Intereting Posts

Real roots of a polynomial of real co-efficients , with the co-efficients of $x^2 , x$ and the constant term all $1$
Increasing orthogonal functions
What is the biggest number ever used in a mathematical proof?
Use a lemma to prove that $A_4$ has no subgroup of order $6$.
Do the infinite series converge
Can decimal numbers be considered “even” or “odd”?
Is every embedded submanifold globally a level set?
Set of points of $[0,1)$ that have a unique binary expansion
Expected Value of Flips Until HT Consecutively
Proving a subset is not a submanifold
How to prove $\tanh ^{-1} (\sin \theta)=\cosh^{-1} (\sec \theta)$
Is there a vector space that cannot be an inner product space?
A simple proof that $\bigl(1+\frac1n\bigr)^n\leq3-\frac1n$?
Maximize :: $A = B \times C$
$z\exp(z)$ surjectivity with the Little Picard Theorem

Hallo fellow mathematicians.

I try to understand why the normal bundle of

$\mathbb{PR}^n$ is isomorphic (in the category of vector bundles) to the tautological line Bundle. More aptly, why $\nu_{\mathbb{RP}^{n+1}}^{\beta} \mathbb{RP}^n \cong L, \text{ where } L$ denotes the tautological line bundle over $\mathbb{RP}^n$ and $ \beta \colon \mathbb{RP}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{RP}^{n+1} $ the inclusion induced by the inclusion $\mathbb{R}^{n+1} \subset \mathbb{R}^{n+2}$.

I followed a few loose ends until now.

One of them:

(1) In this script (pdf) I found a proof (p.8). I just don’t understand, how that is supposed to be suffice as proof. Afaik under trivialisations I could identify every vector bundle of the same dimension, so what seals the proof here?

Another idea I came up with:

- Embedding a manifold in the disk
- Presentation of the fundamental group of a manifold minus some points
- The fundamental group of $U(n)/O(n)$
- Continuous Deformation Of Punctured Torus
- Tensor product of flat real line bundles and triviality.
- Category Theory usage in Algebraic Topology

(2) On $\mathbb{PR}^{n+1}$ we have a riemannian metric, i.e. the tangent bundle allows a presentation as the whitney-sum: $\nu_{\mathbb{RP}^{n+1}}^{\beta} \mathbb{RP}^n \oplus T \mathbb{PR}^n \cong T\mathbb{RP}^{n+1}|_{\mathbb{PR}^n} $. According to Husemoller (Fibre Bundles, Theorem 2.7) we now (analogous to this) that two vector bundles – in order to be isomorphic – have to have cohomologous transition functions, i.e. they are related in a certain way to each other. Afaik we can split the transition functions of $T\mathbb{PR}^{n+1}$ into the direct sum (in the sense that $\phi_{ij}(p)=\begin{matrix}

\phi_{ij}^1(p) & 0 \\

0 & \phi_{ij}^2(p)

\end{matrix} $ is the transition function of $T\mathbb{PR}^{n+1}$, where $ \phi_{ij}^1$ is the trans. function of $T\mathbb{PR}^{n}$ and $ \phi_{ij}^2 $ the is trans. function of the normal bundle). As soon as I try to compute all this I encounter problems. So I took the transition functions of the “standard” atlas of $\mathbb{RP}^n$, i.e. with $U_i:=\{[x_1:\dots x_n]|x_i \neq 0 \}$ the transition function is $\phi_j \circ \phi_i^{-1} (y^1, \dots y^n)=(\frac{y^1}{y^j}, \dots \frac{y^{i-1}}{y^{j}}, \frac{1}{y^j}, \frac{y^{i+1}}{y^j}, \dots,\frac{y^n}{y^j})$. When I pass this to the Jacobian (which is the transition function of the tangent bundle, right?) things get ugly.

(3) Another idea I had (which is… regressing I suppose) is to use the orientiability of $\mathbb{RP}^{2n}$ and $\mathbb{RP}^{2n+1}$ and their stiefel whitney classes, which inplies in every case, that the normal bundle is not trivial. But now I would have to show that a line bundle is either trivial or isomorphic to the tautological bundle over $\mathbb{RP}^n$. Is that even true?

I’m very greatful for any help you may be able to provide. If I made a mistake, you are more than welcome to correct me.

- Unitary group and unit circle
- CW complex structure on standard sphere identifying the south pole and north pole
- Why do we need the partial derivative $\frac {\partial F}{\partial t}$ in the definition of an envelope?
- The only finite group which can act freely on even dimensional spheres is $C_2$.
- Uniqueness for a covering map lift: is locally connected necessary?
- Is the hypersurface of class $C^k$ a $C^k$-differentiable manifold?
- What is the definition of tensor contraction?
- Fundamental solution to Laplace equation on arbitrary Riemann surfaces
- Equivalent definitions of $C^r(\Omega)$?
- Basis for the set of all covariant $k$-tensors on V

Yes it is true, that $\omega_1:Vect_1X \to H^1(X;Z/2)$ is an isomorphism for general (paracompact) $X$. Hence you have to show that the normal bundle is not trivial. To do that note that $L\to X$ is trivial iff orientable iff $L_0$ disconnected (if $X$ is connected).

Now we have a very natural identification of the total space of $L$, namely $RP^{n+1}-*$ where we choose a point in the interior of the attached $n+1$-disk. So we have $L_0=(RP^{n+1}-*)-RP^n=D^{n+1}-*$, hence connected.

Intuitively speaking, we use that the attaching map $S^n \to RP^n$ is the two fold covering, which gives you the easy situation, that you have 2 ways to go out from the zero section, which both end in the same component $L_0$. Maybe imagine the normal bundle as $RP^n$ and gluing $S^n\times [0,1)$ along it.

*Edit concerning the first sentence of this answer.*

So consider we have the following:

$$

\begin{array}{ccc}

[X,RP^\infty] && \\

\downarrow & \searrow&\\

Vect_1X &\xrightarrow{\omega_1}&H^1(X;Z/2)

\end{array}

$$

Observe that the diagonal map ${[f] \mapsto f^*\alpha}$ is the map which makes the Eilenberg Maclane isomorphism. But this triangle is so natural that it easily commutes and since the vertical map is an isomorphism, we get an isomorphism on the horizontal map. Those are all set-theoretic isomorphisms, i.e. bijections. Now note that $Vect_1X$ becomes a group under $\otimes$ and that the Stiefel Whitney class behaves nicely. So we get a group isomorphism $Vect_1X \cong H^1(X;Z/2)$. Hence there is up to isomorphism only *one* non trivial line bundle, where we already know one, namely the tautological one. That is why it suffices to show that our line bundle is of non-trivial isomorphism type.

Now note that for a line bundle being of trivial type is equivalent to being orientable. A continous choice of orientation, gives you by renormalizing a nowhere vanishing section, i.e. a trivialization. For the other direction note that a trivialization gives you a continous choice of a basis.

- Opposite of Fermat's Last Theorem?
- Showing that a topological space is ${\rm T}_1$
- How to find $\sum_{k \in \mathbb{Z}}\frac1{(k+a)(k+b)}$
- How do we show that $\int_{0}^{1}{\arctan(x\sqrt{x^2+2})\over \sqrt{x^2+2}}\cdot{dx\over x^2+1}=\left({\pi\over 6}\right)^2$
- How do I solve this improper integral: $\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-x^2-x}dx$?
- A conjectured closed form of $\int\limits_0^\infty\frac{x-1}{\sqrt{2^x-1}\ \ln\left(2^x-1\right)}dx$
- Is 2048 the highest power of 2 with all even digits (base ten)?
- Let $ Y = \{ (1,1),(0,0\} \subset \mathbb A_k^2$. Find the $ \mathbb I(Y)$.
- Finitely generated field extensions
- Complex numbers and Roots of unity
- Let $G$ be a graph of minimum degree $k>1$. Show that $G$ has a cycle of length at least $k+1$
- Recurrent problem about polynomials
- Consider the following Sturm-Liouville problem
- Martingality Theorem: Solving expectation of a stochastic integral
- Complex power of complex number