Are complete minimal submanifolds closed?












1












$begingroup$


Is it true that any complete minimal submanifold of some Riemannian manifold is closed as a subset?
What about the case in which the ambient manifold is an euclidean space?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    Is it true that any complete minimal submanifold of some Riemannian manifold is closed as a subset?
    What about the case in which the ambient manifold is an euclidean space?










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      Is it true that any complete minimal submanifold of some Riemannian manifold is closed as a subset?
      What about the case in which the ambient manifold is an euclidean space?










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      Is it true that any complete minimal submanifold of some Riemannian manifold is closed as a subset?
      What about the case in which the ambient manifold is an euclidean space?







      riemannian-geometry smooth-manifolds minimal-surfaces






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked 4 hours ago









      ValentinoValentino

      1275




      1275






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4












          $begingroup$

          It depends on what you mean by submanifold (at least for surfaces in three dimensional ambient spaces).



          Nadirashvilli constructed an example of a complete minimal immersion into the unit ball in $mathbb{R}^3$. In particular, this immersion is not proper and so the image is not a closed subset of $mathbb{R}^3$. In contrast, Colding-Minicozzi showed that any complete embedded minimal surface in $mathbb{R}^3$ (i.e. a two dimensional submanifold of $mathbb{R}^3$ in the usual sense) that has finite topology must be properly embedded and hence be a closed subset. This has been extended in various ways by Meeks-Perez-Ros. There are still a number of difficult open problems about exactly how general this phenomena is -- e.g. is it true for surfaces of finite genus? Any complete embedded minimal surface?






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "504"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f323476%2fare-complete-minimal-submanifolds-closed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            4












            $begingroup$

            It depends on what you mean by submanifold (at least for surfaces in three dimensional ambient spaces).



            Nadirashvilli constructed an example of a complete minimal immersion into the unit ball in $mathbb{R}^3$. In particular, this immersion is not proper and so the image is not a closed subset of $mathbb{R}^3$. In contrast, Colding-Minicozzi showed that any complete embedded minimal surface in $mathbb{R}^3$ (i.e. a two dimensional submanifold of $mathbb{R}^3$ in the usual sense) that has finite topology must be properly embedded and hence be a closed subset. This has been extended in various ways by Meeks-Perez-Ros. There are still a number of difficult open problems about exactly how general this phenomena is -- e.g. is it true for surfaces of finite genus? Any complete embedded minimal surface?






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$


















              4












              $begingroup$

              It depends on what you mean by submanifold (at least for surfaces in three dimensional ambient spaces).



              Nadirashvilli constructed an example of a complete minimal immersion into the unit ball in $mathbb{R}^3$. In particular, this immersion is not proper and so the image is not a closed subset of $mathbb{R}^3$. In contrast, Colding-Minicozzi showed that any complete embedded minimal surface in $mathbb{R}^3$ (i.e. a two dimensional submanifold of $mathbb{R}^3$ in the usual sense) that has finite topology must be properly embedded and hence be a closed subset. This has been extended in various ways by Meeks-Perez-Ros. There are still a number of difficult open problems about exactly how general this phenomena is -- e.g. is it true for surfaces of finite genus? Any complete embedded minimal surface?






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$
















                4












                4








                4





                $begingroup$

                It depends on what you mean by submanifold (at least for surfaces in three dimensional ambient spaces).



                Nadirashvilli constructed an example of a complete minimal immersion into the unit ball in $mathbb{R}^3$. In particular, this immersion is not proper and so the image is not a closed subset of $mathbb{R}^3$. In contrast, Colding-Minicozzi showed that any complete embedded minimal surface in $mathbb{R}^3$ (i.e. a two dimensional submanifold of $mathbb{R}^3$ in the usual sense) that has finite topology must be properly embedded and hence be a closed subset. This has been extended in various ways by Meeks-Perez-Ros. There are still a number of difficult open problems about exactly how general this phenomena is -- e.g. is it true for surfaces of finite genus? Any complete embedded minimal surface?






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                It depends on what you mean by submanifold (at least for surfaces in three dimensional ambient spaces).



                Nadirashvilli constructed an example of a complete minimal immersion into the unit ball in $mathbb{R}^3$. In particular, this immersion is not proper and so the image is not a closed subset of $mathbb{R}^3$. In contrast, Colding-Minicozzi showed that any complete embedded minimal surface in $mathbb{R}^3$ (i.e. a two dimensional submanifold of $mathbb{R}^3$ in the usual sense) that has finite topology must be properly embedded and hence be a closed subset. This has been extended in various ways by Meeks-Perez-Ros. There are still a number of difficult open problems about exactly how general this phenomena is -- e.g. is it true for surfaces of finite genus? Any complete embedded minimal surface?







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited 2 hours ago

























                answered 4 hours ago









                RBega2RBega2

                52629




                52629






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f323476%2fare-complete-minimal-submanifolds-closed%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Olav Thon

                    Waikiki

                    Hudsonelva