, particularly when an egg might be in the oviduct antibiotic e.g. penicillin; medicines that work inside the body to kill bacterial pathogens accommodation ability of the eyes to change focus antibody protein normally present in the body acid rain rain water which is made more acidic by or produced in response to an antigen, which it pollutant gases neutralises, thus producing an immune response active site the place on an enzyme where the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) an increasing substrate molecule binds problem in the twenty-first century whereby active transport in active transport, cells use energy bacteria have evolved to develop resistance against to transport substances through cell membranes antibiotics due to their overuse against a concentration gradient antiretroviral drugs drugs used to treat HIV adaptation features that organisms have to help infections; they
    [Show full text]
  • INTRODUCTION to ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY, CLASS 25 Contents 1
    INTRODUCTION TO ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY, CLASS 25 RAVI VAKIL Contents 1. The genus of a nonsingular projective curve 1 2. The Riemann-Roch Theorem with Applications but No Proof 2 2.1. A criterion for closed immersions 3 3. Recap of course 6 PS10 back today; PS11 due today. PS12 due Monday December 13. 1. The genus of a nonsingular projective curve The definition I’m going to give you isn’t the one people would typically start with. I prefer to introduce this one here, because it is more easily computable. Definition. The tentative genus of a nonsingular projective curve C is given by 1 − deg ΩC =2g 2. Fact (from Riemann-Roch, later). g is always a nonnegative integer, i.e. deg K = −2, 0, 2,.... Complex picture: Riemann-surface with g “holes”. Examples. Hence P1 has genus 0, smooth plane cubics have genus 1, etc. Exercise: Hyperelliptic curves. Suppose f(x0,x1) is a polynomial of homo- geneous degree n where n is even. Let C0 be the affine plane curve given by 2 y = f(1,x1), with the generically 2-to-1 cover C0 → U0.LetC1be the affine 2 plane curve given by z = f(x0, 1), with the generically 2-to-1 cover C1 → U1. Check that C0 and C1 are nonsingular. Show that you can glue together C0 and C1 (and the double covers) so as to give a double cover C → P1. (For computational convenience, you may assume that neither [0; 1] nor [1; 0] are zeros of f.) What goes wrong if n is odd? Show that the tentative genus of C is n/2 − 1.(Thisisa special case of the Riemann-Hurwitz formula.) This provides examples of curves of any genus.
    [Show full text]
  • Homeomorphisms of the 3-Sphere That Preserve a Heegaard Splitting of Genus Two
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 136, Number 3, March 2008, Pages 1113–1123 S 0002-9939(07)09188-5 Article electronically published on November 30, 2007 HOMEOMORPHISMS OF THE 3-SPHERE THAT PRESERVE A HEEGAARD SPLITTING OF GENUS TWO SANGBUM CHO (Communicated by Daniel Ruberman) Abstract. Let H2 be the group of isotopy classes of orientation-preserving homeomorphisms of S3 that preserve a Heegaard splitting of genus two. In this paper, we construct a tree in the barycentric subdivision of the disk complex of a handlebody of the splitting to obtain a finite presentation of H2. 1. Introduction Let Hg be the group of isotopy classes of orientation-preserving homeomorphisms of S3 that preserve a Heegaard splitting of genus g,forg ≥ 2. It was shown by Goeritz [3] in 1933 that H2 is finitely generated. Scharlemann [7] gave a modern proof of Goeritz’s result, and Akbas [1] refined this argument to give a finite pre- sentation of H2. In arbitrary genus, first Powell [6] and then Hirose [4] claimed to have found a finite generating set for the group Hg, though serious gaps in both ar- guments were found by Scharlemann. Establishing the existence of such generating sets appears to be an open problem. In this paper, we recover Akbas’s presentation of H2 by a new argument. First, we define the complex P (V ) of primitive disks, which is a subcomplex of the disk complex of a handlebody V in a Heegaard splitting of genus two. Then we find a suitable tree T ,onwhichH2 acts, in the barycentric subdivision of P (V )toget a finite presentation of H2.
    [Show full text]
  • Â-Genus and Collapsing
    The Journal of Geometric Analysis Volume 10, Number 3, 2000 A A-Genus and Collapsing By John Lott ABSTRACT. If M is a compact spin manifold, we give relationships between the vanishing of A( M) and the possibility that M can collapse with curvature bounded below. 1. Introduction The purpose of this paper is to extend the following simple lemma. Lemma 1.I. If M is a connectedA closed Riemannian spin manifold of nonnegative sectional curvature with dim(M) > 0, then A(M) = O. Proof Let K denote the sectional curvature of M and let R denote its scalar curvature. Suppose that A(M) (: O. Let D denote the Dirac operator on M. From the Atiyah-Singer index theorem, there is a nonzero spinor field 7t on M such that D~p = 0. From Lichnerowicz's theorem, 0 = IDOl 2 dvol = IV~Pl 2 dvol + ~- I•12 dvol. (1.1) From our assumptions, R > 0. Hence V~p = 0. This implies that I~k F2 is a nonzero constant function on M and so we must also have R = 0. Then as K > 0, we must have K = 0. This implies, from the integral formula for A'(M) [14, p. 231], that A"(M) = O. [] The spin condition is necessary in Lemma 1.l, as can be seen in the case of M = CP 2k. The Ricci-analog of Lemma 1.1 is false, as can be seen in the case of M = K3. Definition 1.2. A connected closed manifold M is almost-nonnegatively-curved if for every E > 0, there is a Riemannian metric g on M such that K(M, g) diam(M, g)2 > -E.
    [Show full text]
  • Riemann Surfaces
    RIEMANN SURFACES AARON LANDESMAN CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2 2. Maps of Riemann Surfaces 4 2.1. Defining the maps 4 2.2. The multiplicity of a map 4 2.3. Ramification Loci of maps 6 2.4. Applications 6 3. Properness 9 3.1. Definition of properness 9 3.2. Basic properties of proper morphisms 9 3.3. Constancy of degree of a map 10 4. Examples of Proper Maps of Riemann Surfaces 13 5. Riemann-Hurwitz 15 5.1. Statement of Riemann-Hurwitz 15 5.2. Applications 15 6. Automorphisms of Riemann Surfaces of genus ≥ 2 18 6.1. Statement of the bound 18 6.2. Proving the bound 18 6.3. We rule out g(Y) > 1 20 6.4. We rule out g(Y) = 1 20 6.5. We rule out g(Y) = 0, n ≥ 5 20 6.6. We rule out g(Y) = 0, n = 4 20 6.7. We rule out g(C0) = 0, n = 3 20 6.8. 21 7. Automorphisms in low genus 0 and 1 22 7.1. Genus 0 22 7.2. Genus 1 22 7.3. Example in Genus 3 23 Appendix A. Proof of Riemann Hurwitz 25 Appendix B. Quotients of Riemann surfaces by automorphisms 29 References 31 1 2 AARON LANDESMAN 1. INTRODUCTION In this course, we’ll discuss the theory of Riemann surfaces. Rie- mann surfaces are a beautiful breeding ground for ideas from many areas of math. In this way they connect seemingly disjoint fields, and also allow one to use tools from different areas of math to study them.
    [Show full text]
  • Congolius, a New Genus of African Reed Frog Endemic to The
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Congolius, a new genus of African reed frog endemic to the central Congo: A potential case of convergent evolution Tadeáš Nečas1,2*, Gabriel Badjedjea3, Michal Vopálenský4 & Václav Gvoždík1,5* The reed frog genus Hyperolius (Afrobatrachia, Hyperoliidae) is a speciose genus containing over 140 species of mostly small to medium-sized frogs distributed in sub-Saharan Africa. Its high level of colour polymorphism, together with in anurans relatively rare sexual dichromatism, make systematic studies more difcult. As a result, the knowledge of the diversity and taxonomy of this genus is still limited. Hyperolius robustus known only from a handful of localities in rain forests of the central Congo Basin is one of the least known species. Here, we have used molecular methods for the frst time to study the phylogenetic position of this taxon, accompanied by an analysis of phenotype based on external (morphometric) and internal (osteological) morphological characters. Our phylogenetic results undoubtedly placed H. robustus out of Hyperolius into a common clade with sympatric Cryptothylax and West African Morerella. To prevent the uncovered paraphyly, we place H. robustus into a new genus, Congolius. The review of all available data suggests that the new genus is endemic to the central Congolian lowland rain forests. The analysis of phenotype underlined morphological similarity of the new genus to some Hyperolius species. This uniformity of body shape (including cranial shape) indicates that the two genera have either retained ancestral morphology or evolved through convergent evolution under similar ecological pressures in the African rain forests. African reed frogs, Hyperoliidae Laurent, 1943, are presently encompassing almost 230 species in 17 genera.
    [Show full text]
  • Recognizing Surfaces
    RECOGNIZING SURFACES Ivo Nikolov and Alexandru I. Suciu Mathematics Department College of Arts and Sciences Northeastern University Abstract The subject of this poster is the interplay between the topology and the combinatorics of surfaces. The main problem of Topology is to classify spaces up to continuous deformations, known as homeomorphisms. Under certain conditions, topological invariants that capture qualitative and quantitative properties of spaces lead to the enumeration of homeomorphism types. Surfaces are some of the simplest, yet most interesting topological objects. The poster focuses on the main topological invariants of two-dimensional manifolds—orientability, number of boundary components, genus, and Euler characteristic—and how these invariants solve the classification problem for compact surfaces. The poster introduces a Java applet that was written in Fall, 1998 as a class project for a Topology I course. It implements an algorithm that determines the homeomorphism type of a closed surface from a combinatorial description as a polygon with edges identified in pairs. The input for the applet is a string of integers, encoding the edge identifications. The output of the applet consists of three topological invariants that completely classify the resulting surface. Topology of Surfaces Topology is the abstraction of certain geometrical ideas, such as continuity and closeness. Roughly speaking, topol- ogy is the exploration of manifolds, and of the properties that remain invariant under continuous, invertible transforma- tions, known as homeomorphisms. The basic problem is to classify manifolds according to homeomorphism type. In higher dimensions, this is an impossible task, but, in low di- mensions, it can be done. Surfaces are some of the simplest, yet most interesting topological objects.
    [Show full text]
  • § 112 Implications for Genus Claims Lisa Larrimore Ouellette Genus and Species Claims
    Advanced Patent Law Institute: Silicon Valley § 112 Implications for Genus Claims Lisa Larrimore Ouellette Genus and Species Claims genus fastener species screw R1 mammalian insulin cDNA R2 CH CH sequence 2 3 for rat CH3 insulin cDNA Genus and Species Claims: Anticipation . Single species always anticipates genus. Genus anticipates species only if species can be “at once envisaged” from genus. Generic chemical formula that represents limited number of compounds that PHOSITA can easily draw or name anticipates each compound. Generic chemical formula for vast number of compounds doesn’t anticipate each—and such a claim likely has § 112 problems… Genus and Species Claims: Section 112 . How can a patentee adequately describe and enable a genus? . When does a generic disclosure describe and enable a species? genus Disclosures required by § 112 serve not species just teaching function but also evidentiary function—showing what inventor actually possessed. Key policy lever for limiting claim scope to inventive contribution. Genus and Species Claims: Section 112 . How can a patentee adequately describe and enable a genus? . Ariad v. Eli Lilly . What is a representative number of species? . When is functional claiming ok? . When do you have to enable and describe unrecited elements? . Are § 112 genus claims only problematic in biotech? Ariad v. Eli Lilly (en banc 2010) . Genus claims for all methods of reducing binding of a certain transcription factor. inadequate description . Need “disclosure of either a representative number of species … or structural features common to the members of the genus so that one of skill in the art can ‘visualize or recognize’ the members of the genus.” .
    [Show full text]
  • Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology University of Michigan Ann Arbor,Michigan
    OCCASIONAL PAPERS OF THE MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN ANN ARBOR,MICHIGAN THE NEOTROPICAL GENUS PAZZUS (MECOPTERA: BITTACIDAE) I)ISC.OTIIRY 01 speclmeils of the unusual bittacid genus Pazzus in the Mecoptera collection of the Univeisity of Michigan Museum of Zoology led to an euainination of what little has been written about this genus. Appaiently, only tllice spccirnens have hitherto been known to science. A single male, collected in Peiu, was described by Nav,is in 1908 as Bzllacu~graczl!~. Five years later Navis concluded that this rem'ukable insect repiesented a new genus, which he named Ynzzzlr iln honor 01 Diego Alvarez tlc Paz, S.J. In the preparation of his 1921 monograph ot the Mecoptera of the wolld, Esben-Petersen ex,~inincd one male and onc lemale of P~rzrusfrom Panama, in the tollection 01 the British Museum. These he identified as Pnzzus gtnczlzs Nakis, at the same time presenting a sketch of the inale genitalia slid a pllotograph of the wings. For the past thirty-five years no furtl-~erspecimens 01 Pnz2us have been nlcntioned in entomological litelature. Illustlations ot wings oT Pnzr~,~in Navis' 1913 papel and Esben- Petersen's nronograph indicate cleai ly that the Pel u and Panama specilllens 'lie of one genus, for the ~enationancl shape of wing are tonspicuously different from those of all other bittacid genera. How- ever, on comparing Nakbs' original description 01 Bzttaczlr graczlzs with my notes on the British Mlrseum specimens so named, it is evident to me that there are two species involved. A female in the Unive~sity of ~idhi~aicollection, taken in a light trap at l'eiia Illanca, Los Santos, Panama, about 175 miles from the locality lrom which tlhe specimens in the British Museum came, appears to be tonspecihc with them.
    [Show full text]
  • Harmonic Maps from Surfaces of Arbitrary Genus Into Spheres
    Harmonic maps from surfaces of arbitrary genus into spheres Renan Assimos and J¨urgenJost∗ Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences Leipzig, Germany We relate the existence problem of harmonic maps into S2 to the convex geometry of S2. On one hand, this allows us to construct new examples of harmonic maps of degree 0 from compact surfaces of arbitrary genus into S2. On the other hand, we produce new example of regions that do not contain closed geodesics (that is, harmonic maps from S1) but do contain images of harmonic maps from other domains. These regions can therefore not support a strictly convex function. Our construction builds upon an example of W. Kendall, and uses M. Struwe's heat flow approach for the existence of harmonic maps from surfaces. Keywords: Harmonic maps, harmonic map heat flow, maximum principle, convexity. arXiv:1910.13966v2 [math.DG] 4 Nov 2019 ∗Correspondence: [email protected], [email protected] 1 Contents 1 Introduction2 2 Preliminaries4 2.1 Harmonic maps . .4 2.2 The harmonic map flow . .6 3 The main example7 3.1 The construction of the Riemann surface . .7 3.2 The initial condition u0 ............................8 3.3 Controlling the image of u1 ......................... 10 4 Remarks and open questions 13 Bibliography 15 1 Introduction M. Emery [3] conjectured that a region in a Riemannian manifold that does not contain a closed geodesic supports a strictly convex function. W. Kendall [8] gave a counterexample to that conjecture. Having such a counterexample is important to understand the relation between convexity of domains and convexity of functions in Riemannian geometry.
    [Show full text]