3

Update: Based on this, I think: Surjective immersions are (surjective) local diffeomorphisms because surjective immersions have $\dim {\text{domain}} = \dim{\text{range/image}}$. In particular, surjective immersions are equivalent to surjective local diffeomorphisms. Similarly, immersions whose images are (regular/embedded) submanifolds of range are local diffeomorphisms onto their images because $\dim {\text{domain}} = \dim{\text{image}}$, i.e. $n=k$, as below. Please verify that this in fact answers these three questions:

  1. Immersions whose images are actually submanifolds? Or surjective immersions? (I think surjective immersions are local diffeomorphisms)

  2. Are immersions equivalent to local diffeomorphisms onto their images if their images are submanifolds?

  3. Different proof for immersion is equivalent to local embedding when image is submanifold


Let $N$ and $M$ be smooth manifolds with respective dimensions $n$ and $m$. Let $p \in N$. Let $F: N \to M$ be an immersion at $p$. It can be shown $F$ is a local embedding at $p$ (and conversely).

Main questions: If $F$ is an immersion for each $p \in N$ and $F(N)$ is, not only an immersed submanifold of $M$, but actually a (regular/an embedded) $k$-submanifold of $M$, then what can we say (about $F$, $N$, $F(N)$, the restriction $\tilde F: N \to F(N)$ etc)? Or what about if $F$ is additionally surjective (then its image is of course a submanifold of itself...I guess)?

So far I have: (I think these don't use that $F$ is an immersion.)

A. The inclusion $\iota: F(N) \to M$ is a smooth topological embedding and immersion.

B. The map $\tilde F: N \to F(N)$, $F$ with restricted range that satisfies $F = \iota \circ \tilde F$ is smooth.

Some guide questions for the main questions:

C. Does $N$ have the same dimension as $F(N)$, i.e. is $n=k$ ?

D. I haven't thought of any other guide questions.

I'm asking because

  1. I find that the assumption that $F(N)$ is a submanifold makes the proof that $F$ is a local embedding a lot simpler, assuming the proof is correct.

    • Whether or not the proof is correct, I'm thinking that there's something more to this. Perhaps assuming $F(N)$ submanifold makes $F$ into something where it would be obvious that $F$ is indeed a local embedding, such as because $F$ is actually an embedding (I think $F$ isn't necessarily injective) or a local diffeomorphism (I think immersions are not necessarily local diffeomorphisms).
  2. We might be able to characterize such immersions as equivalent to local diffeomorphisms onto their images.

    • But in this case I think this would mean that surjective immersions are (surjective) local diffeomorphisms. While this would be consistent with both that bijective immersions are diffeomorphisms and that bijective local diffeomorphisms are diffeomorphisms, I wasn't able to find anything about surjective immersions being local diffeomorphisms, but I think this is true if $n=m$ and even if not surjective (and immersions would be local diffeomorphisms onto their images if $n=k$, I guess).

    • In relation to (1), I think (both local diffeomorphisms and) local diffeomorphisms onto images are local embeddings.

    • Since immersions are equivalent to local embeddings, I guess a local embedding with a submanifold image is a local diffeomorphism onto image.

  3. For such an $F$, we can say $F$ is an immersion if and only if $\tilde F$ is an immersion. I suppose we might say this even if $F(N)$ weren't a submanifold or maybe even if not a manifold as long as we have some kind of smoothness definition.

0 Answers0