Proving the No Retraction Theorem












3












$begingroup$


I try to understand a proof of the No Retraction Theorem which states that for any compact smooth manifold $M$ with boundary $partial M neq emptyset$, there is no smooth map
$$
f : M to partial M , f|_{partial M } = id.
$$



For the proof we suppose that such a map exists. Then by Sard's theorem we find a regular value $r in partial M$ and the primage of $r$ under $f$ is a 1-dimensional manifold. The author now continues to say that the boundary of this preimage has to be a subset of $partial M$. My questions is: Why do we know that?






general-topology functions differential-topology







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    3












    $begingroup$


    I try to understand a proof of the No Retraction Theorem which states that for any compact smooth manifold $M$ with boundary $partial M neq emptyset$, there is no smooth map
    $$
    f : M to partial M , f|_{partial M } = id.
    $$



    For the proof we suppose that such a map exists. Then by Sard's theorem we find a regular value $r in partial M$ and the primage of $r$ under $f$ is a 1-dimensional manifold. The author now continues to say that the boundary of this preimage has to be a subset of $partial M$. My questions is: Why do we know that?






    general-topology functions differential-topology







    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      3












      3








      3


      1



      $begingroup$


      I try to understand a proof of the No Retraction Theorem which states that for any compact smooth manifold $M$ with boundary $partial M neq emptyset$, there is no smooth map
      $$
      f : M to partial M , f|_{partial M } = id.
      $$



      For the proof we suppose that such a map exists. Then by Sard's theorem we find a regular value $r in partial M$ and the primage of $r$ under $f$ is a 1-dimensional manifold. The author now continues to say that the boundary of this preimage has to be a subset of $partial M$. My questions is: Why do we know that?






      general-topology functions differential-topology







      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I try to understand a proof of the No Retraction Theorem which states that for any compact smooth manifold $M$ with boundary $partial M neq emptyset$, there is no smooth map
      $$
      f : M to partial M , f|_{partial M } = id.
      $$



      For the proof we suppose that such a map exists. Then by Sard's theorem we find a regular value $r in partial M$ and the primage of $r$ under $f$ is a 1-dimensional manifold. The author now continues to say that the boundary of this preimage has to be a subset of $partial M$. My questions is: Why do we know that?






      general-topology functions differential-topology




      general-topology functions differential-topology






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked 1 hour ago









      MuziMuzi

      387218




      387218






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3












          $begingroup$

          This is due to the form that the regular value theorem takes for manifolds with boundary:




          Let $f:Mto N$ be a smooth map between manifolds with boundary and let $partial N=emptyset$. Let $cin N$ be a regular value for $f$. Then, $f^{-1}(c)$ is a submanifold of $M$ such that $dim f^{-1}(c)=dim M-dim N$ and $partial f^{-1}(c)= f^{-1}(c)cap partial M$.







          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            That helps a lot. I didn't know this version of the regular value theorem
            $endgroup$
            – Muzi
            55 mins ago



















          4












          $begingroup$

          The conclusion of the Sard's Theorem argument is a bit stronger than what you say.



          The real conclusion is that the map $f : M to partial M$ has a regular value $r in partial M$.



          It follows, first, that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a 1-manifold with boundary.



          Now suppose that you take $x in f^{-1}(r) cap text{interior}(M)$. The derivative map $D_x f : T_x M to T_r M$ has rank $1$, so its kernel is a 1-dimensional subspace of $M$. Applying the implicit function theorem, and using that $x$ is in the interior of $M$, it follows that $f^{-1}(r)$ intersected with a small neighborhood of $x$ is a 1-manifold without boundary containing $r$. Thus, $x$ cannot be a boundary point of the 1-manifold $f^{-1}(r)$, therefore all of the boundary points of $f^{-1}(r)$ are contained in $partial M$.



          One can make a still stronger conclusion, namely that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a "properly embedded" submanifold of $M$, which means that each point on $partial M cap f^{-1}(r)$ has a neighborhood in which the intersection of that neighborhood with $f^{-1}(r)$ looks like the intersection of the half-disc ${(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 < 0, |y| ge 1}$ with the line $x=0$.






          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: "69"
            };
            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%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3089943%2fproving-the-no-retraction-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            3












            $begingroup$

            This is due to the form that the regular value theorem takes for manifolds with boundary:




            Let $f:Mto N$ be a smooth map between manifolds with boundary and let $partial N=emptyset$. Let $cin N$ be a regular value for $f$. Then, $f^{-1}(c)$ is a submanifold of $M$ such that $dim f^{-1}(c)=dim M-dim N$ and $partial f^{-1}(c)= f^{-1}(c)cap partial M$.







            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              That helps a lot. I didn't know this version of the regular value theorem
              $endgroup$
              – Muzi
              55 mins ago
















            3












            $begingroup$

            This is due to the form that the regular value theorem takes for manifolds with boundary:




            Let $f:Mto N$ be a smooth map between manifolds with boundary and let $partial N=emptyset$. Let $cin N$ be a regular value for $f$. Then, $f^{-1}(c)$ is a submanifold of $M$ such that $dim f^{-1}(c)=dim M-dim N$ and $partial f^{-1}(c)= f^{-1}(c)cap partial M$.







            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              That helps a lot. I didn't know this version of the regular value theorem
              $endgroup$
              – Muzi
              55 mins ago














            3












            3








            3





            $begingroup$

            This is due to the form that the regular value theorem takes for manifolds with boundary:




            Let $f:Mto N$ be a smooth map between manifolds with boundary and let $partial N=emptyset$. Let $cin N$ be a regular value for $f$. Then, $f^{-1}(c)$ is a submanifold of $M$ such that $dim f^{-1}(c)=dim M-dim N$ and $partial f^{-1}(c)= f^{-1}(c)cap partial M$.







            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            This is due to the form that the regular value theorem takes for manifolds with boundary:




            Let $f:Mto N$ be a smooth map between manifolds with boundary and let $partial N=emptyset$. Let $cin N$ be a regular value for $f$. Then, $f^{-1}(c)$ is a submanifold of $M$ such that $dim f^{-1}(c)=dim M-dim N$ and $partial f^{-1}(c)= f^{-1}(c)cap partial M$.








            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered 1 hour ago









            Saucy O'PathSaucy O'Path

            5,9091626




            5,9091626












            • $begingroup$
              That helps a lot. I didn't know this version of the regular value theorem
              $endgroup$
              – Muzi
              55 mins ago


















            • $begingroup$
              That helps a lot. I didn't know this version of the regular value theorem
              $endgroup$
              – Muzi
              55 mins ago
















            $begingroup$
            That helps a lot. I didn't know this version of the regular value theorem
            $endgroup$
            – Muzi
            55 mins ago




            $begingroup$
            That helps a lot. I didn't know this version of the regular value theorem
            $endgroup$
            – Muzi
            55 mins ago











            4












            $begingroup$

            The conclusion of the Sard's Theorem argument is a bit stronger than what you say.



            The real conclusion is that the map $f : M to partial M$ has a regular value $r in partial M$.



            It follows, first, that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a 1-manifold with boundary.



            Now suppose that you take $x in f^{-1}(r) cap text{interior}(M)$. The derivative map $D_x f : T_x M to T_r M$ has rank $1$, so its kernel is a 1-dimensional subspace of $M$. Applying the implicit function theorem, and using that $x$ is in the interior of $M$, it follows that $f^{-1}(r)$ intersected with a small neighborhood of $x$ is a 1-manifold without boundary containing $r$. Thus, $x$ cannot be a boundary point of the 1-manifold $f^{-1}(r)$, therefore all of the boundary points of $f^{-1}(r)$ are contained in $partial M$.



            One can make a still stronger conclusion, namely that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a "properly embedded" submanifold of $M$, which means that each point on $partial M cap f^{-1}(r)$ has a neighborhood in which the intersection of that neighborhood with $f^{-1}(r)$ looks like the intersection of the half-disc ${(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 < 0, |y| ge 1}$ with the line $x=0$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$


















              4












              $begingroup$

              The conclusion of the Sard's Theorem argument is a bit stronger than what you say.



              The real conclusion is that the map $f : M to partial M$ has a regular value $r in partial M$.



              It follows, first, that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a 1-manifold with boundary.



              Now suppose that you take $x in f^{-1}(r) cap text{interior}(M)$. The derivative map $D_x f : T_x M to T_r M$ has rank $1$, so its kernel is a 1-dimensional subspace of $M$. Applying the implicit function theorem, and using that $x$ is in the interior of $M$, it follows that $f^{-1}(r)$ intersected with a small neighborhood of $x$ is a 1-manifold without boundary containing $r$. Thus, $x$ cannot be a boundary point of the 1-manifold $f^{-1}(r)$, therefore all of the boundary points of $f^{-1}(r)$ are contained in $partial M$.



              One can make a still stronger conclusion, namely that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a "properly embedded" submanifold of $M$, which means that each point on $partial M cap f^{-1}(r)$ has a neighborhood in which the intersection of that neighborhood with $f^{-1}(r)$ looks like the intersection of the half-disc ${(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 < 0, |y| ge 1}$ with the line $x=0$.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$
















                4












                4








                4





                $begingroup$

                The conclusion of the Sard's Theorem argument is a bit stronger than what you say.



                The real conclusion is that the map $f : M to partial M$ has a regular value $r in partial M$.



                It follows, first, that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a 1-manifold with boundary.



                Now suppose that you take $x in f^{-1}(r) cap text{interior}(M)$. The derivative map $D_x f : T_x M to T_r M$ has rank $1$, so its kernel is a 1-dimensional subspace of $M$. Applying the implicit function theorem, and using that $x$ is in the interior of $M$, it follows that $f^{-1}(r)$ intersected with a small neighborhood of $x$ is a 1-manifold without boundary containing $r$. Thus, $x$ cannot be a boundary point of the 1-manifold $f^{-1}(r)$, therefore all of the boundary points of $f^{-1}(r)$ are contained in $partial M$.



                One can make a still stronger conclusion, namely that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a "properly embedded" submanifold of $M$, which means that each point on $partial M cap f^{-1}(r)$ has a neighborhood in which the intersection of that neighborhood with $f^{-1}(r)$ looks like the intersection of the half-disc ${(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 < 0, |y| ge 1}$ with the line $x=0$.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$



                The conclusion of the Sard's Theorem argument is a bit stronger than what you say.



                The real conclusion is that the map $f : M to partial M$ has a regular value $r in partial M$.



                It follows, first, that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a 1-manifold with boundary.



                Now suppose that you take $x in f^{-1}(r) cap text{interior}(M)$. The derivative map $D_x f : T_x M to T_r M$ has rank $1$, so its kernel is a 1-dimensional subspace of $M$. Applying the implicit function theorem, and using that $x$ is in the interior of $M$, it follows that $f^{-1}(r)$ intersected with a small neighborhood of $x$ is a 1-manifold without boundary containing $r$. Thus, $x$ cannot be a boundary point of the 1-manifold $f^{-1}(r)$, therefore all of the boundary points of $f^{-1}(r)$ are contained in $partial M$.



                One can make a still stronger conclusion, namely that $f^{-1}(r)$ is a "properly embedded" submanifold of $M$, which means that each point on $partial M cap f^{-1}(r)$ has a neighborhood in which the intersection of that neighborhood with $f^{-1}(r)$ looks like the intersection of the half-disc ${(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 < 0, |y| ge 1}$ with the line $x=0$.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered 59 mins ago









                Lee MosherLee Mosher

                48.8k33682




                48.8k33682






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                    • 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%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3089943%2fproving-the-no-retraction-theorem%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

                    What are all the squawk codes?

                    Image
                    2 $begingroup$ I love aviation and I love learning new things about it. I was wondering if anyone knew all of the squawk codes and in particular what squawk 7500 means. squawk-codes share | improve this question edited 15 mins ago Jamiec ♦ 14.8k 4 60 91 asked 5 hours ago Zac Callaghan Zac Callaghan 11 2 New contributor Zac Callaghan is a new co
                    Read more

                    What are differences between VBoxVGA, VMSVGA and VBoxSVGA in VirtualBox?

                    Image
                    1 VirtualBox 6.0 provides a new setting called Graphics Controller. There are four options to choose from: None VBoxVGA VMSVGA VBoxSVGA In the user manual I have found this information: Graphics Controller: Specifies the graphics adapter type used by the guest VM. Note that you must install the Guest Additions on the guest VM to specify the VBoxSVGA or VMSVGA graphics controller. The following options are available: – VBoxSVGA: The default graphics controller for new VMs that use Linux or Windows 7 or later. This graphics controller improves performance and 3D support when compared to the legacy VBoxVGA option. – VBoxVGA: Use this graphics controller for legacy guest OSes. This is the default graphics controller for Windows versions before Windows 7. – VMSVGA: Use this graphics controller to emul
                    Read more

                    Hudsonelva

                    Image
                    Hudson elv Land   USA Område New York Sideelvar Mohawk Lengd 507 km Middelvassføring 606 m³/s Munning Upper New York Bay i Atlanterhavet Elvene Hudson og Mohawk med nedbørsområdet markert med gult. Wikimedia Commons: Hudson River Hudsonelva ( Hudson River ) mohikansk Muh-he-kun-ne-tuk ) er ei elv i USA. Ho renn hovudsakleg gjennom delstaten New York, men markerer også ein del av grensa mellom New York og New Jersey. Hudsonelva har namn etter Henry Hudson, ein engelskmann som utforska elva i 1609. Hudsonelva sett frå Bear Mountain Bridge. Kjelda til elva er Tear-of-the-Clouds-sjøen i Adirondackfjella. Ved Albany renn Mohawk-elva saman med henne, og deretter renn ho nesten rett sørover til ho munnar ut i Atlanterhavet mellom Manhattan i New York og New Jersey. Eriekanalen, som blei opna den 26 oktober 1825, bind saman Hudsonelva og Eriesjøen, slik at byane ved Dei store sjøane fekk vasstilgang til A
                    Read more