5

In this semester I study differential geometry and in this chapter we want to define what is a surface. In order to do that we first define what a manifold is on a Euclidean space, not generally what is a manifold, and Euclidean space I mean $(\mathbb{R}^{n},\left \| \cdot \right \|)$.

That been said, if someone who doesn't study math ask you "what this a manifold?" how would you answer, in simple terms (as Feynman says).

Can we just say it's a homomorphic function from open sets to open sets ?

Older posts had been made on this topic (but I don't think they answer well my question, in my option) and have already been answered if there isn't anything new to add I will delete this.

ViktorStein
  • 4,838
領域展開
  • 2,139
  • 1
    Do you mean homeomorphic instead of "homomorphic"? – ViktorStein Nov 25 '20 at 13:13
  • 3
    in simple terms, a manifold is something that looks locally like $\mathbb R^m$ – J. W. Tanner Nov 25 '20 at 13:20
  • 1
    Also, a manifold is not a function, neither a homomorphic or homeomorphic one. A manifold is the mathematical object giving rigorous sense to the sentance "looking locally to the euclidean space", or, in terms of sensible notions, "a surface is an object that looks locally like a plane, and a 3-manifold is something that looks locally like de three-dimensionnal space". Then, you can illustrate this saying "the earth is round, but locally, it looks like it is flat : the earth is a 2-manifold". – Didier Nov 25 '20 at 14:01
  • @DIdier_ very nice approach I now get it thank you – 領域展開 Nov 25 '20 at 16:27
  • 1
    @Ramanujan since the OP mentions Feynman, I'm reminded of a line in Feynman's story A Different Box of Tools: "We forgot to tell you that it's Class 2 Hausdorff homomorphic." – KCd Nov 26 '20 at 04:14

4 Answers4

10

So the OP asked this:

if someone who doesn't study math ask you "what this a manifold?" how would you answer, in simple terms (as Feynman says).

My emphasis. So clearly the interest is about informing people who have no practice with math and requires analogies and explanations that do not include jargon. Which is great, because I am not a mathematician so I will provide the answer that was provided to me when I had this same questions hovering in my head.

You can start by saying that, the simplest example of a manifold is surface that is, in general, globally curved. As an example you can give a sphere. The surface of a sphere. Then explain that despite the fact that the sphere is curved, you can divide it in several little squares or triangles and if your division is fine enough and each little triangle is small enough, you can tile the entire surface of the sphere very tightly even though its surface is curved and the small polygonal tiles are flat. So it is locally flat, despite being globally curved. This, incidentally, is why the surface of the Earth seems so flat when seen from our vantage point.

Here you make your point that if you can tile a surface with such minuscule flat polygons, then it is a manifold because even though it is generally curved, it is locally flat. As a general example you can give a waving flag, relief terrain maps etc. 2D manifolds for which global curvature isn't constant, the most general examples you can think of.

The next point in the instruction is harder because then you need to show your interlocutor that the notion is general. That is, there is no reason why manifolds should be 2D, tiled by flat polygons. They may very well be 3D, tiled by flat polygons or 4D, tiled by flat polytopes.

Once you do that you can say that an entire manifold can, in fact, be flat. In which case it will be both globally and locally flat. When you study a manifold embedded inside a flat Euclidean space it is just a fancy way of saying that you, as the observer, is watching your curved study manifold from an external flat manifold. For instance, when you study the curvature of the surface of a sphere, a 2D manifold, inserted in a 3D flat space like the room where you are studying it, which is a 3D flat manifold. You can contrast this type of study with a study of the surface of the sphere where the observer isn't in an external room, but constrained to walk on the surface of the sphere itself.

Again, the notion of observing a sphere inside a room can be extended to the general case of $n-1$ dimensional manifolds embedded in $n$ dimensional flat manifolds.

I will leave it as homework how to explain what you mean by "Euclidean space".

I hope this helps, good luck.

urquiza
  • 887
  • One slight catch with this answer is that it may leave people with the mistaken impression that manifolds are always embedded in higher-dimensional (Euclidean) spaces and that this is why they can be curved. – Harry Johnston Nov 25 '20 at 22:30
  • If you take the x-axis and union it with the y-axis, and then take the cartesian product of that with the y-axis, does it satisfy your description? 2. Does it satisfy the mathematical definition of a manifold?
  • – Acccumulation Nov 26 '20 at 00:14
  • 1
    I agree with you @HarryJohnson. But do realize that the OP specifically asked about how to approach a lay interlocutor about the study of embedded manifolds. In one of the paragraphs I say that the OP could contrast this study of a sphere from the vantage point of an observer in an external room with the study of a sphere from the vantage point of an observer constrained to the sphere's surface. This could illustrate that there is a different math to be found in each approach and that they are complimentary. – urquiza Nov 26 '20 at 02:25