2
$\begingroup$

Let $M$ be a compact manifold, and let $M_1,\ldots, M_k$ (k>2) be embedded submanifolds. Suppose that $p\in\cap_{i=1}^k M_k$ and that for any subset $S$ of $\{1,\ldots, k\}$ and any $j\notin S$ that $\cap_{i\in S}M_i$ intersects $M_j$ transversally at $p$.

I believe that in this case the fact that $\cap_{i=1}^k M_k$ is nonempty is stable (still true after homotoping each $M_i$ a little bit). Does anyone have a reference for this fact?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This is an induction argument with the $k=2$ case implying all the $k>2$ cases. For $k=2$ see Guillemin and Pollack. $\endgroup$
    – Ryan Budney
    Jul 26, 2010 at 20:07

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
3
$\begingroup$

The matter being local, we can restrict to a nbd $U$ of $p$ and think that $M_i$ is the zero set of some local submersion $g_i:U\to\mathbb{R}^{n_i}$. If I'm not wrong your transversality assumption then translates into the surjectivity of the differential at $p$ of the map $g:=(g_1,\dots,g_k):U\to\mathbb{R}^m$ (here $m:={n_1+\dots+n_k}$). So $0\in\mathbb{R}^m$ is a regular value for $g$, which implies your thesis. Note that the compactness assumption on $M$ plays no role.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

If I take M to be the filled torus $D^2\times S^1$ and $M_1$ and $M_2$ two circles (the two transversal generators of the torus $S^1\times S^1$) then when you can contract one of them a little so that they no longer intersect.

Uff, manyfolds. Then replace $D^2\times S^1$ by $S^3$ and keep the two circles.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ You've verified Alex's hypothesis in the vacuous case -- when all transverse intersections are empty. $\endgroup$
    – Ryan Budney
    Jul 26, 2010 at 22:16
  • $\begingroup$ ? The two circles were intersecting at the beginning. Just two intersecting circles (not in the same plane) in $\mathbb{R}^3$ $\endgroup$
    – O.R.
    Jul 27, 2010 at 0:32
  • $\begingroup$ The theorem need some condition on the dimensions and the number of sub-manifolds as in Pietro's post. $\endgroup$
    – O.R.
    Jul 27, 2010 at 0:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In manifold theory, a transverse intersection means that at any point of intersection, the tangent spaces of the two submanifolds must span the tangent space of the ambient manifold. Since $1+1=2<3$, the only way two 1-manifolds can intersect transversely in a 3-manifold is for them to be disjoint. $\endgroup$
    – Ryan Budney
    Jul 27, 2010 at 1:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Franklin, please check the definition of transversality (for example, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transversality). The sum of the tangent spaces of the two submanifolds has to be equal to the tangent space of the ambient space. This is not the case in your example. $\endgroup$
    – Deane Yang
    Jul 27, 2010 at 1:59

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.