8
$\begingroup$

Given a continuous mapping $f$ between Euclidean domains (or domains in topological manifolds) of the same (topological) dimension, what are the natural assumptions to conclude that $f$ is open? Here, open means that f maps open sets to open sets.

The only way I know is imposing certain regularity assumption on $f$ to conclude that the fiber of $f$ has zero one-dimensional Hausdorff measure, i.e., $H^1(f^{-1}(y))=0$ for all $y$. Then one invokes a result of C. Titus, G. Young, The extension of interiority, with some applications, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 103 (1962) 329–340 to conclude that $f$ is open. Actually, the latter theorem implies that $f$ is both discrete and open. Here discreteness means that the fiber of $f$ does not have accumulation points.

Some update: In the following paper of Bonk and Kleiner, it was proved that a mapping of bounded multiplicity from $X$ to $\mathbb{R}^n$ is open, provided that $X$ is a compact metric space such that every non-empty open subset of $X$ has topological dimension at least $n$.

Bonk, Mario; Kleiner, Bruce Rigidity for quasi-Möbius group actions. J. Differential Geom. 61 (2002), no. 1, 81–106.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ The most natural sufficient condition that comes to mind is that $f$ be a $C^1$ submersion. $\endgroup$ Dec 3, 2013 at 13:46
  • $\begingroup$ One remark: the discreteness above should be replaced by lightness. Discreteness means that the fiber of f does not have accumulation points. $\endgroup$ Dec 3, 2013 at 13:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ There is classical nice sufficient condition (Brouwer): a continuous injective map from an open subset of $\mathbf R^n$ to $\mathbf R^n$ is open. However, it looks like it is superseded by the theorem of Titus-Young you mention. $\endgroup$
    – ACL
    Mar 6, 2014 at 13:01
  • $\begingroup$ To ACL: the result you mentioned is the invariance of the domain, which is a simply application of degree theory. Here I am looking for more analytic assumptions on $f$, instead of strong topological assumptions, like you mentioned local injectivity. $\endgroup$ Mar 6, 2014 at 14:00

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

The zero one-dimensional Hausdorff measure assumption on fibers is NOT a sufficient condition for openness. The smooth map (x,y) to (x square, y) on the plane is a counterexample. According to Titus and Young, one has to impose another assumption.

The zero one-dimensional Hausdorff measure of critical points is a sufficient condition when n is greater than or equal to 2. For details, see Titus and Young’s 1952 paper.

Liangpan Li @ 2021

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.