Okay, you asked for it!


> **Question:** What is the manifold structure on $P^1(M)$?

 

> **Answer:** There isn't one.

It is, as you say, a smooth space.  This is formal: whatever category of generalised smooth spaces you like, take the quotient of $P(M)$ by thin homotopies.  All the proposed categories of generalised smooth spaces admit quotients, so the quotient exists and is a smooth space.  Depending on your choice of category, the description of this smooth space may vary.  For example, its Frolicher structure and its diffeological structure are very different.

But it is not "locally linear" in any sense.  The basic problem is that, as you say, within an equivalence class you have paths wrapping all the way around the manifold.  This destroys any hope of local linearity.

As for the proposed local model, you hit the nail on the head when you say:

> It's not clear to me how to put a topology on it,

Absolutely!  Topologising these spaces can lead to quite strange behaviour.  You want a LCTVS structure, else you haven't a hope of even starting, and that can distort the topology from what you expect.  For example, if you take piecewise-smooth paths (with no quotient) then the LCTVS topology on that is the $C^0$-topology!  Indeed, simply taking so-called "lazy paths" could be fraught with difficulties (I notice that you define "lazy" slightly differently to how I've seen it done before with sitting instances).  Is that space a manifold?  (I know the answer to this one, but if you don't then you should start with that one as it is a *much* easier question and will hone your skills a little.)

If you really want a manifold, the solution is to go one step further.  Rather than quotienting out by thin homotopies, make your "thing" into a 2-structure and put the thin homotopies in at the 2-level.  Keep *all* paths at the 1-level.  Then each level has a manifold structure and by mapping into a 1-structure you effectively quotient out by the 2-structure but never actually have to consider the quotient itself.

To coin a phrase:

> Quotients are horrible, it's a shame so many people think otherwise.

Lastly, that's not to say that there is *no* way of making $P^1(M)$ into a manifold.  There may well be.  But if there is, it'll be so convoluted and contrived that it won't look anything like the quotient of $P(M)$.  A cautionary tale here is the case of *all* paths in a manifold, $C^\infty(\mathbb{R},M)$.  That can be made into a manifold, but it has uncountably many components, for example, so looks absolutely horrid.

Okay, not quite lastly.  There's lots of details here that have been glossed over.  If you are really interested in working out the smooth space structure of this particular space then I (and I suspect Urs and Konrad) would be very interested in seeing it done and helping out.  But MO isn't the place for that.  Hop on over to the nLab, create a spin-off of <http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/path+groupoid>, and start working.

### Further Reading ###

1. _Constructing smooth manifolds of loop spaces._ [canonical page](http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Research/Papers/smooth.html).  The point of this is to figure out exactly when the "standard method" (alluded to by Tim) works.  The distinction between "loop" and "path" is irrelevant.

2. _The Smooth Structure of the Space of Piecewise-Smooth Loops._ [canonical page](http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Research/Preprints/piecewise.html).  Why you should be very, very nervous whenever anyone says "consider piecewise-smooth maps"; and take as a cautionary tale as to the inadvisability of going beyond smooth maps in general.

3. [Work of David Roberts on the nLab](http://ncatlab.org/davidroberts/show/which+smooth+paths+do+I+use).  This is where I got the 2-idea that I mentioned above.

4. Other relevant nLab pages: <http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/generalized+smooth+space>, <http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/smooth+loop+space> and further.

5. Of course, the magnificent [book by Kriegl and Michor](http://www.ams.org/online_bks/surv53/).  (I'm going to create a separate MO account for that book; its role will be to post an answer on relevant questions simply saying "Read Me".)