General question about Compact and Non-Compact Riemannian Manifolds framed in context of G2 Holonomy
$begingroup$
I have what I believe is a general question relating compact and non-compact Riemannian Manifolds that comes up in a specific context in a paper by Alexei Kovalev titled Twisted Connected Sums and Special Riemannian Holonomy. I have seen similar reasoning used on a number of cases and meerly seek to use this paper to see if the reasoning used in a number of instances is more general.
The General Theory I have been using is as follows:
1) Hopf-Rinow Theorem: Closed and Bounded implies compact
2) Compact subspaces of Hausdorff Spaces are closed
3) Closed subsets of compact spaces are compact
The point of Kovalev's paper is to build a compact manifold out of non-compact building blocks. I have questions regarding two steps of the approach, the reasoning from which the building blocks are non-compact and the reasoning justifiying how to make a compact space out of the non-compact building blocks.
1) Concerning the building blocks being non-compact. The building blocks W are of the form W'D where W' is compact Kahler and D is a K3 Surface. Does the fact that W is non-compact follow simply from the fact that W' and D are compact, or is it a more subtle consequence of the specific geometry?
2) Building the Compact Space out of building blocks. Kovalev defines a map i: R(>0) x S1 x D -> W and uses it to define a new manifold basically of the following form
M=WImage(i) x S1
The claim is that M is compact (and then two such M will be sewn together). Does this follow from W being non-compact and the compactness of the image of i?
general-topology riemannian-geometry
asked Jan 21 at 23:17
Canonical MomentaCanonical Momenta
283
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have what I believe is a general question relating compact and non-compact Riemannian Manifolds that comes up in a specific context in a paper by Alexei Kovalev titled Twisted Connected Sums and Special Riemannian Holonomy. I have seen similar reasoning used on a number of cases and meerly seek to use this paper to see if the reasoning used in a number of instances is more general.
The General Theory I have been using is as follows:
1) Hopf-Rinow Theorem: Closed and Bounded implies compact
2) Compact subspaces of Hausdorff Spaces are closed
3) Closed subsets of compact spaces are compact
The point of Kovalev's paper is to build a compact manifold out of non-compact building blocks. I have questions regarding two steps of the approach, the reasoning from which the building blocks are non-compact and the reasoning justifiying how to make a compact space out of the non-compact building blocks.
1) Concerning the building blocks being non-compact. The building blocks W are of the form W'D where W' is compact Kahler and D is a K3 Surface. Does the fact that W is non-compact follow simply from the fact that W' and D are compact, or is it a more subtle consequence of the specific geometry?
2) Building the Compact Space out of building blocks. Kovalev defines a map i: R(>0) x S1 x D -> W and uses it to define a new manifold basically of the following form
M=WImage(i) x S1
The claim is that M is compact (and then two such M will be sewn together). Does this follow from W being non-compact and the compactness of the image of i?
general-topology riemannian-geometry
asked Jan 21 at 23:17
Canonical MomentaCanonical Momenta
283
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I have what I believe is a general question relating compact and non-compact Riemannian Manifolds that comes up in a specific context in a paper by Alexei Kovalev titled Twisted Connected Sums and Special Riemannian Holonomy. I have seen similar reasoning used on a number of cases and meerly seek to use this paper to see if the reasoning used in a number of instances is more general.
The General Theory I have been using is as follows:
1) Hopf-Rinow Theorem: Closed and Bounded implies compact
2) Compact subspaces of Hausdorff Spaces are closed
3) Closed subsets of compact spaces are compact
The point of Kovalev's paper is to build a compact manifold out of non-compact building blocks. I have questions regarding two steps of the approach, the reasoning from which the building blocks are non-compact and the reasoning justifiying how to make a compact space out of the non-compact building blocks.
1) Concerning the building blocks being non-compact. The building blocks W are of the form W'D where W' is compact Kahler and D is a K3 Surface. Does the fact that W is non-compact follow simply from the fact that W' and D are compact, or is it a more subtle consequence of the specific geometry?
2) Building the Compact Space out of building blocks. Kovalev defines a map i: R(>0) x S1 x D -> W and uses it to define a new manifold basically of the following form
M=WImage(i) x S1
The claim is that M is compact (and then two such M will be sewn together). Does this follow from W being non-compact and the compactness of the image of i?
general-topology riemannian-geometry
asked Jan 21 at 23:17
Canonical MomentaCanonical Momenta
283
$endgroup$
I have what I believe is a general question relating compact and non-compact Riemannian Manifolds that comes up in a specific context in a paper by Alexei Kovalev titled Twisted Connected Sums and Special Riemannian Holonomy. I have seen similar reasoning used on a number of cases and meerly seek to use this paper to see if the reasoning used in a number of instances is more general.
The General Theory I have been using is as follows:
1) Hopf-Rinow Theorem: Closed and Bounded implies compact
2) Compact subspaces of Hausdorff Spaces are closed
3) Closed subsets of compact spaces are compact
The point of Kovalev's paper is to build a compact manifold out of non-compact building blocks. I have questions regarding two steps of the approach, the reasoning from which the building blocks are non-compact and the reasoning justifiying how to make a compact space out of the non-compact building blocks.
1) Concerning the building blocks being non-compact. The building blocks W are of the form W'D where W' is compact Kahler and D is a K3 Surface. Does the fact that W is non-compact follow simply from the fact that W' and D are compact, or is it a more subtle consequence of the specific geometry?
2) Building the Compact Space out of building blocks. Kovalev defines a map i: R(>0) x S1 x D -> W and uses it to define a new manifold basically of the following form
M=WImage(i) x S1
The claim is that M is compact (and then two such M will be sewn together). Does this follow from W being non-compact and the compactness of the image of i?
general-topology riemannian-geometry
general-topology riemannian-geometry
asked Jan 21 at 23:17
Canonical MomentaCanonical Momenta
283
asked Jan 21 at 23:17
Canonical MomentaCanonical Momenta
283
asked Jan 21 at 23:17
Canonical MomentaCanonical Momenta
283
asked Jan 21 at 23:17
Canonical MomentaCanonical Momenta
283
asked Jan 21 at 23:17
Canonical MomentaCanonical Momenta
283
283
add a comment |
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3082544%2fgeneral-question-about-compact-and-non-compact-riemannian-manifolds-framed-in-co%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3082544%2fgeneral-question-about-compact-and-non-compact-riemannian-manifolds-framed-in-co%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
