Let $X$, $Y$ and $Z$ be smooth manifolds. Any differentiable map $f \colon Y \rightarrow Z$ induces a continuous map $f_{\ast} \colon C^{\infty}(X, Y) \rightarrow C^{\infty}(X, Z)$ via composition $g \mapsto f \circ g$, where the spaces of differentiable maps are equipped with the Whitney $C^{\infty}$ topology.

Question: When $f$ is a submersion, what can we say about the image of $f_{\ast}$ in $C^{\infty}(X, Z)$? Is it an open or dense or residual subset?


The density does not hold even in the compact connected case: if $X=Y=Z=\mathbb S^1\simeq\mathbb R/\mathbb Z$ and $f:\theta\mapsto2\theta$, then any composition $f\circ g$ has even degree, for instance it cannot be too close to the identity map.

I believe however that the following holds.

Proposition. If $X$ is compact, the composition operator $f_*$ is open in the Whitney topology.

In particular, it would imply that its range $R$ is open, so that for any pair of homotopic maps $\phi\simeq\psi:X\to Z$, $\phi\in R$ if and only if $\psi\in R$. In other words, and as the above example suggests, obstructions to being in $R$ are topological.

Sketch of proof

I assume (without loss of generality, up to working component by component) that $X$, $Y$ and $Z$ are connected. I make the additional assumption that $Y$ is compact also, although I don't think it is needed; see below.

Proof. Let $TY\to Y$ (resp. $TZ\to Z$) be the the tangent bundle of $Y$ (resp. $Z$), and $\ker Tf\to Y$ be the kernel of the bundle map $Tf:TY\to TZ$. Note that $\ker Tf$ is indeed a vector bundle since $f$ is a submersion, and it is in fact a subbundle of $TY$. As such, it admits a complement, i.e. a subbundle $F\to Y$ of $TY$ such that $F_y\oplus \ker T_yf=T_yY$ at all points $y$ of $Y$.¹ In particular, $T_yf$ restricted to $F_y$ is an isomorphism for all $y\in Y$.

Identify a neighbourhood $V$ of the zero section in $TY$ to a neighbourhood $V'$ of the diagonal in $Y\times Y$, through a diffeomorphism $\mu:V\to V'$

Lemma. The function $\alpha:(y,y')\in\mu(F\cap V)\mapsto(y,f(y'))\in Y\times Z$ is a (smooth) diffeomorphism on a neighbourhood $U$ of the diagonal.

Assume for now that the lemma is true, and let's see how the proposition follows. Let $f\circ g$ be an element of the range $R$, and $\phi_n:X\to Z$ a sequence of maps converging to $f\circ g$ in the Whitney topology. We need to show that $\phi_n=f\circ g_n$ for all $n$ large enough, for a sequence $g_n$ that converges to $g$. The existence of $g_n$ is a consequence of the lemma: at some point, $\phi_n$ is sufficiently close to $f\circ g$ in the uniform topology so that $(g(x),\phi_n(x))$ belongs to $\alpha(U)$. Then, setting $(g,g_n) := \alpha^{-1}\circ(g,\phi)$, we have $\phi_n=f\circ g_n$ as announced. Now it suffices to show that $g_n$ converges to $g$ in the Whitney topology, i.e. that all their derivatives converge uniformly to that of $g$. But it is clear from the definition of $g_n$.

Proof of the lemma. The differential of $\alpha$ can be decomposed according to the structure of $Y\times Y$ and $Y\times Z$; along the diagonal, we have $$ T\alpha=\begin{pmatrix}\mathrm{id}&*\\0& Tf_{|F}\end{pmatrix}. $$ According to the inverse function theorem, $\alpha$ is a local diffeomorphism on a neighbourhood of the diagonal. Then it is enough to show that it is injective on a smaller neighbourhood.

Let $(y_n,y'_n)$ and $(\tilde y_n,\tilde y'_n)$ be sequences with values in $\mu(F\cap V)$ such that they both approach the diagonal³ and $\alpha(y_n,y'_n)=\alpha(\tilde y_n,\tilde y'_n)$. It suffices to show that they coincide for an infinite number of $n$. In fact, $y_n=\tilde y_n$ by definition of $\alpha$. Up to considering a subsequence, we can assume that $y_n$ converges, say to $y$. Now if $W$ is a neighbourhood of $(y,y)$ in $\mu(F\cap V)$ over which $\alpha$ is a diffeomorphism, $(y_n,y'_n)$ and $(\tilde y_n,\tilde y'_n)$ must belong to that neighbourhood for $n$ large enough, so that they are in fact equal. This concludes the proof of the lemma.

The non-compact case

We have used the fact that $Y$ is compact in the proof of the lemma. However, we need only assume that $\alpha$ is a diffeomorphism on a neighbourhood of the image of $(g,g)$, which is compact; the proof is then the same.

I don't know what happens in the case where $Y$ is compact but $X$ is not; I would guess it still holds, based on sheer intuition. If neither are, for $f$ the inclusion of an open arc in the circle, and $g$ the identity of said arc, $f_*$ is not open at $g$.

¹ For instance, fix a Riemannian metric on $Y$ and consider the orthonormal complement.

² For instance, $\mu$ could be the exponential map associated any Riemannian metric on $Y$.

³ In any reasonnable sense, say $d(y_n,y'_n)\to0$ for a Riemannian distance $d$.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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