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

I already asked this question at stackexchange three days ago. Since I got no answer, I want to try mathoverflow now. I hope that you can help.

I'm looking for a proof of an equivalence that can e.g. be found in a paper by Shubin 'Spectral theory of elliptic operators on non-compact manifolds' (Appendix A.1.1 below Def. 1.1).

It's about manifolds of bounded geometry, where bounded geometry means here: positive injectivity radius and the curvature tensor and all its covariant derivatives are bounded.

In the paper of Shubin it is written that there are the following equivalent characterizations: (Let $(M,g)$ always have positive injectivity radius.)

(i) $(M,g)$ is of bounded geometry.

(ii) Let $r>0$ be smaller than the injectivity radius. For any $x,x′\in M$ let $y$ (resp. $y′$) be geodesic normal coordinates around $x$ (resp. $x′$) with an r-ball as domain. If the balls of radius $r$ around $x$ and $x′$ have a nonempty intersection, then the transition function $y^{−1}\circ y$ and all its derivatives are uniformly bounded (where uniformly means here independent of $x$ and $x′$).

I know that (i) is equivalent to the following: (iii) Let $g^\alpha_{ij}$ be the representation of the metric coefficienst on a ball of radius $r$ around $x_\alpha$ with respect to geodesic normal coordinates. Then $g^\alpha_{ij}$ and all its derivatives are uniformly bounded (where uniformly means independent on $\alpha$).

I can see that (iii) implies (ii) (by looking at the geodesic flow and using Gronwall's inequality). But I have no idea how to get the converse. Is there any reference for the proof? I'm grateful for any idea for the proof as well.

Thank you in advance.

share|improve this question
    
Have a look at: MR2343536 (2008i:58001) Eichhorn, Jürgen Global analysis on open manifolds. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., New York, 2007. x+644 pp. I do not have my copy at hand, so I cannot check whether a proof is there. Since the whole book uses bounded geometry, it might be there. –  Peter Michor Nov 19 '12 at 10:04
1  
I have to check, don't have time now, if the statement you want is actually in there, but a lot of these type of theorems are proven in the PhD thesis of Jaap Eldering arxiv.org/pdf/1204.1310v2.pdf . See for example Lemma 2.6 –  Thomas Rot Nov 19 '12 at 12:33
    
Indeed to confirm what @Thomas Rot said: the converse statement is not in my PhD thesis. I don't know of another place where you might find a citable reference. –  Jaap Eldering Nov 19 '12 at 22:38

1 Answer 1

up vote 8 down vote accepted

I assume that by "all derivatives" you mean derivatives of every order.

Suppose that all transitions between normal coordinates have uniformly bounded derivatives within some radius $r$. For every point $p$ we have a unit radial vector field $V=V(p)$ whose derivatives are uniformly bounded at distances between, say $r/10$ and $r$ from $p$. (This holds in normal coordinates centered at $p$ and hence in normal coordinates centered at any nearby point.)

Now fix a point $q\in M$ and arrange points $p_k$, $k=1,\dots,\frac{n(n+1)}2$, where $n=\dim M$, so that the distances from $q$ to $p_k$ equal $r/2$ and the corresponding vector fields $V_k=V(p_k)$ at $q$ are generic in the sense that the symmetric tensors $V_k\otimes V_k$ are linearly independent. Then the same holds at every point in a neighborhood of $q$. Actually the points $p_k$ should have some prescribed coordinates in normal coordinate system centered at $q$, then all subsequent estimates are uniform.

We have a system of equations $g(V_k,V_k)=1$, $k=1,\dots,\frac{n(n+1)}2$. At every point near $q$ this is a nondegenerate linear system on the components of the metric tensor $g$. Hence it uniquely determines $g$ via some explicit formulae in terms of $V_k$. Since the derivatives of $V_k$ are uniformly bounded, so are the derivatives of the metric tensor.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks a lot. Do you know any ("citeable") reference for this? (The book of Eichhorn (mentioned above by Peter Michor) does not work with transition functions and in the PhD-Thesis of Elderling I only found the implication "(i) implies (ii)") –  ngrosse Nov 19 '12 at 19:15
    
No, I have no reference. It may be hard to find one as this implication does not look very useful. –  Sergei Ivanov Nov 19 '12 at 20:27

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.