# The Unapologetic Mathematician

## Compact Oriented Manifolds without Boundary have Nontrivial Homology

If we take $M$ to be a manifold equipped with an orientation given by an orientation form $\omega$. Then $\omega$ is nowhere zero, and $\omega(v_1,\dots,v_n)>0$ for any positively oriented basis $\{v_i\}$ of $\mathcal{T}_pM$ at any point $p\in M$.

Next we take $c:[0,1]^n\to M$ to be an orientation-preserving embedding — a singular cube of top dimension. Then the pullback $c^*\omega=fdu^1\wedge\dots\wedge du^n$ for some strictly-positive function $f$. We conclude that

$\displaystyle\int\limits_c\omega=\int\limits_{[0,1]^n}fdu^1\wedge\dots\wedge du^n=\int\limits_{[0,1]^n}f(u^1,\dots,u^n)\,d(u^1,\dots,u^n)>0$

The integral of $\omega$ over all of $M$ must surely be even greater than the integral over the image of $c$, since we can cover $M$ by orientation-preserving singular $n$-cubes, and none of them can ever contribute a negative to the integral.

If we further suppose that $M$ is compact, we can cover $M$ by finitely many such singular cubes, and the integral on each is well-defined. Using a partition of unity as usual this shows us that the integral over all of $M$ exists and, further, must be strictly positive. In particular it’s not zero.

But now suppose that $M$ also has an empty boundary. Since $\omega$ is a top form, we know that $d\omega=0$ — it’s closed in the de Rham cohomology. But we know that it cannot also be exact, for if $\omega=d\eta$ for some $n-1$-form $\eta$ then Stokes’ theorem would tell us that

$\displaystyle\int\limits_M\omega=\int\limits_Md\eta=\int\limits_{\partial M}\eta=0$

since $\partial M$ is empty.

And so if $M$ is a compact, oriented $n$-manifold without boundary, then there must be some $n$-forms which do not arise from taking the exterior derivatives of $n-1$-forms. If $M$ is pseudo-Riemannian, so we have a Hodge star to work with, this tells us that we always have some functions on $M$ which are not the divergence of any vector field on $M$.

### Like this:

Posted by John Armstrong | Differential Topology, Topology

## 1 Comment	»

1. [...] — we see that any compact, oriented manifold without boundary cannot be contractible, since we know that they have some nontrivial homology! LD_AddCustomAttr("AdOpt", "1"); [...]

Pingback by | December 6, 2011 | Reply

« Previous | Next »

## About this weblog

This is mainly an expository blath, with occasional high-level excursions, humorous observations, rants, and musings. The main-line exposition should be accessible to the “Generally Interested Lay Audience”, as long as you trace the links back towards the basics. Check the sidebar for specific topics (under “Categories”).

I’m in the process of tweaking some aspects of the site to make it easier to refer back to older topics, so try to make the best of it for now.
{"extraction_info": {"found_math": true, "script_math_tex": 0, "script_math_asciimath": 0, "math_annotations": 0, "math_alttext": 0, "mathml": 0, "mathjax_tag": 0, "mathjax_inline_tex": 0, "mathjax_display_tex": 0, "mathjax_asciimath": 0, "img_math": 0, "codecogs_latex": 0, "wp_latex": 34, "mimetex.cgi": 0, "/images/math/codecogs": 0, "mathtex.cgi": 0}, "config": {"markdown_headings": true, "markdown_code": true, "boilerplate_config": {"ratio_threshold": 0.18, "absolute_threshold": 10, "end_threshold": 15, "enable": true}, "remove_buttons": true, "remove_image_figures": true, "remove_link_clusters": true, "table_config": {"min_rows": 2, "min_cols": 3, "format": "plain"}, "remove_chinese": true, "remove_edit_buttons": true, "extract_latex": true}, "english_confidence": 0.9191231727600098, "perplexity_flag": "head"}