16

Let $\phi: S \to \bar{S}$ be a diffeomorphism between two surfaces in $\mathbb{R^3}$. Such a map is called conformal if for all $p \in S$, and $v_1, v_2 \in T_p(S)$ (the tangent plane) we have

$$\langle d\phi_p(v_1), d\phi_p(v_2) \rangle = \lambda^2 \langle v_1, v_2 \rangle_p$$

for some nowhere-zero function $\lambda$.

$\phi$ is said to be angle-preserving, if

$$\cos(v_1, v_2) = \cos(d\phi_p(v_1), d\phi_p(v_2)),$$

which I take to mean

$$\frac{\langle v_1, v_2\rangle}{\lVert v_1 \rVert \lVert v_2 \rVert} = \frac{\langle d\phi(v_1), d\phi(v_2)\rangle}{\lVert d\phi(v_1) \rVert \lVert d\phi(v_2) \rVert} $$

From do Carmo, "Differential Geometry of Curves and Surfaces", 4.2/14:

Prove that $\phi$ is locally conformal if and only if it preserves angles.

The "only if" part is obvious, but how can the "if" portion be proved (i.e. how does preserving angles imply conformality)?

koletenbert
  • 3,970
  • Hint: how would you get $\langle v_1,v_2\rangle/|v_1||v_2| = \langle d\phi(v_1),d\phi(v_2)\rangle/|d\phi(v_1)||d\phi(v_2)|$ into the form $\langle d\phi(v_2),d\phi(v_2)\rangle = (\mbox{something})^2 \langle v_1,v_2\rangle$? What is "something"? – Neal May 27 '12 at 19:02
  • @Neal: "something" would be the square root of $|d\phi(v_1)||d\phi(v_2)| / |v_1||v_2|$. In fact, it seems that $\lambda = |v|/|d\phi(v)|$ is constant for all $v$, but this is where I got stuck originally... I don't know how to show this. – koletenbert May 27 '12 at 19:23

2 Answers2

10

Let $e_1$, $e_2$ be an orthonormal basis of $T_{p}S$. Let:

\begin{align*} \langle d\phi_{p}(e_1), d\phi_{p}(e_1) \rangle &= \lambda_1 \\ \langle d\phi_{p}(e_1), d\phi_{p}(e_2) \rangle &= \mu \\ \langle d\phi_{p}(e_2), d\phi_{p}(e_2) \rangle &= \lambda_2 \end{align*}

Now take:

\begin{align*} v_1 &= e_1 \\ v_2 &= \cos\theta\ e_1 + \sin\theta\ e_2 \end{align*}

The equation in your question implies that:

$$ \cos\theta = \frac{\lambda_1 \cos\theta + \mu \sin\theta}{\sqrt{\lambda_1\left(\lambda_1\cos^2\theta + 2\mu\sin\theta\cos\theta + \lambda_2\sin^2\theta\right)}} $$

Take $\theta = \frac{\pi}{2}$ to get $\mu = 0$. This implies that:

$$ \lambda_1 = \lambda_1 \cos^2\theta + \lambda_2\sin^2\theta $$

Or $\lambda_1 = \lambda_2$. Hence:

\begin{align*} \langle d\phi_{p}(e_1), d\phi_{p}(e_1) \rangle &= \lambda_1 \langle e_1, e_1 \rangle_{p} \\ \langle d\phi_{p}(e_2), d\phi_{p}(e_2) \rangle &= \lambda_1 \langle e_2, e_2 \rangle_{p} \\ \langle d\phi_{p}(e_1), d\phi_{p}(e_2) \rangle &= \lambda_1 \langle e_1, e_2 \rangle_{p} \qquad (= 0) \end{align*}

Since both $\langle, \rangle_{p}$ and $\langle d\phi_{p}(), d\phi_{p}() \rangle$ are bilinear forms, the above is true for all $v_1, v_2 \in T_{p}S$.

Ayman Hourieh
  • 39,603
  • In my book it say's that $\lambda$ is a differentiable function on $p$. Is that really true? I have no idea how to conclude that. – Guillermo Mosse Dec 10 '16 at 21:07
3

Since $d\phi$ is a linear map between 2d spaces, the problem boils down to linear algebra. Given a linear map $T\colon \mathbb R^2\to\mathbb R^2$ that preserves angles between vectors, we would like to show that $T$ is a composition of a unitary with dilation.

The most efficient approach may depend on your linear algebra background. My weapon of choice is complex numbers: any linear map $T\colon \mathbb R^2\to\mathbb R^2$ is of the form $z\mapsto az +b\bar z$. The angle-preserving assumption means that $\arg (az+b\bar z)=\phi_0\pm \arg z$ where $\phi_0$ is fixed and the sign in $\pm$ is the same for all $z$. So, either $\arg \frac{az+b\bar z}{z}$ or $\arg \frac{az+b\bar z}{\bar z}$ is constant. In the first case we have $b=0$, in the second $a=0$.

  • Thanks for your answer. The book from which the exercise was taken is about differential geometry and does not use any complex algebra, so I wonder if this can be shown without complex numbers (preferably just using the properties of the inner product and the differential)? – koletenbert May 27 '12 at 18:35