Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have the following basic question about Sobolev-spaces which take their values in a Riemannian manifold $(M,g)$, i.e. functions $u:\Omega \to M$, $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^n$ bounded, such that for every chart $\varphi : M \to \mathbb{R}^d$, the composition $\varphi\circ u$ is in the usual $H^1$ space.

Question: 1. Is this notion well-defined (this is only easy to show for higher order smoothnes or $n =1$)? 2. Does the manifold-valued Sobolev space admit the structure of a Hilbert manifold? 3. Do there exist good references for manifold-valued Sobolev spaces (and their relations with Hilbert manifolds)? 4. Is there a better way to define manifold-valued Sobolev spaces?

Many thanks for your answers!

share|improve this question
add comment

3 Answers

To my knowledge the usual approach to define manifold valued spaces is to embed the target manifold $M$ in some $R^N$, then consider the space of all functions $u:\Omega\to R^N$ which are in $H^1(\Omega,R^N)$ and in addition take their values in $M$: $u(x)\in M$ for a.e. $x\in \Omega$. For a basic example of this approach see the paper by Brezis and Mironescu (On some questions of topology for $S^1$ valued fractional Sobolev spaces) where functions with values in $S^1$ are considered. You will agree that in that case a very natural definition is to put a priori the constraint $|u|=1$ on the functions. Of course, you end up with considering bounded functions only, but this solves most of the problems you are facing with your definition.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Hi.

This isn't well-defined (even for higher order smoothness). Even the case $M=\mathbb{R}$ doesn't work, because arbitrary diffeomorphism can have arbitrarly bad growth towards infinity and therefore do not map H^1 map to H^1 maps.

share|improve this answer
    
thank you. I have reformulated the question so that the spaces are defined on a bounded domain. –  pil Jul 12 '12 at 7:34
1  
A $H^1$-map $\Omega\to\mathbb{R}$ need not be bounded if $\dim \Omega\gg 0$, even if $\Omega$ is bounded, and Johannes' remark still applies. –  Liviu Nicolaescu Jul 12 '12 at 10:56
2  
Boundedness of domain doesn't fix the issue. Actually boundedness (or rather compactness) of $M$ matters: if $M$ is non-compact, there may be diffeomorphisms of $M$ that do not preserve locally unbounded Sobolev maps. –  Alexander Shamov Jul 12 '12 at 10:57
    
On the other hand, local Sobolev property for continuous maps is perfectly well-defined, since it is preserved by compactly supported diffeomorphisms of the target manifold. –  Alexander Shamov Jul 12 '12 at 11:00
add comment

A (slightly) alternative approach to that suggested by Piero D'Ancona, and indeed quite similar to that proposed by Alexander Shamov, is to consider a partition of unity associated with a given atlas and define $H^1(M)$-functions locally wrt to said partition of unity. You can find a more detailed explanation of this approach in §1.7.3 in the first volume of the monograph by Lions-Magenes.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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