Some Generalites About Isometries Definition. Let M Be a Riemannian

Some Generalites About Isometries Definition. Let M Be a Riemannian

Some Generalites about Isometries Definition. Let M be a Riemannian manifold. Φ:M → M is said to be a local ∞ isometry if Φ ∈ C , and for all p ∈ M, ξ, η ∈ TpM, we have hΦ∗ξ,Φ∗ηi = hξ,ηi. Definition. Let M be a Riemannian manifold. Φ:M → M is said to be a global isometry if in addtion to being a local isometry, Φ preserves the distance function, that is d(Φ(p), Φ(q)) = d(p, q), ∀p, q ∈ M. • If Φ is a local isometry, Φ preserves the Levi-Civita connection; in particular, one has that Φ preserves geodesics, that is, Φ(exp ξ) = exp(Φ∗ξ), for all ξ in the domain of exp in TM. — Also, Φ preserves sectional curvature; that is, if p ∈ M, ξ, η ∈ TpM are linearly independent, then K(Φ∗ξ,Φ∗η)=K(ξ,η). • If M1 is a submanifold of M, and Φ is an isometry of M satisfying Φ(M1) ⊂ M1, then Φ is an isometry. M1 Proposition (Naturality of the Riemannian Connections). Suppose ϕ :(M,g) → (M,g) is an isometry. f (a) ϕ takes the Riemannian connection D of g to the Riemannian connection D of e g, in the sense that e ϕ∗(D Y )=D (ϕ∗Y ). X eϕ∗X (b) If γ is a curve in M and V is a vector field along γ, then ϕ∗D V = D (ϕ∗V ). t et (c) ϕ takes geodesics to geodesics: if γ is the geodesic in M with initial point p and initial velocity V , then ϕ ◦ γ is the geodesic in M with initial point ϕ(p) and f initial velocity ϕ∗V . Proof. (a) Define a map ϕ∗D :Γ(TM) × Γ(TM) → Γ(TM) e by ∗ −1 (ϕ D) Y = ϕ (D (ϕ∗Y )). e X ∗ eϕ∗X Then ϕ∗D is a connection on M (called the pullback connection), and it is e symmetric and compatible; therefore ϕ∗D = D e by uniqueness of the Riemannian connection. (b) Define an operator ϕ∗D : T (γ) →T(γ) by a similar formula which is equal to et Dt . • The naturality of the Riemannian connection and uniqueness of geodesics trans- late into the following important naturality property of the exponential map: Typeset by AMS-TEX 1 2 Proposition (Naturality of Exponential Map). Suppose that ϕ :(M,g) → (M,g) is an isometry. Then, for any p ∈ M, the following diagram f commutes: e ϕ T M −−−−→∗ T M p ϕ(p) f exp exp p ϕ(p) y ϕ y M −−−−→ M f Proposition. The Riemann curvature endomorphism and curvature tensor are local isometry invariants. More precisely, if ϕ :(M,g) → (M,g) is a local isometry, f then e ϕ∗Rm = Rm; g R(ϕ∗X, ϕ∗Y )ϕ∗Z = ϕ∗(R(X, Y )Z). e Isometries between Riemannian Manifolds Proposition 2. Let M, N be a Riemannian manifolds, φ : M → N a local isometry. Then, for any p ∈ M, ∃ε>0 such that φ : Bε(p) → Bε(φ(p)) Bε(p) is an isometry. Proof. Let εp and εφ(p) satisfy exp : Bεp (0p) → Bε(p) B (0 ) εp p → exp : Bεφ(p) (0p) Bε(φ(p)) B (0 ) εp φ(p) be diffeomorphisms, and choose ε = min{εp,εφ(p)}. — The (Euclidean) disks Bε(0p) and Bε(0 ) are isometric under φ∗ , and φ(p) p −1 φ = exp ◦ φ∗ ◦{exp } B (p) B (0 ) p B (0 ) ε εp φ(p) εp p is, therefore, a diffeomorphism, which implies the Proposition. 3 Theorem 1. Suppose we have two isometries ϕ, ψ :(M n,g) → (N n,h).If Dϕp = Dψp. Then ϕ ≡ ψ provided that M is connected. In other words, an isometry is uniquely determined by its differential at just one point. Proof. We use one of the standard closed-open arguments. Let A = {p ∈ M : Dϕp = Dψp}. Continuity of Dϕ and Dψ implies that A is closed. Hence we only need to claim: A is open. — Note that A =6 ∅ by assumption. — Fix q ∈ A and choose ε>0 such that expq :Bε(0p) → Bε(q) expϕ(q)=ψ(q) :Bε(0p) → Bε(ϕ(q)) are diffeomorphisms. (i) We will claim that −1 ϕ(x) = expϕ(q) ◦Dϕq ◦ expq on Bε(ϕ(q)). Choose γ(t) = expq(tv), v ∈ Bε(0), t ∈ [0, 1], which is a geodesic segment. — The curve σ(t)=ϕ ◦ γ(t), t ∈ [0, 1] must also be a geodesic segment. For otherwise, we could find a shorter curve σ :[0, 1] → N with e 1 1 L(ϕ−1 ◦ σ)=Z |Dϕ−1 ◦ σ0(t)| = Z |σ0(t)| = L(σ), e 0 e 0 e e since Dϕ−1 preserves length of vectors, and we will have found a curve from γ(0) to γ(t) of length L(σ) <L(σ)=L(ϕ ◦ γ)=L(γ). e — Now that ϕ ◦ γ is a geodesic, it has the form 0 ϕ ◦ γ(t) = expϕ(q)(t(ϕ ◦ γ) (0)) 0 = expϕ(q)(tDϕq · γ (0)) 0 = expϕ(q)(Dϕq (tγ (0))) −1 = expϕ(q)(Dϕq (expq (γ(t)))). (ii) Similar reasoning shows that −1 ϕ(x) = expψ(q) ◦Dψq ◦ expq on Bε(ϕ(q)). Thus ϕ = ψ on Bε(q), as we assumed that Dψq = Dϕq. 4 • What about the inverse problem? — Given any isometry L : TpM → TqN, is there an isometry ϕ : M → N such that Dϕp = L? — If we let M = N, this would in particular mean that if π is a 2-plane in TpM and p a 2-plane in TqM, then there should be an isometry ϕ : M → M such that e ϕ(π)=π. e But this would imply that M has constant sectional curvature. The above problem can therefore not be solved in general. n n n n — Let Sk be R if k =0,Sk ,ifk>0 and Hk ,ifk<0. If we go back and inspect n our knowledge of Iso(Sk ), we see that these spaces have enough isometries so that any linear isometry n n L : TpSk → TqSk n n can be extended to a global isometry ϕ : Sk → Sk with Dϕp = L. — In some sense these are the only spaces with this property. Theorem 2. Suppose (M,g) is a Riemannian manifold of dimension n and con- stant curvature k. n If M is simply connected and L : TpM → TqSk is a linear isometry, then there is a n unique isometric immersion called the monodromy map ϕ : M → Sk with Dϕp = L. Furthermore, this map is a diffeomorphism if (M,g) is complete. We need the following. Theorem 3. Suppose M and M are connected Riemannian manifolds, with M f f complete, and π : M → M is a local isometry. Then M is complete and π is a f covering map. Proof of Theorem 2. We know that M can be covered by sets Uα such that each n Uα admits a Riemannian embedding ϕ : Uα → Sk . – Furthermore, if p ∈ U , then we can choose ϕ such that Dϕ is any α0 α0 α0 p predetermined isometry. n – Also, each ϕα is well defined up an element in Iso(Sk ); in other words, if ϕα, n −1 n Uα → Sk are isometries then ϕα ◦ψα is the restriction of an element in Iso(Sk ). • The construction of ϕ now proceeds in the same way as one does analytic con- tinuation on simply connected domains. The geodesically complete situation is divided into two cases. (I) Case k ≤ 0. The uniqueness theorem implies that ϕ maps geodesics to geodesics. (i) Claim: ϕ is injective. 5 – Completeness⇒Any two points p, q ∈ M can be joined by a geodesic γ on M. n –Nowϕ ◦ γ is also a geodesic in Sk , k ≤ 0. n – Since geodesics in Sk never intersect themselves, we have ϕ(p) =6 ϕ(q). (ii) Claim: ϕ is onto. n – Choose p ∈ ϕ(M) and q ∈ Sk . b b n Then join p and q by a geodesic γ :[0, 1] → Sk . –InM, let γb:[0, 1]b→ M be the unitb geodesic with −1 0 0 γ(0) = ϕ (p) and Dϕϕ−1(p)(γ (0)) = γ (0). b b This geodesic exists by geodesic completeness. – Now observe that ϕ ◦ γ is a geodesic with the initial values at γ. Thus ϕ ◦ γ = γ everyehere and ϕ(γ(1)) = q in particular. b b b (II) Case k>0. Surjectivity is established by the same method, but since n geodesics in Sk are closed curves, we cannot use the same proof for injectivity. — Using that M is geodesically complete, we know that ϕ is a covering map. n But then it is a diffeomorphism, since π1(Sk )=0. .

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    5 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us