Euler class as obstruction to have a never vanishing cross section
$begingroup$
We know that (see Hatcher's vector bundles and K-theory Prop. 3.22) the Euler class of an orientable vector bundle or rank $r$, $Eto M$ is the first obstruction to the existence of a never vanishing section of $E$ and thus belongs to $H^r(M,mathbb{Z})$ .
It follows that if we consider $E= TM$ the tangent bundle $r=dim (M) =: n$ and thus the Euler class $e(TM)$ is non just the first obstruction but all the obstruction.
Consequently if $e(TM)=0$ there exists a non vanishing section of $TM$
This seems a bit strong as would imply that the Euler characteristic is zero iif we have a never vanishing vector field.
Is my argument correct?
algebraic-topology differential-topology characteristic-classes obstruction-theory
asked Dec 2 '18 at 12:53
Warlock of Firetop MountainWarlock of Firetop Mountain
2,271815
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
We know that (see Hatcher's vector bundles and K-theory Prop. 3.22) the Euler class of an orientable vector bundle or rank $r$, $Eto M$ is the first obstruction to the existence of a never vanishing section of $E$ and thus belongs to $H^r(M,mathbb{Z})$ .
It follows that if we consider $E= TM$ the tangent bundle $r=dim (M) =: n$ and thus the Euler class $e(TM)$ is non just the first obstruction but all the obstruction.
Consequently if $e(TM)=0$ there exists a non vanishing section of $TM$
This seems a bit strong as would imply that the Euler characteristic is zero iif we have a never vanishing vector field.
Is my argument correct?
algebraic-topology differential-topology characteristic-classes obstruction-theory
asked Dec 2 '18 at 12:53
Warlock of Firetop MountainWarlock of Firetop Mountain
2,271815
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle (so you are assuming your manifold to have, and in particular to admit, an orientation). In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold. In the non-orientable case, you could consider the top Stiefel-Whitney class $w_n$, which is the mod 2 reduction of the Euler class in the orientable case, and which integrates to the mod 2 reduction of the (cont'd)
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:22
1
$begingroup$
Euler characteristic in both cases. Having $w_n = 0$ does not imply the existence of a nowhere zero vector field, though. For a non-orientable example, consider the connect sum of two Klein bottles, which has even Euler characteristic (thus $w_2 = 0$) but no nowhere-zero vector fields (since the Euler characteristic is $-2 neq 0$).
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:25
$begingroup$
Thank you Aleksandar, in the non-orientable case can we also consider the Euler class of the orientable double covering ? P.S. yours is not just a mere comment, if you write it as an answer I will accept it.
$endgroup$
– Warlock of Firetop Mountain
Dec 2 '18 at 14:48
1
$begingroup$
The orientable double cover has Euler characteristic equal to twice the Euler characteristic of the non-orientable manifold you start with (see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/80326/…). This implies that one has Euler char 0 if and only if the other does. A closed connected manifold (no assumption on orientability) with zero Euler char admits a nowhere-zero vector field; see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/129752/…
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 15:05
1
$begingroup$
Note that for bundles other than the tangent bundle, the appropriate obstruction is called the twisted Euler class and it lives in cohomology with coefficients twisted by $w_1: pi_1 to pm 1$. A bundle of rank $dim M$ has a section if and only if the (possibly twisted) Euler class vanishes. For manifolds of dimension larger than the vector bundle you are in trouble: there are more obstructions and they are more complicated.
$endgroup$
– Mike Miller
Dec 4 '18 at 22:38
add a comment |
$begingroup$
We know that (see Hatcher's vector bundles and K-theory Prop. 3.22) the Euler class of an orientable vector bundle or rank $r$, $Eto M$ is the first obstruction to the existence of a never vanishing section of $E$ and thus belongs to $H^r(M,mathbb{Z})$ .
It follows that if we consider $E= TM$ the tangent bundle $r=dim (M) =: n$ and thus the Euler class $e(TM)$ is non just the first obstruction but all the obstruction.
Consequently if $e(TM)=0$ there exists a non vanishing section of $TM$
This seems a bit strong as would imply that the Euler characteristic is zero iif we have a never vanishing vector field.
Is my argument correct?
algebraic-topology differential-topology characteristic-classes obstruction-theory
asked Dec 2 '18 at 12:53
Warlock of Firetop MountainWarlock of Firetop Mountain
2,271815
$endgroup$
We know that (see Hatcher's vector bundles and K-theory Prop. 3.22) the Euler class of an orientable vector bundle or rank $r$, $Eto M$ is the first obstruction to the existence of a never vanishing section of $E$ and thus belongs to $H^r(M,mathbb{Z})$ .
It follows that if we consider $E= TM$ the tangent bundle $r=dim (M) =: n$ and thus the Euler class $e(TM)$ is non just the first obstruction but all the obstruction.
Consequently if $e(TM)=0$ there exists a non vanishing section of $TM$
This seems a bit strong as would imply that the Euler characteristic is zero iif we have a never vanishing vector field.
Is my argument correct?
algebraic-topology differential-topology characteristic-classes obstruction-theory
algebraic-topology differential-topology characteristic-classes obstruction-theory
asked Dec 2 '18 at 12:53
Warlock of Firetop MountainWarlock of Firetop Mountain
2,271815
asked Dec 2 '18 at 12:53
Warlock of Firetop MountainWarlock of Firetop Mountain
2,271815
edited Dec 2 '18 at 13:02
Warlock of Firetop Mountain
asked Dec 2 '18 at 12:53
Warlock of Firetop MountainWarlock of Firetop Mountain
2,271815
asked Dec 2 '18 at 12:53
Warlock of Firetop MountainWarlock of Firetop Mountain
2,271815
asked Dec 2 '18 at 12:53
Warlock of Firetop MountainWarlock of Firetop Mountain
2,271815
2,271815
1
$begingroup$
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle (so you are assuming your manifold to have, and in particular to admit, an orientation). In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold. In the non-orientable case, you could consider the top Stiefel-Whitney class $w_n$, which is the mod 2 reduction of the Euler class in the orientable case, and which integrates to the mod 2 reduction of the (cont'd)
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:22
1
$begingroup$
Euler characteristic in both cases. Having $w_n = 0$ does not imply the existence of a nowhere zero vector field, though. For a non-orientable example, consider the connect sum of two Klein bottles, which has even Euler characteristic (thus $w_2 = 0$) but no nowhere-zero vector fields (since the Euler characteristic is $-2 neq 0$).
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:25
$begingroup$
Thank you Aleksandar, in the non-orientable case can we also consider the Euler class of the orientable double covering ? P.S. yours is not just a mere comment, if you write it as an answer I will accept it.
$endgroup$
– Warlock of Firetop Mountain
Dec 2 '18 at 14:48
1
$begingroup$
The orientable double cover has Euler characteristic equal to twice the Euler characteristic of the non-orientable manifold you start with (see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/80326/…). This implies that one has Euler char 0 if and only if the other does. A closed connected manifold (no assumption on orientability) with zero Euler char admits a nowhere-zero vector field; see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/129752/…
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 15:05
1
$begingroup$
Note that for bundles other than the tangent bundle, the appropriate obstruction is called the twisted Euler class and it lives in cohomology with coefficients twisted by $w_1: pi_1 to pm 1$. A bundle of rank $dim M$ has a section if and only if the (possibly twisted) Euler class vanishes. For manifolds of dimension larger than the vector bundle you are in trouble: there are more obstructions and they are more complicated.
$endgroup$
– Mike Miller
Dec 4 '18 at 22:38
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle (so you are assuming your manifold to have, and in particular to admit, an orientation). In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold. In the non-orientable case, you could consider the top Stiefel-Whitney class $w_n$, which is the mod 2 reduction of the Euler class in the orientable case, and which integrates to the mod 2 reduction of the (cont'd)
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:22
1
$begingroup$
Euler characteristic in both cases. Having $w_n = 0$ does not imply the existence of a nowhere zero vector field, though. For a non-orientable example, consider the connect sum of two Klein bottles, which has even Euler characteristic (thus $w_2 = 0$) but no nowhere-zero vector fields (since the Euler characteristic is $-2 neq 0$).
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:25
$begingroup$
Thank you Aleksandar, in the non-orientable case can we also consider the Euler class of the orientable double covering ? P.S. yours is not just a mere comment, if you write it as an answer I will accept it.
$endgroup$
– Warlock of Firetop Mountain
Dec 2 '18 at 14:48
1
$begingroup$
The orientable double cover has Euler characteristic equal to twice the Euler characteristic of the non-orientable manifold you start with (see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/80326/…). This implies that one has Euler char 0 if and only if the other does. A closed connected manifold (no assumption on orientability) with zero Euler char admits a nowhere-zero vector field; see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/129752/…
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 15:05
1
$begingroup$
Note that for bundles other than the tangent bundle, the appropriate obstruction is called the twisted Euler class and it lives in cohomology with coefficients twisted by $w_1: pi_1 to pm 1$. A bundle of rank $dim M$ has a section if and only if the (possibly twisted) Euler class vanishes. For manifolds of dimension larger than the vector bundle you are in trouble: there are more obstructions and they are more complicated.
$endgroup$
– Mike Miller
Dec 4 '18 at 22:38
1
1
$begingroup$
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle (so you are assuming your manifold to have, and in particular to admit, an orientation). In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold. In the non-orientable case, you could consider the top Stiefel-Whitney class $w_n$, which is the mod 2 reduction of the Euler class in the orientable case, and which integrates to the mod 2 reduction of the (cont'd)
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:22
$begingroup$
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle (so you are assuming your manifold to have, and in particular to admit, an orientation). In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold. In the non-orientable case, you could consider the top Stiefel-Whitney class $w_n$, which is the mod 2 reduction of the Euler class in the orientable case, and which integrates to the mod 2 reduction of the (cont'd)
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:22
1
1
$begingroup$
Euler characteristic in both cases. Having $w_n = 0$ does not imply the existence of a nowhere zero vector field, though. For a non-orientable example, consider the connect sum of two Klein bottles, which has even Euler characteristic (thus $w_2 = 0$) but no nowhere-zero vector fields (since the Euler characteristic is $-2 neq 0$).
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:25
$begingroup$
Euler characteristic in both cases. Having $w_n = 0$ does not imply the existence of a nowhere zero vector field, though. For a non-orientable example, consider the connect sum of two Klein bottles, which has even Euler characteristic (thus $w_2 = 0$) but no nowhere-zero vector fields (since the Euler characteristic is $-2 neq 0$).
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:25
$begingroup$
Thank you Aleksandar, in the non-orientable case can we also consider the Euler class of the orientable double covering ? P.S. yours is not just a mere comment, if you write it as an answer I will accept it.
$endgroup$
– Warlock of Firetop Mountain
Dec 2 '18 at 14:48
$begingroup$
Thank you Aleksandar, in the non-orientable case can we also consider the Euler class of the orientable double covering ? P.S. yours is not just a mere comment, if you write it as an answer I will accept it.
$endgroup$
– Warlock of Firetop Mountain
Dec 2 '18 at 14:48
1
1
$begingroup$
The orientable double cover has Euler characteristic equal to twice the Euler characteristic of the non-orientable manifold you start with (see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/80326/…). This implies that one has Euler char 0 if and only if the other does. A closed connected manifold (no assumption on orientability) with zero Euler char admits a nowhere-zero vector field; see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/129752/…
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 15:05
$begingroup$
The orientable double cover has Euler characteristic equal to twice the Euler characteristic of the non-orientable manifold you start with (see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/80326/…). This implies that one has Euler char 0 if and only if the other does. A closed connected manifold (no assumption on orientability) with zero Euler char admits a nowhere-zero vector field; see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/129752/…
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 15:05
1
1
$begingroup$
Note that for bundles other than the tangent bundle, the appropriate obstruction is called the twisted Euler class and it lives in cohomology with coefficients twisted by $w_1: pi_1 to pm 1$. A bundle of rank $dim M$ has a section if and only if the (possibly twisted) Euler class vanishes. For manifolds of dimension larger than the vector bundle you are in trouble: there are more obstructions and they are more complicated.
$endgroup$
– Mike Miller
Dec 4 '18 at 22:38
$begingroup$
Note that for bundles other than the tangent bundle, the appropriate obstruction is called the twisted Euler class and it lives in cohomology with coefficients twisted by $w_1: pi_1 to pm 1$. A bundle of rank $dim M$ has a section if and only if the (possibly twisted) Euler class vanishes. For manifolds of dimension larger than the vector bundle you are in trouble: there are more obstructions and they are more complicated.
$endgroup$
– Mike Miller
Dec 4 '18 at 22:38
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
(part of comment above converted to answer)
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle, so you are assuming your manifold to have an orientation. In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold.
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:15
Aleksandar MilivojevicAleksandar Milivojevic
358212
$endgroup$
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3022604%2feuler-class-as-obstruction-to-have-a-never-vanishing-cross-section%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
$begingroup$
(part of comment above converted to answer)
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle, so you are assuming your manifold to have an orientation. In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold.
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:15
Aleksandar MilivojevicAleksandar Milivojevic
358212
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
(part of comment above converted to answer)
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle, so you are assuming your manifold to have an orientation. In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold.
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:15
Aleksandar MilivojevicAleksandar Milivojevic
358212
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
(part of comment above converted to answer)
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle, so you are assuming your manifold to have an orientation. In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold.
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:15
Aleksandar MilivojevicAleksandar Milivojevic
358212
$endgroup$
(part of comment above converted to answer)
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle, so you are assuming your manifold to have an orientation. In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold.
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:15
Aleksandar MilivojevicAleksandar Milivojevic
358212
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:15
Aleksandar MilivojevicAleksandar Milivojevic
358212
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:15
Aleksandar MilivojevicAleksandar Milivojevic
358212
answered Dec 2 '18 at 15:15
Aleksandar MilivojevicAleksandar Milivojevic
358212
358212
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3022604%2feuler-class-as-obstruction-to-have-a-never-vanishing-cross-section%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
1
$begingroup$
Note that the Euler class is only defined in the case of an oriented bundle (so you are assuming your manifold to have, and in particular to admit, an orientation). In that case, your argument is correct. As you noted, the Euler class is the one and only obstruction to finding a section of the sphere bundle of the tangent bundle, i.e. a nowhere-zero vector field on the manifold. In the non-orientable case, you could consider the top Stiefel-Whitney class $w_n$, which is the mod 2 reduction of the Euler class in the orientable case, and which integrates to the mod 2 reduction of the (cont'd)
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:22
1
$begingroup$
Euler characteristic in both cases. Having $w_n = 0$ does not imply the existence of a nowhere zero vector field, though. For a non-orientable example, consider the connect sum of two Klein bottles, which has even Euler characteristic (thus $w_2 = 0$) but no nowhere-zero vector fields (since the Euler characteristic is $-2 neq 0$).
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 14:25
$begingroup$
Thank you Aleksandar, in the non-orientable case can we also consider the Euler class of the orientable double covering ? P.S. yours is not just a mere comment, if you write it as an answer I will accept it.
$endgroup$
– Warlock of Firetop Mountain
Dec 2 '18 at 14:48
1
$begingroup$
The orientable double cover has Euler characteristic equal to twice the Euler characteristic of the non-orientable manifold you start with (see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/80326/…). This implies that one has Euler char 0 if and only if the other does. A closed connected manifold (no assumption on orientability) with zero Euler char admits a nowhere-zero vector field; see this MO post mathoverflow.net/questions/129752/…
$endgroup$
– Aleksandar Milivojevic
Dec 2 '18 at 15:05
1
$begingroup$
Note that for bundles other than the tangent bundle, the appropriate obstruction is called the twisted Euler class and it lives in cohomology with coefficients twisted by $w_1: pi_1 to pm 1$. A bundle of rank $dim M$ has a section if and only if the (possibly twisted) Euler class vanishes. For manifolds of dimension larger than the vector bundle you are in trouble: there are more obstructions and they are more complicated.
$endgroup$
– Mike Miller
Dec 4 '18 at 22:38