About geodesics on a torus












6














Looking at some old midterms online I came across this problem and I'm having some difficulties proving it.



Let $T$ be a torus of revolution paramterized by,
$$x(u,v)=((rcos u+a)cos v,(rcos u+a)sin v ,rsin u)$$ where $a,r in Bbb{R}$ with $a>r$ and $ 0 < u< 2 pi$, $0 < v < 2 pi$.



Prove that if a geodesic is tangent to the parallel $u= pi/2$, then it is entirely contained in the region of $T$ given by $-frac{pi}{2}le u le frac{pi}{2}$
.



Also show that a geodesic that intersects the parallel $u=0$ under the angle $theta$ ($0 < theta < pi/2$) also intersects the parallel $u=pi$ if $cos theta < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clairaut%27s_relation
    – Will Jagy
    Apr 4 '13 at 18:56










  • I guess I'm just confused about how to implement this
    – user62931
    Apr 5 '13 at 6:57
















6














Looking at some old midterms online I came across this problem and I'm having some difficulties proving it.



Let $T$ be a torus of revolution paramterized by,
$$x(u,v)=((rcos u+a)cos v,(rcos u+a)sin v ,rsin u)$$ where $a,r in Bbb{R}$ with $a>r$ and $ 0 < u< 2 pi$, $0 < v < 2 pi$.



Prove that if a geodesic is tangent to the parallel $u= pi/2$, then it is entirely contained in the region of $T$ given by $-frac{pi}{2}le u le frac{pi}{2}$
.



Also show that a geodesic that intersects the parallel $u=0$ under the angle $theta$ ($0 < theta < pi/2$) also intersects the parallel $u=pi$ if $cos theta < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clairaut%27s_relation
    – Will Jagy
    Apr 4 '13 at 18:56










  • I guess I'm just confused about how to implement this
    – user62931
    Apr 5 '13 at 6:57














6












6








6


3





Looking at some old midterms online I came across this problem and I'm having some difficulties proving it.



Let $T$ be a torus of revolution paramterized by,
$$x(u,v)=((rcos u+a)cos v,(rcos u+a)sin v ,rsin u)$$ where $a,r in Bbb{R}$ with $a>r$ and $ 0 < u< 2 pi$, $0 < v < 2 pi$.



Prove that if a geodesic is tangent to the parallel $u= pi/2$, then it is entirely contained in the region of $T$ given by $-frac{pi}{2}le u le frac{pi}{2}$
.



Also show that a geodesic that intersects the parallel $u=0$ under the angle $theta$ ($0 < theta < pi/2$) also intersects the parallel $u=pi$ if $cos theta < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$.










share|cite|improve this question















Looking at some old midterms online I came across this problem and I'm having some difficulties proving it.



Let $T$ be a torus of revolution paramterized by,
$$x(u,v)=((rcos u+a)cos v,(rcos u+a)sin v ,rsin u)$$ where $a,r in Bbb{R}$ with $a>r$ and $ 0 < u< 2 pi$, $0 < v < 2 pi$.



Prove that if a geodesic is tangent to the parallel $u= pi/2$, then it is entirely contained in the region of $T$ given by $-frac{pi}{2}le u le frac{pi}{2}$
.



Also show that a geodesic that intersects the parallel $u=0$ under the angle $theta$ ($0 < theta < pi/2$) also intersects the parallel $u=pi$ if $cos theta < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$.







differential-geometry






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Oct 18 '17 at 20:57









Guy Fsone

17.1k42873




17.1k42873










asked Apr 4 '13 at 16:15









user62931

18019




18019












  • en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clairaut%27s_relation
    – Will Jagy
    Apr 4 '13 at 18:56










  • I guess I'm just confused about how to implement this
    – user62931
    Apr 5 '13 at 6:57


















  • en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clairaut%27s_relation
    – Will Jagy
    Apr 4 '13 at 18:56










  • I guess I'm just confused about how to implement this
    – user62931
    Apr 5 '13 at 6:57
















en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clairaut%27s_relation
– Will Jagy
Apr 4 '13 at 18:56




en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clairaut%27s_relation
– Will Jagy
Apr 4 '13 at 18:56












I guess I'm just confused about how to implement this
– user62931
Apr 5 '13 at 6:57




I guess I'm just confused about how to implement this
– user62931
Apr 5 '13 at 6:57










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















5














There are a few types of geodesics on a torus of revolution. There are meridians, which are cirlces going the short way around. There is an inner equator and an outer equator. After those, there are about three types that pass through a point on the outer equator with some starting angle $theta_0 $ compared with the horizontal.



(A) small $theta_0,$ in which case Clairaut says that they reach a minimum $r$ away from the $z$ axis, where $cos theta = 1$ and $theta = 0.$ By various symmetry properties, these simply return to the outer equator, and pass through it again at angle $-theta_0,$ thus making a wave forever



(B) large $theta_0$ in which they reach the inner equator and pass it at a nonzero angle, in which case they wrap around the torus forever



(C) a critical intermediate value of $theta_0,$ precisely the one that says that the angle $theta$ at the inner equator would be $0,$ by Clairaut. In this case, the geodesic never actually reaches the inner equator, it wraps around and around it, getting closer and closer.



do Carmo's first book does not picture this on the torus. On pages 262-263, he talks about this type (C) for a hyperboloid of revolution, with Figure 4-22.






share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 1




    +1 Interesting! So just to check that I got it right. The outer equator is sort of stable in the sense that any geodesic close to it and nearly parallel to it will never drift too far away from it. The inner equator OTOH... I can `sorta' see that this is the way it might go, but do need to study this to really understand the details :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:27












  • Well, your link to Clairaut's relation is a good start :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:32










  • @Jyrki, exactly right. If you have a closed geodesic in a region of positive Gauss curvature, other geodesics that cross it will have some tendency to meet it again, as meridians leaving the North Pole of the sphere meet up again at the South Pole. In a region of negative Gauss curvature, geodesics will tend to separate. As far as proving things, you consider some geodesic beginning very near the inner equator with Clairaut's angle $theta = 0.$
    – Will Jagy
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:34






  • 1




    Thanks, Will. So if we know the current compass bearing on a great circle flight path, and can keep track of our latitude, Clairaut gives us a simple way of calculating the compass bearing all along the path. Hmm. Could also be useful in a computer game, where we fly around the planet.
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 17:05






  • 1




    Do these last three types of geodesics close upon themselves, or do they never come to pass into their initial point in the proper manner for closure? If the latter, what can be said about their density- meaning, for example: is it true that in any neighborhood of a point on the torus, such a geodesic passes through that neighborhood?
    – kevin
    Apr 17 '14 at 5:53



















4














This question was posted a long time ago, but I will write my solution because I spent a lot of time stuck on this question.



$$sigma(u,v) = ((rcos(u)+a)cos(v),(r cos(u) + a )sin(v), r sin(u) ) $$



With $0<r<a$.



If $gamma(t)= sigma(u(t),v(t))$ is a geodesic parametrized by arc length, then $(u(t),v(t))$ must satisfy the differential equation (geodesic diffential equation)



$$v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)' }{(rcos(u)+a)^2} u' v' = 0 $$
$$u'' - frac{(rcos(u)+a) (rcos(u)+a)'}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (v')^2 + frac{r^2 cos(u)sin(u)}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (u')^2 = 0. $$



From the first equation, we conclude that
begin{align*}
frac{d}{dt}(rcos(u(t)) +a)^2v'(t)) &= (rcos(u)+a)^2 v''(t) + 2(rcos(u(t)
+a)(rcos(u)+a)' u' v'\
&=(rcos(u) + a)^2left[ v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)'}{(rcos(u)+a)^2}u' v'right] \
&=0,
end{align*}

which imply that $exists$ $c in mathbb{R}$, such that



$$(rcos(u(t) +a)^2 v'(t) = c.$$



Follows from these observations



begin{align*}cos(theta(t)) &:= frac{langle sigma_v(u(t),v(t)) , gamma'(t)rangle}{|sigma_v(u(t),v(t))||gamma'(t)|} \
&= frac{langle sigma_v , u'sigma_u + v' sigma_v rangle}{Vertsigma_vVert}\
&= v' Vert sigma_v Vert \
&= v'(t)cdot Vert(-(rcos(u(t))+a)sin(v),(r cos(u(t)) + a) cos(v(t)) , 0) Vert\
&= (r cos(u(t)) +a)v'(t) = frac{c}{rcos(u(t)) + a }
end{align*}



$$Rightarrow (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) equiv c. qquad (1) $$





a)$gamma$ is tangent to the parallel $u=pi/2$



Suppose that $exists$ $v_0,t_0 in mathbb{R}$ satisfying
begin{align*}gamma(t_0) &= sigmaleft(left(frac{pi}{2}, v_0right)right) \
gamma'(t_0) &= pm frac{sigma_v left(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)}{left|sigma_vleft(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)right|},mbox{ remember that }gamma mbox{ is parametrized by arc length}.
end{align*}



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_0)) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) = a quad (2) . $$



Supose by reductio ad absurdum that there is $t_1 in mathbb{R}$, satisfying $gamma(t_1) = sigma(u_1,v_1)$ with $u_1 in [-pi,pi]setminus [-pi/2,pi/2]$.



Using (2)
$$(r cos(u(t_1)) +a) cos(theta(t_1)) = a, hspace{0.1cm} mbox{note that $0leq cos(theta(t))leq 1$} $$
$$Rightarrow cos(theta(t_1)) = frac{a}{(r cos(u(t_1)) +a)}, $$



which implies $cos(theta(t_1)) > 1$. Absurd!!



These arguments prove the first part of your question .





b) $gamma$ intersect the parallel $u=0$ with angle $0<theta<pi/2$ .



$exists$ $t_0$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$, such that



$$gamma(t_0) = sigma(0,v_0),quad cos(theta(t_0))<frac{a-r}{a+r} $$



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(0) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) < a-rqquad (3) $$



Suppose by reductio ad absurdum that $gamma$ never reaches the parallel $u = pi$, this is equivalent to say that $-pi < u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$.



Note that $v'(t) neq 0$, for all $t$. If $exists$ $t_1$, such $v'(t_1) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $cos(theta(t_1)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $gamma'(t_1)$ is l.d. with a meridian, by the unicity of the geodesics (given a point and a direction there is a unique geodesic passing through this point) $gamma$ must be the meridian, it implies that $cos(theta(t_0)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $theta(t_0) = theta = pi/2$. Absurd! So $v'(t) neq 0$, $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $v'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



On the order hand $u'(t) neq 0$. Suppose that $exists$ $t_1$ such that $u'(t_1) = 0$, it implies that $cos(theta(t_1)) = 1$ (remember that we suppose that $-pi < u(t)< pi)$. But



$$c = (rcos(u(t)) + a )cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_1))+a) 1 > a-r $$



contradicts (3). So $u'(t) neq 0$ $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $u'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



Note that by the hypothesis $gamma$ is parametrized by arc length



$$ |u'| |sigma_u| + |v'| |sigma_v| = 1 $$



Using that



$$|sigma_u| = r, quad |sigma_v| > a-r>0 $$



this implies that



$$0< u'(t) leq 1/r , qquad 0< v'(t) < 1/(r-a) quad (4)$$



Now we can conclude that the domain of $gamma$ contains $[t_0, infty)$
. If this not occur exists a maximal $omega^{+}$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$ such that $gamma: [0, omega^+) rightarrow mathbb{R}^3$. Remember that $(u(t),v(t))$ resolves the geodesic differential equation, by ODE theorems we know that $(u(t),v(t))$ $to$ $partial mathbb{R}^2$ when $t rightarrow omega^{+}$ (This means that for every compact $K$ $subset$ $mathbb{R}^2$, $exists$ $t_K$ such that $(u(t),v(t)) notin K$, forall $t>t_K$).



so $$|(u(t),v(t))| rightarrow infty, quad mbox{when}quad t rightarrow omega^{+}. $$



But from Mean Value Theorem and (4).



$$|u(t) - u(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+} - t_0}{r} quad |v(t) - v(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+}- t_0}{a-r}, quad forall t in [t_0, omega^{+})$$



Absurd! Then $gamma$ is well defined forall $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty).$



Note that $u'(t) >0$, and (by the reductio ad absurdum hypothesis) $u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty]$ as $u (t)$ is limited and increasing, there is $tilde{u} leq pi$ satisfying
$$lim_{t rightarrow infty} u(t) = tilde{u} $$



Now we will prove that $liminflimits_{t rightarrow infty} u'(t) rightarrow 0 $ when $t rightarrow infty$. In case otherwise, there will be $ c> 0 $ such that $ u '(t)> c $ for all $ t> t_c $ which implies that
$$ | u (t) - u (t_c) | > c | t - t_c | $$
$$Rightarrow u(t) rightarrow infty, qquad mbox{when} quad t rightarrow infty $$
Absurd! So $exists$ sequence $(t_k)_{k in mathbb{N}}$, such that $t_k rightarrow infty$ and $u'(t_k) rightarrow 0$ when $krightarrow infty$. But this imply that



$$cos(theta (t_k)) rightarrow 1, quad mbox{when}quad k rightarrow infty $$
and
$$a-r > c = lim_{k rightarrow infty} (rcos(u(t_k)) +a) cos(theta (t_k)) = (r cos(tilde{u}) +a ) 1 geq a-r $$
(Final) Absurd! So we conclude that $u(t)$ must pass to $pi$ (or $-pi$, if you suppose that $u'(t) <0$).



Therefore, we proved the theorem.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Your solution for (a) is great. Your derivativion of $(1)$ also follows directly from Clairaut's relation. For (b) there is a much simpler solution:
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:24










  • $(rcos(u)+a)cos(theta)=c Rightarrow (r+a)cos(theta_0)=c Rightarrow (a-r)cos(theta_T)=(r+a)cos(theta_0) Rightarrow cos(theta_0)= cos(theta_T) frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)} < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$ with strictness of the last inequality following from $(a)$.
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:26






  • 1




    @Dan At that time I demonstrate (1) without using directly Clairaut's relations just because I wanted a more elementary solution, but you are right, follows directly from Clairaut's relation. Your demonstration for (b) I didn't understand why your computation implies that the geodesic also intersects the parallel $u=π$? Can you explain, please?
    – Matheus Manzatto
    Jun 1 '18 at 16:03











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%2f351243%2fabout-geodesics-on-a-torus%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









5














There are a few types of geodesics on a torus of revolution. There are meridians, which are cirlces going the short way around. There is an inner equator and an outer equator. After those, there are about three types that pass through a point on the outer equator with some starting angle $theta_0 $ compared with the horizontal.



(A) small $theta_0,$ in which case Clairaut says that they reach a minimum $r$ away from the $z$ axis, where $cos theta = 1$ and $theta = 0.$ By various symmetry properties, these simply return to the outer equator, and pass through it again at angle $-theta_0,$ thus making a wave forever



(B) large $theta_0$ in which they reach the inner equator and pass it at a nonzero angle, in which case they wrap around the torus forever



(C) a critical intermediate value of $theta_0,$ precisely the one that says that the angle $theta$ at the inner equator would be $0,$ by Clairaut. In this case, the geodesic never actually reaches the inner equator, it wraps around and around it, getting closer and closer.



do Carmo's first book does not picture this on the torus. On pages 262-263, he talks about this type (C) for a hyperboloid of revolution, with Figure 4-22.






share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 1




    +1 Interesting! So just to check that I got it right. The outer equator is sort of stable in the sense that any geodesic close to it and nearly parallel to it will never drift too far away from it. The inner equator OTOH... I can `sorta' see that this is the way it might go, but do need to study this to really understand the details :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:27












  • Well, your link to Clairaut's relation is a good start :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:32










  • @Jyrki, exactly right. If you have a closed geodesic in a region of positive Gauss curvature, other geodesics that cross it will have some tendency to meet it again, as meridians leaving the North Pole of the sphere meet up again at the South Pole. In a region of negative Gauss curvature, geodesics will tend to separate. As far as proving things, you consider some geodesic beginning very near the inner equator with Clairaut's angle $theta = 0.$
    – Will Jagy
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:34






  • 1




    Thanks, Will. So if we know the current compass bearing on a great circle flight path, and can keep track of our latitude, Clairaut gives us a simple way of calculating the compass bearing all along the path. Hmm. Could also be useful in a computer game, where we fly around the planet.
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 17:05






  • 1




    Do these last three types of geodesics close upon themselves, or do they never come to pass into their initial point in the proper manner for closure? If the latter, what can be said about their density- meaning, for example: is it true that in any neighborhood of a point on the torus, such a geodesic passes through that neighborhood?
    – kevin
    Apr 17 '14 at 5:53
















5














There are a few types of geodesics on a torus of revolution. There are meridians, which are cirlces going the short way around. There is an inner equator and an outer equator. After those, there are about three types that pass through a point on the outer equator with some starting angle $theta_0 $ compared with the horizontal.



(A) small $theta_0,$ in which case Clairaut says that they reach a minimum $r$ away from the $z$ axis, where $cos theta = 1$ and $theta = 0.$ By various symmetry properties, these simply return to the outer equator, and pass through it again at angle $-theta_0,$ thus making a wave forever



(B) large $theta_0$ in which they reach the inner equator and pass it at a nonzero angle, in which case they wrap around the torus forever



(C) a critical intermediate value of $theta_0,$ precisely the one that says that the angle $theta$ at the inner equator would be $0,$ by Clairaut. In this case, the geodesic never actually reaches the inner equator, it wraps around and around it, getting closer and closer.



do Carmo's first book does not picture this on the torus. On pages 262-263, he talks about this type (C) for a hyperboloid of revolution, with Figure 4-22.






share|cite|improve this answer

















  • 1




    +1 Interesting! So just to check that I got it right. The outer equator is sort of stable in the sense that any geodesic close to it and nearly parallel to it will never drift too far away from it. The inner equator OTOH... I can `sorta' see that this is the way it might go, but do need to study this to really understand the details :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:27












  • Well, your link to Clairaut's relation is a good start :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:32










  • @Jyrki, exactly right. If you have a closed geodesic in a region of positive Gauss curvature, other geodesics that cross it will have some tendency to meet it again, as meridians leaving the North Pole of the sphere meet up again at the South Pole. In a region of negative Gauss curvature, geodesics will tend to separate. As far as proving things, you consider some geodesic beginning very near the inner equator with Clairaut's angle $theta = 0.$
    – Will Jagy
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:34






  • 1




    Thanks, Will. So if we know the current compass bearing on a great circle flight path, and can keep track of our latitude, Clairaut gives us a simple way of calculating the compass bearing all along the path. Hmm. Could also be useful in a computer game, where we fly around the planet.
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 17:05






  • 1




    Do these last three types of geodesics close upon themselves, or do they never come to pass into their initial point in the proper manner for closure? If the latter, what can be said about their density- meaning, for example: is it true that in any neighborhood of a point on the torus, such a geodesic passes through that neighborhood?
    – kevin
    Apr 17 '14 at 5:53














5












5








5






There are a few types of geodesics on a torus of revolution. There are meridians, which are cirlces going the short way around. There is an inner equator and an outer equator. After those, there are about three types that pass through a point on the outer equator with some starting angle $theta_0 $ compared with the horizontal.



(A) small $theta_0,$ in which case Clairaut says that they reach a minimum $r$ away from the $z$ axis, where $cos theta = 1$ and $theta = 0.$ By various symmetry properties, these simply return to the outer equator, and pass through it again at angle $-theta_0,$ thus making a wave forever



(B) large $theta_0$ in which they reach the inner equator and pass it at a nonzero angle, in which case they wrap around the torus forever



(C) a critical intermediate value of $theta_0,$ precisely the one that says that the angle $theta$ at the inner equator would be $0,$ by Clairaut. In this case, the geodesic never actually reaches the inner equator, it wraps around and around it, getting closer and closer.



do Carmo's first book does not picture this on the torus. On pages 262-263, he talks about this type (C) for a hyperboloid of revolution, with Figure 4-22.






share|cite|improve this answer












There are a few types of geodesics on a torus of revolution. There are meridians, which are cirlces going the short way around. There is an inner equator and an outer equator. After those, there are about three types that pass through a point on the outer equator with some starting angle $theta_0 $ compared with the horizontal.



(A) small $theta_0,$ in which case Clairaut says that they reach a minimum $r$ away from the $z$ axis, where $cos theta = 1$ and $theta = 0.$ By various symmetry properties, these simply return to the outer equator, and pass through it again at angle $-theta_0,$ thus making a wave forever



(B) large $theta_0$ in which they reach the inner equator and pass it at a nonzero angle, in which case they wrap around the torus forever



(C) a critical intermediate value of $theta_0,$ precisely the one that says that the angle $theta$ at the inner equator would be $0,$ by Clairaut. In this case, the geodesic never actually reaches the inner equator, it wraps around and around it, getting closer and closer.



do Carmo's first book does not picture this on the torus. On pages 262-263, he talks about this type (C) for a hyperboloid of revolution, with Figure 4-22.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Apr 5 '13 at 16:12









Will Jagy

101k599199




101k599199








  • 1




    +1 Interesting! So just to check that I got it right. The outer equator is sort of stable in the sense that any geodesic close to it and nearly parallel to it will never drift too far away from it. The inner equator OTOH... I can `sorta' see that this is the way it might go, but do need to study this to really understand the details :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:27












  • Well, your link to Clairaut's relation is a good start :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:32










  • @Jyrki, exactly right. If you have a closed geodesic in a region of positive Gauss curvature, other geodesics that cross it will have some tendency to meet it again, as meridians leaving the North Pole of the sphere meet up again at the South Pole. In a region of negative Gauss curvature, geodesics will tend to separate. As far as proving things, you consider some geodesic beginning very near the inner equator with Clairaut's angle $theta = 0.$
    – Will Jagy
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:34






  • 1




    Thanks, Will. So if we know the current compass bearing on a great circle flight path, and can keep track of our latitude, Clairaut gives us a simple way of calculating the compass bearing all along the path. Hmm. Could also be useful in a computer game, where we fly around the planet.
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 17:05






  • 1




    Do these last three types of geodesics close upon themselves, or do they never come to pass into their initial point in the proper manner for closure? If the latter, what can be said about their density- meaning, for example: is it true that in any neighborhood of a point on the torus, such a geodesic passes through that neighborhood?
    – kevin
    Apr 17 '14 at 5:53














  • 1




    +1 Interesting! So just to check that I got it right. The outer equator is sort of stable in the sense that any geodesic close to it and nearly parallel to it will never drift too far away from it. The inner equator OTOH... I can `sorta' see that this is the way it might go, but do need to study this to really understand the details :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:27












  • Well, your link to Clairaut's relation is a good start :-)
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:32










  • @Jyrki, exactly right. If you have a closed geodesic in a region of positive Gauss curvature, other geodesics that cross it will have some tendency to meet it again, as meridians leaving the North Pole of the sphere meet up again at the South Pole. In a region of negative Gauss curvature, geodesics will tend to separate. As far as proving things, you consider some geodesic beginning very near the inner equator with Clairaut's angle $theta = 0.$
    – Will Jagy
    Apr 5 '13 at 16:34






  • 1




    Thanks, Will. So if we know the current compass bearing on a great circle flight path, and can keep track of our latitude, Clairaut gives us a simple way of calculating the compass bearing all along the path. Hmm. Could also be useful in a computer game, where we fly around the planet.
    – Jyrki Lahtonen
    Apr 5 '13 at 17:05






  • 1




    Do these last three types of geodesics close upon themselves, or do they never come to pass into their initial point in the proper manner for closure? If the latter, what can be said about their density- meaning, for example: is it true that in any neighborhood of a point on the torus, such a geodesic passes through that neighborhood?
    – kevin
    Apr 17 '14 at 5:53








1




1




+1 Interesting! So just to check that I got it right. The outer equator is sort of stable in the sense that any geodesic close to it and nearly parallel to it will never drift too far away from it. The inner equator OTOH... I can `sorta' see that this is the way it might go, but do need to study this to really understand the details :-)
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 5 '13 at 16:27






+1 Interesting! So just to check that I got it right. The outer equator is sort of stable in the sense that any geodesic close to it and nearly parallel to it will never drift too far away from it. The inner equator OTOH... I can `sorta' see that this is the way it might go, but do need to study this to really understand the details :-)
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 5 '13 at 16:27














Well, your link to Clairaut's relation is a good start :-)
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 5 '13 at 16:32




Well, your link to Clairaut's relation is a good start :-)
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 5 '13 at 16:32












@Jyrki, exactly right. If you have a closed geodesic in a region of positive Gauss curvature, other geodesics that cross it will have some tendency to meet it again, as meridians leaving the North Pole of the sphere meet up again at the South Pole. In a region of negative Gauss curvature, geodesics will tend to separate. As far as proving things, you consider some geodesic beginning very near the inner equator with Clairaut's angle $theta = 0.$
– Will Jagy
Apr 5 '13 at 16:34




@Jyrki, exactly right. If you have a closed geodesic in a region of positive Gauss curvature, other geodesics that cross it will have some tendency to meet it again, as meridians leaving the North Pole of the sphere meet up again at the South Pole. In a region of negative Gauss curvature, geodesics will tend to separate. As far as proving things, you consider some geodesic beginning very near the inner equator with Clairaut's angle $theta = 0.$
– Will Jagy
Apr 5 '13 at 16:34




1




1




Thanks, Will. So if we know the current compass bearing on a great circle flight path, and can keep track of our latitude, Clairaut gives us a simple way of calculating the compass bearing all along the path. Hmm. Could also be useful in a computer game, where we fly around the planet.
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 5 '13 at 17:05




Thanks, Will. So if we know the current compass bearing on a great circle flight path, and can keep track of our latitude, Clairaut gives us a simple way of calculating the compass bearing all along the path. Hmm. Could also be useful in a computer game, where we fly around the planet.
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 5 '13 at 17:05




1




1




Do these last three types of geodesics close upon themselves, or do they never come to pass into their initial point in the proper manner for closure? If the latter, what can be said about their density- meaning, for example: is it true that in any neighborhood of a point on the torus, such a geodesic passes through that neighborhood?
– kevin
Apr 17 '14 at 5:53




Do these last three types of geodesics close upon themselves, or do they never come to pass into their initial point in the proper manner for closure? If the latter, what can be said about their density- meaning, for example: is it true that in any neighborhood of a point on the torus, such a geodesic passes through that neighborhood?
– kevin
Apr 17 '14 at 5:53











4














This question was posted a long time ago, but I will write my solution because I spent a lot of time stuck on this question.



$$sigma(u,v) = ((rcos(u)+a)cos(v),(r cos(u) + a )sin(v), r sin(u) ) $$



With $0<r<a$.



If $gamma(t)= sigma(u(t),v(t))$ is a geodesic parametrized by arc length, then $(u(t),v(t))$ must satisfy the differential equation (geodesic diffential equation)



$$v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)' }{(rcos(u)+a)^2} u' v' = 0 $$
$$u'' - frac{(rcos(u)+a) (rcos(u)+a)'}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (v')^2 + frac{r^2 cos(u)sin(u)}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (u')^2 = 0. $$



From the first equation, we conclude that
begin{align*}
frac{d}{dt}(rcos(u(t)) +a)^2v'(t)) &= (rcos(u)+a)^2 v''(t) + 2(rcos(u(t)
+a)(rcos(u)+a)' u' v'\
&=(rcos(u) + a)^2left[ v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)'}{(rcos(u)+a)^2}u' v'right] \
&=0,
end{align*}

which imply that $exists$ $c in mathbb{R}$, such that



$$(rcos(u(t) +a)^2 v'(t) = c.$$



Follows from these observations



begin{align*}cos(theta(t)) &:= frac{langle sigma_v(u(t),v(t)) , gamma'(t)rangle}{|sigma_v(u(t),v(t))||gamma'(t)|} \
&= frac{langle sigma_v , u'sigma_u + v' sigma_v rangle}{Vertsigma_vVert}\
&= v' Vert sigma_v Vert \
&= v'(t)cdot Vert(-(rcos(u(t))+a)sin(v),(r cos(u(t)) + a) cos(v(t)) , 0) Vert\
&= (r cos(u(t)) +a)v'(t) = frac{c}{rcos(u(t)) + a }
end{align*}



$$Rightarrow (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) equiv c. qquad (1) $$





a)$gamma$ is tangent to the parallel $u=pi/2$



Suppose that $exists$ $v_0,t_0 in mathbb{R}$ satisfying
begin{align*}gamma(t_0) &= sigmaleft(left(frac{pi}{2}, v_0right)right) \
gamma'(t_0) &= pm frac{sigma_v left(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)}{left|sigma_vleft(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)right|},mbox{ remember that }gamma mbox{ is parametrized by arc length}.
end{align*}



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_0)) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) = a quad (2) . $$



Supose by reductio ad absurdum that there is $t_1 in mathbb{R}$, satisfying $gamma(t_1) = sigma(u_1,v_1)$ with $u_1 in [-pi,pi]setminus [-pi/2,pi/2]$.



Using (2)
$$(r cos(u(t_1)) +a) cos(theta(t_1)) = a, hspace{0.1cm} mbox{note that $0leq cos(theta(t))leq 1$} $$
$$Rightarrow cos(theta(t_1)) = frac{a}{(r cos(u(t_1)) +a)}, $$



which implies $cos(theta(t_1)) > 1$. Absurd!!



These arguments prove the first part of your question .





b) $gamma$ intersect the parallel $u=0$ with angle $0<theta<pi/2$ .



$exists$ $t_0$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$, such that



$$gamma(t_0) = sigma(0,v_0),quad cos(theta(t_0))<frac{a-r}{a+r} $$



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(0) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) < a-rqquad (3) $$



Suppose by reductio ad absurdum that $gamma$ never reaches the parallel $u = pi$, this is equivalent to say that $-pi < u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$.



Note that $v'(t) neq 0$, for all $t$. If $exists$ $t_1$, such $v'(t_1) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $cos(theta(t_1)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $gamma'(t_1)$ is l.d. with a meridian, by the unicity of the geodesics (given a point and a direction there is a unique geodesic passing through this point) $gamma$ must be the meridian, it implies that $cos(theta(t_0)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $theta(t_0) = theta = pi/2$. Absurd! So $v'(t) neq 0$, $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $v'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



On the order hand $u'(t) neq 0$. Suppose that $exists$ $t_1$ such that $u'(t_1) = 0$, it implies that $cos(theta(t_1)) = 1$ (remember that we suppose that $-pi < u(t)< pi)$. But



$$c = (rcos(u(t)) + a )cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_1))+a) 1 > a-r $$



contradicts (3). So $u'(t) neq 0$ $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $u'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



Note that by the hypothesis $gamma$ is parametrized by arc length



$$ |u'| |sigma_u| + |v'| |sigma_v| = 1 $$



Using that



$$|sigma_u| = r, quad |sigma_v| > a-r>0 $$



this implies that



$$0< u'(t) leq 1/r , qquad 0< v'(t) < 1/(r-a) quad (4)$$



Now we can conclude that the domain of $gamma$ contains $[t_0, infty)$
. If this not occur exists a maximal $omega^{+}$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$ such that $gamma: [0, omega^+) rightarrow mathbb{R}^3$. Remember that $(u(t),v(t))$ resolves the geodesic differential equation, by ODE theorems we know that $(u(t),v(t))$ $to$ $partial mathbb{R}^2$ when $t rightarrow omega^{+}$ (This means that for every compact $K$ $subset$ $mathbb{R}^2$, $exists$ $t_K$ such that $(u(t),v(t)) notin K$, forall $t>t_K$).



so $$|(u(t),v(t))| rightarrow infty, quad mbox{when}quad t rightarrow omega^{+}. $$



But from Mean Value Theorem and (4).



$$|u(t) - u(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+} - t_0}{r} quad |v(t) - v(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+}- t_0}{a-r}, quad forall t in [t_0, omega^{+})$$



Absurd! Then $gamma$ is well defined forall $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty).$



Note that $u'(t) >0$, and (by the reductio ad absurdum hypothesis) $u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty]$ as $u (t)$ is limited and increasing, there is $tilde{u} leq pi$ satisfying
$$lim_{t rightarrow infty} u(t) = tilde{u} $$



Now we will prove that $liminflimits_{t rightarrow infty} u'(t) rightarrow 0 $ when $t rightarrow infty$. In case otherwise, there will be $ c> 0 $ such that $ u '(t)> c $ for all $ t> t_c $ which implies that
$$ | u (t) - u (t_c) | > c | t - t_c | $$
$$Rightarrow u(t) rightarrow infty, qquad mbox{when} quad t rightarrow infty $$
Absurd! So $exists$ sequence $(t_k)_{k in mathbb{N}}$, such that $t_k rightarrow infty$ and $u'(t_k) rightarrow 0$ when $krightarrow infty$. But this imply that



$$cos(theta (t_k)) rightarrow 1, quad mbox{when}quad k rightarrow infty $$
and
$$a-r > c = lim_{k rightarrow infty} (rcos(u(t_k)) +a) cos(theta (t_k)) = (r cos(tilde{u}) +a ) 1 geq a-r $$
(Final) Absurd! So we conclude that $u(t)$ must pass to $pi$ (or $-pi$, if you suppose that $u'(t) <0$).



Therefore, we proved the theorem.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Your solution for (a) is great. Your derivativion of $(1)$ also follows directly from Clairaut's relation. For (b) there is a much simpler solution:
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:24










  • $(rcos(u)+a)cos(theta)=c Rightarrow (r+a)cos(theta_0)=c Rightarrow (a-r)cos(theta_T)=(r+a)cos(theta_0) Rightarrow cos(theta_0)= cos(theta_T) frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)} < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$ with strictness of the last inequality following from $(a)$.
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:26






  • 1




    @Dan At that time I demonstrate (1) without using directly Clairaut's relations just because I wanted a more elementary solution, but you are right, follows directly from Clairaut's relation. Your demonstration for (b) I didn't understand why your computation implies that the geodesic also intersects the parallel $u=π$? Can you explain, please?
    – Matheus Manzatto
    Jun 1 '18 at 16:03
















4














This question was posted a long time ago, but I will write my solution because I spent a lot of time stuck on this question.



$$sigma(u,v) = ((rcos(u)+a)cos(v),(r cos(u) + a )sin(v), r sin(u) ) $$



With $0<r<a$.



If $gamma(t)= sigma(u(t),v(t))$ is a geodesic parametrized by arc length, then $(u(t),v(t))$ must satisfy the differential equation (geodesic diffential equation)



$$v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)' }{(rcos(u)+a)^2} u' v' = 0 $$
$$u'' - frac{(rcos(u)+a) (rcos(u)+a)'}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (v')^2 + frac{r^2 cos(u)sin(u)}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (u')^2 = 0. $$



From the first equation, we conclude that
begin{align*}
frac{d}{dt}(rcos(u(t)) +a)^2v'(t)) &= (rcos(u)+a)^2 v''(t) + 2(rcos(u(t)
+a)(rcos(u)+a)' u' v'\
&=(rcos(u) + a)^2left[ v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)'}{(rcos(u)+a)^2}u' v'right] \
&=0,
end{align*}

which imply that $exists$ $c in mathbb{R}$, such that



$$(rcos(u(t) +a)^2 v'(t) = c.$$



Follows from these observations



begin{align*}cos(theta(t)) &:= frac{langle sigma_v(u(t),v(t)) , gamma'(t)rangle}{|sigma_v(u(t),v(t))||gamma'(t)|} \
&= frac{langle sigma_v , u'sigma_u + v' sigma_v rangle}{Vertsigma_vVert}\
&= v' Vert sigma_v Vert \
&= v'(t)cdot Vert(-(rcos(u(t))+a)sin(v),(r cos(u(t)) + a) cos(v(t)) , 0) Vert\
&= (r cos(u(t)) +a)v'(t) = frac{c}{rcos(u(t)) + a }
end{align*}



$$Rightarrow (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) equiv c. qquad (1) $$





a)$gamma$ is tangent to the parallel $u=pi/2$



Suppose that $exists$ $v_0,t_0 in mathbb{R}$ satisfying
begin{align*}gamma(t_0) &= sigmaleft(left(frac{pi}{2}, v_0right)right) \
gamma'(t_0) &= pm frac{sigma_v left(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)}{left|sigma_vleft(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)right|},mbox{ remember that }gamma mbox{ is parametrized by arc length}.
end{align*}



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_0)) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) = a quad (2) . $$



Supose by reductio ad absurdum that there is $t_1 in mathbb{R}$, satisfying $gamma(t_1) = sigma(u_1,v_1)$ with $u_1 in [-pi,pi]setminus [-pi/2,pi/2]$.



Using (2)
$$(r cos(u(t_1)) +a) cos(theta(t_1)) = a, hspace{0.1cm} mbox{note that $0leq cos(theta(t))leq 1$} $$
$$Rightarrow cos(theta(t_1)) = frac{a}{(r cos(u(t_1)) +a)}, $$



which implies $cos(theta(t_1)) > 1$. Absurd!!



These arguments prove the first part of your question .





b) $gamma$ intersect the parallel $u=0$ with angle $0<theta<pi/2$ .



$exists$ $t_0$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$, such that



$$gamma(t_0) = sigma(0,v_0),quad cos(theta(t_0))<frac{a-r}{a+r} $$



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(0) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) < a-rqquad (3) $$



Suppose by reductio ad absurdum that $gamma$ never reaches the parallel $u = pi$, this is equivalent to say that $-pi < u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$.



Note that $v'(t) neq 0$, for all $t$. If $exists$ $t_1$, such $v'(t_1) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $cos(theta(t_1)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $gamma'(t_1)$ is l.d. with a meridian, by the unicity of the geodesics (given a point and a direction there is a unique geodesic passing through this point) $gamma$ must be the meridian, it implies that $cos(theta(t_0)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $theta(t_0) = theta = pi/2$. Absurd! So $v'(t) neq 0$, $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $v'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



On the order hand $u'(t) neq 0$. Suppose that $exists$ $t_1$ such that $u'(t_1) = 0$, it implies that $cos(theta(t_1)) = 1$ (remember that we suppose that $-pi < u(t)< pi)$. But



$$c = (rcos(u(t)) + a )cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_1))+a) 1 > a-r $$



contradicts (3). So $u'(t) neq 0$ $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $u'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



Note that by the hypothesis $gamma$ is parametrized by arc length



$$ |u'| |sigma_u| + |v'| |sigma_v| = 1 $$



Using that



$$|sigma_u| = r, quad |sigma_v| > a-r>0 $$



this implies that



$$0< u'(t) leq 1/r , qquad 0< v'(t) < 1/(r-a) quad (4)$$



Now we can conclude that the domain of $gamma$ contains $[t_0, infty)$
. If this not occur exists a maximal $omega^{+}$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$ such that $gamma: [0, omega^+) rightarrow mathbb{R}^3$. Remember that $(u(t),v(t))$ resolves the geodesic differential equation, by ODE theorems we know that $(u(t),v(t))$ $to$ $partial mathbb{R}^2$ when $t rightarrow omega^{+}$ (This means that for every compact $K$ $subset$ $mathbb{R}^2$, $exists$ $t_K$ such that $(u(t),v(t)) notin K$, forall $t>t_K$).



so $$|(u(t),v(t))| rightarrow infty, quad mbox{when}quad t rightarrow omega^{+}. $$



But from Mean Value Theorem and (4).



$$|u(t) - u(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+} - t_0}{r} quad |v(t) - v(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+}- t_0}{a-r}, quad forall t in [t_0, omega^{+})$$



Absurd! Then $gamma$ is well defined forall $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty).$



Note that $u'(t) >0$, and (by the reductio ad absurdum hypothesis) $u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty]$ as $u (t)$ is limited and increasing, there is $tilde{u} leq pi$ satisfying
$$lim_{t rightarrow infty} u(t) = tilde{u} $$



Now we will prove that $liminflimits_{t rightarrow infty} u'(t) rightarrow 0 $ when $t rightarrow infty$. In case otherwise, there will be $ c> 0 $ such that $ u '(t)> c $ for all $ t> t_c $ which implies that
$$ | u (t) - u (t_c) | > c | t - t_c | $$
$$Rightarrow u(t) rightarrow infty, qquad mbox{when} quad t rightarrow infty $$
Absurd! So $exists$ sequence $(t_k)_{k in mathbb{N}}$, such that $t_k rightarrow infty$ and $u'(t_k) rightarrow 0$ when $krightarrow infty$. But this imply that



$$cos(theta (t_k)) rightarrow 1, quad mbox{when}quad k rightarrow infty $$
and
$$a-r > c = lim_{k rightarrow infty} (rcos(u(t_k)) +a) cos(theta (t_k)) = (r cos(tilde{u}) +a ) 1 geq a-r $$
(Final) Absurd! So we conclude that $u(t)$ must pass to $pi$ (or $-pi$, if you suppose that $u'(t) <0$).



Therefore, we proved the theorem.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • Your solution for (a) is great. Your derivativion of $(1)$ also follows directly from Clairaut's relation. For (b) there is a much simpler solution:
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:24










  • $(rcos(u)+a)cos(theta)=c Rightarrow (r+a)cos(theta_0)=c Rightarrow (a-r)cos(theta_T)=(r+a)cos(theta_0) Rightarrow cos(theta_0)= cos(theta_T) frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)} < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$ with strictness of the last inequality following from $(a)$.
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:26






  • 1




    @Dan At that time I demonstrate (1) without using directly Clairaut's relations just because I wanted a more elementary solution, but you are right, follows directly from Clairaut's relation. Your demonstration for (b) I didn't understand why your computation implies that the geodesic also intersects the parallel $u=π$? Can you explain, please?
    – Matheus Manzatto
    Jun 1 '18 at 16:03














4












4








4






This question was posted a long time ago, but I will write my solution because I spent a lot of time stuck on this question.



$$sigma(u,v) = ((rcos(u)+a)cos(v),(r cos(u) + a )sin(v), r sin(u) ) $$



With $0<r<a$.



If $gamma(t)= sigma(u(t),v(t))$ is a geodesic parametrized by arc length, then $(u(t),v(t))$ must satisfy the differential equation (geodesic diffential equation)



$$v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)' }{(rcos(u)+a)^2} u' v' = 0 $$
$$u'' - frac{(rcos(u)+a) (rcos(u)+a)'}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (v')^2 + frac{r^2 cos(u)sin(u)}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (u')^2 = 0. $$



From the first equation, we conclude that
begin{align*}
frac{d}{dt}(rcos(u(t)) +a)^2v'(t)) &= (rcos(u)+a)^2 v''(t) + 2(rcos(u(t)
+a)(rcos(u)+a)' u' v'\
&=(rcos(u) + a)^2left[ v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)'}{(rcos(u)+a)^2}u' v'right] \
&=0,
end{align*}

which imply that $exists$ $c in mathbb{R}$, such that



$$(rcos(u(t) +a)^2 v'(t) = c.$$



Follows from these observations



begin{align*}cos(theta(t)) &:= frac{langle sigma_v(u(t),v(t)) , gamma'(t)rangle}{|sigma_v(u(t),v(t))||gamma'(t)|} \
&= frac{langle sigma_v , u'sigma_u + v' sigma_v rangle}{Vertsigma_vVert}\
&= v' Vert sigma_v Vert \
&= v'(t)cdot Vert(-(rcos(u(t))+a)sin(v),(r cos(u(t)) + a) cos(v(t)) , 0) Vert\
&= (r cos(u(t)) +a)v'(t) = frac{c}{rcos(u(t)) + a }
end{align*}



$$Rightarrow (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) equiv c. qquad (1) $$





a)$gamma$ is tangent to the parallel $u=pi/2$



Suppose that $exists$ $v_0,t_0 in mathbb{R}$ satisfying
begin{align*}gamma(t_0) &= sigmaleft(left(frac{pi}{2}, v_0right)right) \
gamma'(t_0) &= pm frac{sigma_v left(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)}{left|sigma_vleft(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)right|},mbox{ remember that }gamma mbox{ is parametrized by arc length}.
end{align*}



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_0)) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) = a quad (2) . $$



Supose by reductio ad absurdum that there is $t_1 in mathbb{R}$, satisfying $gamma(t_1) = sigma(u_1,v_1)$ with $u_1 in [-pi,pi]setminus [-pi/2,pi/2]$.



Using (2)
$$(r cos(u(t_1)) +a) cos(theta(t_1)) = a, hspace{0.1cm} mbox{note that $0leq cos(theta(t))leq 1$} $$
$$Rightarrow cos(theta(t_1)) = frac{a}{(r cos(u(t_1)) +a)}, $$



which implies $cos(theta(t_1)) > 1$. Absurd!!



These arguments prove the first part of your question .





b) $gamma$ intersect the parallel $u=0$ with angle $0<theta<pi/2$ .



$exists$ $t_0$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$, such that



$$gamma(t_0) = sigma(0,v_0),quad cos(theta(t_0))<frac{a-r}{a+r} $$



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(0) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) < a-rqquad (3) $$



Suppose by reductio ad absurdum that $gamma$ never reaches the parallel $u = pi$, this is equivalent to say that $-pi < u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$.



Note that $v'(t) neq 0$, for all $t$. If $exists$ $t_1$, such $v'(t_1) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $cos(theta(t_1)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $gamma'(t_1)$ is l.d. with a meridian, by the unicity of the geodesics (given a point and a direction there is a unique geodesic passing through this point) $gamma$ must be the meridian, it implies that $cos(theta(t_0)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $theta(t_0) = theta = pi/2$. Absurd! So $v'(t) neq 0$, $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $v'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



On the order hand $u'(t) neq 0$. Suppose that $exists$ $t_1$ such that $u'(t_1) = 0$, it implies that $cos(theta(t_1)) = 1$ (remember that we suppose that $-pi < u(t)< pi)$. But



$$c = (rcos(u(t)) + a )cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_1))+a) 1 > a-r $$



contradicts (3). So $u'(t) neq 0$ $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $u'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



Note that by the hypothesis $gamma$ is parametrized by arc length



$$ |u'| |sigma_u| + |v'| |sigma_v| = 1 $$



Using that



$$|sigma_u| = r, quad |sigma_v| > a-r>0 $$



this implies that



$$0< u'(t) leq 1/r , qquad 0< v'(t) < 1/(r-a) quad (4)$$



Now we can conclude that the domain of $gamma$ contains $[t_0, infty)$
. If this not occur exists a maximal $omega^{+}$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$ such that $gamma: [0, omega^+) rightarrow mathbb{R}^3$. Remember that $(u(t),v(t))$ resolves the geodesic differential equation, by ODE theorems we know that $(u(t),v(t))$ $to$ $partial mathbb{R}^2$ when $t rightarrow omega^{+}$ (This means that for every compact $K$ $subset$ $mathbb{R}^2$, $exists$ $t_K$ such that $(u(t),v(t)) notin K$, forall $t>t_K$).



so $$|(u(t),v(t))| rightarrow infty, quad mbox{when}quad t rightarrow omega^{+}. $$



But from Mean Value Theorem and (4).



$$|u(t) - u(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+} - t_0}{r} quad |v(t) - v(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+}- t_0}{a-r}, quad forall t in [t_0, omega^{+})$$



Absurd! Then $gamma$ is well defined forall $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty).$



Note that $u'(t) >0$, and (by the reductio ad absurdum hypothesis) $u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty]$ as $u (t)$ is limited and increasing, there is $tilde{u} leq pi$ satisfying
$$lim_{t rightarrow infty} u(t) = tilde{u} $$



Now we will prove that $liminflimits_{t rightarrow infty} u'(t) rightarrow 0 $ when $t rightarrow infty$. In case otherwise, there will be $ c> 0 $ such that $ u '(t)> c $ for all $ t> t_c $ which implies that
$$ | u (t) - u (t_c) | > c | t - t_c | $$
$$Rightarrow u(t) rightarrow infty, qquad mbox{when} quad t rightarrow infty $$
Absurd! So $exists$ sequence $(t_k)_{k in mathbb{N}}$, such that $t_k rightarrow infty$ and $u'(t_k) rightarrow 0$ when $krightarrow infty$. But this imply that



$$cos(theta (t_k)) rightarrow 1, quad mbox{when}quad k rightarrow infty $$
and
$$a-r > c = lim_{k rightarrow infty} (rcos(u(t_k)) +a) cos(theta (t_k)) = (r cos(tilde{u}) +a ) 1 geq a-r $$
(Final) Absurd! So we conclude that $u(t)$ must pass to $pi$ (or $-pi$, if you suppose that $u'(t) <0$).



Therefore, we proved the theorem.






share|cite|improve this answer














This question was posted a long time ago, but I will write my solution because I spent a lot of time stuck on this question.



$$sigma(u,v) = ((rcos(u)+a)cos(v),(r cos(u) + a )sin(v), r sin(u) ) $$



With $0<r<a$.



If $gamma(t)= sigma(u(t),v(t))$ is a geodesic parametrized by arc length, then $(u(t),v(t))$ must satisfy the differential equation (geodesic diffential equation)



$$v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)' }{(rcos(u)+a)^2} u' v' = 0 $$
$$u'' - frac{(rcos(u)+a) (rcos(u)+a)'}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (v')^2 + frac{r^2 cos(u)sin(u)}{((rcos(u)+a)')^2 + (cos(u))^2} (u')^2 = 0. $$



From the first equation, we conclude that
begin{align*}
frac{d}{dt}(rcos(u(t)) +a)^2v'(t)) &= (rcos(u)+a)^2 v''(t) + 2(rcos(u(t)
+a)(rcos(u)+a)' u' v'\
&=(rcos(u) + a)^2left[ v'' + 2frac{(rcos(u)+a)(rcos(u)+a)'}{(rcos(u)+a)^2}u' v'right] \
&=0,
end{align*}

which imply that $exists$ $c in mathbb{R}$, such that



$$(rcos(u(t) +a)^2 v'(t) = c.$$



Follows from these observations



begin{align*}cos(theta(t)) &:= frac{langle sigma_v(u(t),v(t)) , gamma'(t)rangle}{|sigma_v(u(t),v(t))||gamma'(t)|} \
&= frac{langle sigma_v , u'sigma_u + v' sigma_v rangle}{Vertsigma_vVert}\
&= v' Vert sigma_v Vert \
&= v'(t)cdot Vert(-(rcos(u(t))+a)sin(v),(r cos(u(t)) + a) cos(v(t)) , 0) Vert\
&= (r cos(u(t)) +a)v'(t) = frac{c}{rcos(u(t)) + a }
end{align*}



$$Rightarrow (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) equiv c. qquad (1) $$





a)$gamma$ is tangent to the parallel $u=pi/2$



Suppose that $exists$ $v_0,t_0 in mathbb{R}$ satisfying
begin{align*}gamma(t_0) &= sigmaleft(left(frac{pi}{2}, v_0right)right) \
gamma'(t_0) &= pm frac{sigma_v left(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)}{left|sigma_vleft(frac{pi}{2},v_0right)right|},mbox{ remember that }gamma mbox{ is parametrized by arc length}.
end{align*}



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_0)) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) = a quad (2) . $$



Supose by reductio ad absurdum that there is $t_1 in mathbb{R}$, satisfying $gamma(t_1) = sigma(u_1,v_1)$ with $u_1 in [-pi,pi]setminus [-pi/2,pi/2]$.



Using (2)
$$(r cos(u(t_1)) +a) cos(theta(t_1)) = a, hspace{0.1cm} mbox{note that $0leq cos(theta(t))leq 1$} $$
$$Rightarrow cos(theta(t_1)) = frac{a}{(r cos(u(t_1)) +a)}, $$



which implies $cos(theta(t_1)) > 1$. Absurd!!



These arguments prove the first part of your question .





b) $gamma$ intersect the parallel $u=0$ with angle $0<theta<pi/2$ .



$exists$ $t_0$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$, such that



$$gamma(t_0) = sigma(0,v_0),quad cos(theta(t_0))<frac{a-r}{a+r} $$



From (1)



$$c = (r cos(u(t)) +a) cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(0) +a) cos(theta(t_0)) < a-rqquad (3) $$



Suppose by reductio ad absurdum that $gamma$ never reaches the parallel $u = pi$, this is equivalent to say that $-pi < u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$.



Note that $v'(t) neq 0$, for all $t$. If $exists$ $t_1$, such $v'(t_1) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $cos(theta(t_1)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $gamma'(t_1)$ is l.d. with a meridian, by the unicity of the geodesics (given a point and a direction there is a unique geodesic passing through this point) $gamma$ must be the meridian, it implies that $cos(theta(t_0)) = 0$ $Rightarrow$ $theta(t_0) = theta = pi/2$. Absurd! So $v'(t) neq 0$, $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $v'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



On the order hand $u'(t) neq 0$. Suppose that $exists$ $t_1$ such that $u'(t_1) = 0$, it implies that $cos(theta(t_1)) = 1$ (remember that we suppose that $-pi < u(t)< pi)$. But



$$c = (rcos(u(t)) + a )cos(theta(t)) = (r cos(u(t_1))+a) 1 > a-r $$



contradicts (3). So $u'(t) neq 0$ $forall$ $t$.



Suppose without loss of generality that $u'(t) >0$ $forall t$.



Note that by the hypothesis $gamma$ is parametrized by arc length



$$ |u'| |sigma_u| + |v'| |sigma_v| = 1 $$



Using that



$$|sigma_u| = r, quad |sigma_v| > a-r>0 $$



this implies that



$$0< u'(t) leq 1/r , qquad 0< v'(t) < 1/(r-a) quad (4)$$



Now we can conclude that the domain of $gamma$ contains $[t_0, infty)$
. If this not occur exists a maximal $omega^{+}$ $in$ $mathbb{R}$ such that $gamma: [0, omega^+) rightarrow mathbb{R}^3$. Remember that $(u(t),v(t))$ resolves the geodesic differential equation, by ODE theorems we know that $(u(t),v(t))$ $to$ $partial mathbb{R}^2$ when $t rightarrow omega^{+}$ (This means that for every compact $K$ $subset$ $mathbb{R}^2$, $exists$ $t_K$ such that $(u(t),v(t)) notin K$, forall $t>t_K$).



so $$|(u(t),v(t))| rightarrow infty, quad mbox{when}quad t rightarrow omega^{+}. $$



But from Mean Value Theorem and (4).



$$|u(t) - u(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+} - t_0}{r} quad |v(t) - v(t_0)| < frac{omega^{+}- t_0}{a-r}, quad forall t in [t_0, omega^{+})$$



Absurd! Then $gamma$ is well defined forall $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty).$



Note that $u'(t) >0$, and (by the reductio ad absurdum hypothesis) $u(t) < pi$, $forall$ $t$ $in$ $[t_0, infty]$ as $u (t)$ is limited and increasing, there is $tilde{u} leq pi$ satisfying
$$lim_{t rightarrow infty} u(t) = tilde{u} $$



Now we will prove that $liminflimits_{t rightarrow infty} u'(t) rightarrow 0 $ when $t rightarrow infty$. In case otherwise, there will be $ c> 0 $ such that $ u '(t)> c $ for all $ t> t_c $ which implies that
$$ | u (t) - u (t_c) | > c | t - t_c | $$
$$Rightarrow u(t) rightarrow infty, qquad mbox{when} quad t rightarrow infty $$
Absurd! So $exists$ sequence $(t_k)_{k in mathbb{N}}$, such that $t_k rightarrow infty$ and $u'(t_k) rightarrow 0$ when $krightarrow infty$. But this imply that



$$cos(theta (t_k)) rightarrow 1, quad mbox{when}quad k rightarrow infty $$
and
$$a-r > c = lim_{k rightarrow infty} (rcos(u(t_k)) +a) cos(theta (t_k)) = (r cos(tilde{u}) +a ) 1 geq a-r $$
(Final) Absurd! So we conclude that $u(t)$ must pass to $pi$ (or $-pi$, if you suppose that $u'(t) <0$).



Therefore, we proved the theorem.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Nov 27 '18 at 23:53

























answered Oct 14 '17 at 21:55









Matheus Manzatto

1,3611523




1,3611523












  • Your solution for (a) is great. Your derivativion of $(1)$ also follows directly from Clairaut's relation. For (b) there is a much simpler solution:
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:24










  • $(rcos(u)+a)cos(theta)=c Rightarrow (r+a)cos(theta_0)=c Rightarrow (a-r)cos(theta_T)=(r+a)cos(theta_0) Rightarrow cos(theta_0)= cos(theta_T) frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)} < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$ with strictness of the last inequality following from $(a)$.
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:26






  • 1




    @Dan At that time I demonstrate (1) without using directly Clairaut's relations just because I wanted a more elementary solution, but you are right, follows directly from Clairaut's relation. Your demonstration for (b) I didn't understand why your computation implies that the geodesic also intersects the parallel $u=π$? Can you explain, please?
    – Matheus Manzatto
    Jun 1 '18 at 16:03


















  • Your solution for (a) is great. Your derivativion of $(1)$ also follows directly from Clairaut's relation. For (b) there is a much simpler solution:
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:24










  • $(rcos(u)+a)cos(theta)=c Rightarrow (r+a)cos(theta_0)=c Rightarrow (a-r)cos(theta_T)=(r+a)cos(theta_0) Rightarrow cos(theta_0)= cos(theta_T) frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)} < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$ with strictness of the last inequality following from $(a)$.
    – Dan
    Jun 1 '18 at 15:26






  • 1




    @Dan At that time I demonstrate (1) without using directly Clairaut's relations just because I wanted a more elementary solution, but you are right, follows directly from Clairaut's relation. Your demonstration for (b) I didn't understand why your computation implies that the geodesic also intersects the parallel $u=π$? Can you explain, please?
    – Matheus Manzatto
    Jun 1 '18 at 16:03
















Your solution for (a) is great. Your derivativion of $(1)$ also follows directly from Clairaut's relation. For (b) there is a much simpler solution:
– Dan
Jun 1 '18 at 15:24




Your solution for (a) is great. Your derivativion of $(1)$ also follows directly from Clairaut's relation. For (b) there is a much simpler solution:
– Dan
Jun 1 '18 at 15:24












$(rcos(u)+a)cos(theta)=c Rightarrow (r+a)cos(theta_0)=c Rightarrow (a-r)cos(theta_T)=(r+a)cos(theta_0) Rightarrow cos(theta_0)= cos(theta_T) frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)} < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$ with strictness of the last inequality following from $(a)$.
– Dan
Jun 1 '18 at 15:26




$(rcos(u)+a)cos(theta)=c Rightarrow (r+a)cos(theta_0)=c Rightarrow (a-r)cos(theta_T)=(r+a)cos(theta_0) Rightarrow cos(theta_0)= cos(theta_T) frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)} < frac{(a-r)}{(a+r)}$ with strictness of the last inequality following from $(a)$.
– Dan
Jun 1 '18 at 15:26




1




1




@Dan At that time I demonstrate (1) without using directly Clairaut's relations just because I wanted a more elementary solution, but you are right, follows directly from Clairaut's relation. Your demonstration for (b) I didn't understand why your computation implies that the geodesic also intersects the parallel $u=π$? Can you explain, please?
– Matheus Manzatto
Jun 1 '18 at 16:03




@Dan At that time I demonstrate (1) without using directly Clairaut's relations just because I wanted a more elementary solution, but you are right, follows directly from Clairaut's relation. Your demonstration for (b) I didn't understand why your computation implies that the geodesic also intersects the parallel $u=π$? Can you explain, please?
– Matheus Manzatto
Jun 1 '18 at 16:03


















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.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • 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.


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%2f351243%2fabout-geodesics-on-a-torus%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

Bundesstraße 106

Verónica Boquete

Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten