Consider, for instance, the categories of $C^k$-manifolds, where $k=0,1,2,...,\infty,\omega$. ($C^\omega$ means real analytic.) Are these categories pairwise non-equivalent?

Of course, the obviuos forgetful functor is not an equivalence, because it is not full: for $k<l$, there are $C^k$ functions which are not $C^l$.

I was just thinking about possible ways of proving non-equivalence of categories and came up with this question. For example, one can prove non-equivalence by showing that limits or colimits of certain shape exist in one category but not in the other. I don't know whether one can deal with manifolds in this way.

What I can prove is that the category of complex-analytic manifolds is not equivalent to any of the above.

This follows from the fact that any real manifold other than the point (which is the terminal object) has non-trivial automorphisms. For $C^k$-manifolds with $k=0,1,...,\infty$ this is very easy to show, as there is a $C^\infty$-diffeomorphism of the ball $|x|<1$ which is the identity near its boundary sphere $|x|=1$. (One can construct such a diffeomorphism uning bump functions.) This does not work for the real analytic case. However, by a theorem of Grauert, for any real analytic manifold $M$ there is a closed analytic embedding $i$ of $M$ into some $\mathbb R^n$. Then one can choose a non-zero vector tangent to $i(M)$ at some point, extend it to a constant vector field along $i(M)\subset\mathbb R^n$ and project this vector field orthogonally to get a bounded vector field on $M$ which is not identically zero. As $M$ is complete in the induced metric (because $\mathbb R^n$ is complete and $i$ is closed), the flow of this vector field will be globally defined and thus it will contain a non-trivial analytic self-diffeomorphism of $M$.

On the other hand, there are lots of complex analytic manifolds with no non-trivial automorphisms. For example, a generic compact Riemann surface of genus $\geq 3$ is known to have this property.


1 Answer 1


Your method of looking for automorphisms of objects works for $C^k$ manifolds as well, $0 < k \le \infty$. This follows from a result of Filipkiewicz (which I found in Kathryn Mann's excellent survey):

If $M, N$ are smooth manifolds without boundary and $\varphi: \text{Diff}^p(M) \to \text{Diff}^q(N)$ is an isomorphism of groups (with $1 \le p, q \le \infty$), then $p = q$ and $\varphi$ is induced by a $C^p$ diffeomorphism $w: M \to N$.

(Recall that every $C^p$ manifold for $p > 0$ carries a compatible smooth structure, so the condition that $M,N$ are smooth manifolds is harmless --- cf. Hirsch, Differential Topology, chapter 2).

If $F: \mathsf{Man}_p \to \mathsf{Man}_q$ is an equivalence of categories, then $F$ induces an isomorphism $\text{Diff}^p(M) \cong \text{Diff}^q(F(M))$, and hence $p = q$ and $M \cong F(M)$. Not only do we have $p = q$, we also see that any autoequivalence of $\mathsf{Man}_p$ is the identity on isomorphism classes. Probably one can say something stronger (maybe they're all naturally isomorphic to the identity).

This handles all but the case where one of $p,q$ is zero or $\omega$. It seems plausible to me that Filipkiewicz' proof goes through when $p = 0$ (though I haven't read carefully enough to say this confidently). I don't know about the case of $\omega$, and Filipkiewicz asks about this as the final question in his paper.


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.