Reference: $(X,X/G,pi,G)$ is principal $G$-bundle?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
The accepted answer in
Projection map between the Stiefel manifold and the Grassmanian
says
If $G$ is a Lie group and $X$ is a manifold on which $G$ acts freely and properly, then $X/G$ has a natural manifold structure and the projection $Xrightarrow X/G$ is a principal $G$-bundle. In particular, $Xrightarrow X/G$ is a fibre bundle with fibre $G$.
without a reference. I wonder where I can find such a result? Does this hold in the infinite dimensional setting, where $X$ is locally Banach spaces, as well?
(I am already struggling with seemingly different definitions of principal fibre bundle etc. Questions asked/answered by others have been helpful but a source for the result above will be very helpful, too.)
differential-geometry reference-request fiber-bundles
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
The accepted answer in
Projection map between the Stiefel manifold and the Grassmanian
says
If $G$ is a Lie group and $X$ is a manifold on which $G$ acts freely and properly, then $X/G$ has a natural manifold structure and the projection $Xrightarrow X/G$ is a principal $G$-bundle. In particular, $Xrightarrow X/G$ is a fibre bundle with fibre $G$.
without a reference. I wonder where I can find such a result? Does this hold in the infinite dimensional setting, where $X$ is locally Banach spaces, as well?
(I am already struggling with seemingly different definitions of principal fibre bundle etc. Questions asked/answered by others have been helpful but a source for the result above will be very helpful, too.)
differential-geometry reference-request fiber-bundles
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
The accepted answer in
Projection map between the Stiefel manifold and the Grassmanian
says
If $G$ is a Lie group and $X$ is a manifold on which $G$ acts freely and properly, then $X/G$ has a natural manifold structure and the projection $Xrightarrow X/G$ is a principal $G$-bundle. In particular, $Xrightarrow X/G$ is a fibre bundle with fibre $G$.
without a reference. I wonder where I can find such a result? Does this hold in the infinite dimensional setting, where $X$ is locally Banach spaces, as well?
(I am already struggling with seemingly different definitions of principal fibre bundle etc. Questions asked/answered by others have been helpful but a source for the result above will be very helpful, too.)
differential-geometry reference-request fiber-bundles
The accepted answer in
Projection map between the Stiefel manifold and the Grassmanian
says
If $G$ is a Lie group and $X$ is a manifold on which $G$ acts freely and properly, then $X/G$ has a natural manifold structure and the projection $Xrightarrow X/G$ is a principal $G$-bundle. In particular, $Xrightarrow X/G$ is a fibre bundle with fibre $G$.
without a reference. I wonder where I can find such a result? Does this hold in the infinite dimensional setting, where $X$ is locally Banach spaces, as well?
(I am already struggling with seemingly different definitions of principal fibre bundle etc. Questions asked/answered by others have been helpful but a source for the result above will be very helpful, too.)
differential-geometry reference-request fiber-bundles
edited Aug 13 at 12:35
asked Aug 13 at 10:24
Jara
236
236
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
Yes, the result is true and proved in many differential geometry books. This is definitely in John Lee's Smooth Manifolds book, for instance.
The Banach manifold case is harder to track down, but is in Bourbaki, Lie Groups and Lie Algebras as Proposition 3.1.5.10. The following is not precisely a translation (I have changed it slightly to make the assumptions more clear), but is close.
Suppose $G$ is a Banach Lie group and $X$ a Banach manifold on which $G$ acts. Suppose that $G$ acts freely and properly on $X$, and such that if $rho(x): T_eG to T_xX$ is the differential of the action at the point $x$, the image of $rho(x)$ is closed and has some closed complement for all $x$. Then the quotient topology on $X/G$ is Hausdorff, and there is a unique smooth structure on $X/G$ such that $pi: X to X/G$ is a submersion. Furthermore, $X to X/G$ is a principal $G$-bundle.
So the main difference in the Banach case is that the orbits should have complemented tangent space. in the Hilbert case, this is just saying the orbits have closed tangent space.
1
If you meant John Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds by Lee's book, I do not really think he discusses principal $G$-bundle in the book explicitly. (Well, problem 21-6 would be the desired statement, if one can show this...)
â user41467
Aug 13 at 14:45
Once you have the slice and that the quotient is a submersion, everything else comes for free: the section allows you to define a local trivialization.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 16:26
I personally find your answer really helpful and interesting (thank you for that), I believe others too but what I was trying to say was that the OP asked a reference (which you did (Bourbaki)) but I thought it might be helpful also if you could name a widely read? (contemporary?) book like John Lee's book that discusses this explicitly with a proof (which John Lee's book does not seem to).
â user41467
Aug 13 at 19:55
Sure, I will let someone else take charge on that if they want; I do not really want to look through my books to see what author has the best proof. I mainly know from experience that it is irritating to find the Banach case, and posting that reference was my primary motivation.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 20:11
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
Yes, the result is true and proved in many differential geometry books. This is definitely in John Lee's Smooth Manifolds book, for instance.
The Banach manifold case is harder to track down, but is in Bourbaki, Lie Groups and Lie Algebras as Proposition 3.1.5.10. The following is not precisely a translation (I have changed it slightly to make the assumptions more clear), but is close.
Suppose $G$ is a Banach Lie group and $X$ a Banach manifold on which $G$ acts. Suppose that $G$ acts freely and properly on $X$, and such that if $rho(x): T_eG to T_xX$ is the differential of the action at the point $x$, the image of $rho(x)$ is closed and has some closed complement for all $x$. Then the quotient topology on $X/G$ is Hausdorff, and there is a unique smooth structure on $X/G$ such that $pi: X to X/G$ is a submersion. Furthermore, $X to X/G$ is a principal $G$-bundle.
So the main difference in the Banach case is that the orbits should have complemented tangent space. in the Hilbert case, this is just saying the orbits have closed tangent space.
1
If you meant John Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds by Lee's book, I do not really think he discusses principal $G$-bundle in the book explicitly. (Well, problem 21-6 would be the desired statement, if one can show this...)
â user41467
Aug 13 at 14:45
Once you have the slice and that the quotient is a submersion, everything else comes for free: the section allows you to define a local trivialization.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 16:26
I personally find your answer really helpful and interesting (thank you for that), I believe others too but what I was trying to say was that the OP asked a reference (which you did (Bourbaki)) but I thought it might be helpful also if you could name a widely read? (contemporary?) book like John Lee's book that discusses this explicitly with a proof (which John Lee's book does not seem to).
â user41467
Aug 13 at 19:55
Sure, I will let someone else take charge on that if they want; I do not really want to look through my books to see what author has the best proof. I mainly know from experience that it is irritating to find the Banach case, and posting that reference was my primary motivation.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 20:11
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
Yes, the result is true and proved in many differential geometry books. This is definitely in John Lee's Smooth Manifolds book, for instance.
The Banach manifold case is harder to track down, but is in Bourbaki, Lie Groups and Lie Algebras as Proposition 3.1.5.10. The following is not precisely a translation (I have changed it slightly to make the assumptions more clear), but is close.
Suppose $G$ is a Banach Lie group and $X$ a Banach manifold on which $G$ acts. Suppose that $G$ acts freely and properly on $X$, and such that if $rho(x): T_eG to T_xX$ is the differential of the action at the point $x$, the image of $rho(x)$ is closed and has some closed complement for all $x$. Then the quotient topology on $X/G$ is Hausdorff, and there is a unique smooth structure on $X/G$ such that $pi: X to X/G$ is a submersion. Furthermore, $X to X/G$ is a principal $G$-bundle.
So the main difference in the Banach case is that the orbits should have complemented tangent space. in the Hilbert case, this is just saying the orbits have closed tangent space.
1
If you meant John Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds by Lee's book, I do not really think he discusses principal $G$-bundle in the book explicitly. (Well, problem 21-6 would be the desired statement, if one can show this...)
â user41467
Aug 13 at 14:45
Once you have the slice and that the quotient is a submersion, everything else comes for free: the section allows you to define a local trivialization.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 16:26
I personally find your answer really helpful and interesting (thank you for that), I believe others too but what I was trying to say was that the OP asked a reference (which you did (Bourbaki)) but I thought it might be helpful also if you could name a widely read? (contemporary?) book like John Lee's book that discusses this explicitly with a proof (which John Lee's book does not seem to).
â user41467
Aug 13 at 19:55
Sure, I will let someone else take charge on that if they want; I do not really want to look through my books to see what author has the best proof. I mainly know from experience that it is irritating to find the Banach case, and posting that reference was my primary motivation.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 20:11
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
Yes, the result is true and proved in many differential geometry books. This is definitely in John Lee's Smooth Manifolds book, for instance.
The Banach manifold case is harder to track down, but is in Bourbaki, Lie Groups and Lie Algebras as Proposition 3.1.5.10. The following is not precisely a translation (I have changed it slightly to make the assumptions more clear), but is close.
Suppose $G$ is a Banach Lie group and $X$ a Banach manifold on which $G$ acts. Suppose that $G$ acts freely and properly on $X$, and such that if $rho(x): T_eG to T_xX$ is the differential of the action at the point $x$, the image of $rho(x)$ is closed and has some closed complement for all $x$. Then the quotient topology on $X/G$ is Hausdorff, and there is a unique smooth structure on $X/G$ such that $pi: X to X/G$ is a submersion. Furthermore, $X to X/G$ is a principal $G$-bundle.
So the main difference in the Banach case is that the orbits should have complemented tangent space. in the Hilbert case, this is just saying the orbits have closed tangent space.
Yes, the result is true and proved in many differential geometry books. This is definitely in John Lee's Smooth Manifolds book, for instance.
The Banach manifold case is harder to track down, but is in Bourbaki, Lie Groups and Lie Algebras as Proposition 3.1.5.10. The following is not precisely a translation (I have changed it slightly to make the assumptions more clear), but is close.
Suppose $G$ is a Banach Lie group and $X$ a Banach manifold on which $G$ acts. Suppose that $G$ acts freely and properly on $X$, and such that if $rho(x): T_eG to T_xX$ is the differential of the action at the point $x$, the image of $rho(x)$ is closed and has some closed complement for all $x$. Then the quotient topology on $X/G$ is Hausdorff, and there is a unique smooth structure on $X/G$ such that $pi: X to X/G$ is a submersion. Furthermore, $X to X/G$ is a principal $G$-bundle.
So the main difference in the Banach case is that the orbits should have complemented tangent space. in the Hilbert case, this is just saying the orbits have closed tangent space.
answered Aug 13 at 13:30
Mike Miller
34k365129
34k365129
1
If you meant John Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds by Lee's book, I do not really think he discusses principal $G$-bundle in the book explicitly. (Well, problem 21-6 would be the desired statement, if one can show this...)
â user41467
Aug 13 at 14:45
Once you have the slice and that the quotient is a submersion, everything else comes for free: the section allows you to define a local trivialization.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 16:26
I personally find your answer really helpful and interesting (thank you for that), I believe others too but what I was trying to say was that the OP asked a reference (which you did (Bourbaki)) but I thought it might be helpful also if you could name a widely read? (contemporary?) book like John Lee's book that discusses this explicitly with a proof (which John Lee's book does not seem to).
â user41467
Aug 13 at 19:55
Sure, I will let someone else take charge on that if they want; I do not really want to look through my books to see what author has the best proof. I mainly know from experience that it is irritating to find the Banach case, and posting that reference was my primary motivation.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 20:11
add a comment |Â
1
If you meant John Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds by Lee's book, I do not really think he discusses principal $G$-bundle in the book explicitly. (Well, problem 21-6 would be the desired statement, if one can show this...)
â user41467
Aug 13 at 14:45
Once you have the slice and that the quotient is a submersion, everything else comes for free: the section allows you to define a local trivialization.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 16:26
I personally find your answer really helpful and interesting (thank you for that), I believe others too but what I was trying to say was that the OP asked a reference (which you did (Bourbaki)) but I thought it might be helpful also if you could name a widely read? (contemporary?) book like John Lee's book that discusses this explicitly with a proof (which John Lee's book does not seem to).
â user41467
Aug 13 at 19:55
Sure, I will let someone else take charge on that if they want; I do not really want to look through my books to see what author has the best proof. I mainly know from experience that it is irritating to find the Banach case, and posting that reference was my primary motivation.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 20:11
1
1
If you meant John Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds by Lee's book, I do not really think he discusses principal $G$-bundle in the book explicitly. (Well, problem 21-6 would be the desired statement, if one can show this...)
â user41467
Aug 13 at 14:45
If you meant John Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds by Lee's book, I do not really think he discusses principal $G$-bundle in the book explicitly. (Well, problem 21-6 would be the desired statement, if one can show this...)
â user41467
Aug 13 at 14:45
Once you have the slice and that the quotient is a submersion, everything else comes for free: the section allows you to define a local trivialization.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 16:26
Once you have the slice and that the quotient is a submersion, everything else comes for free: the section allows you to define a local trivialization.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 16:26
I personally find your answer really helpful and interesting (thank you for that), I believe others too but what I was trying to say was that the OP asked a reference (which you did (Bourbaki)) but I thought it might be helpful also if you could name a widely read? (contemporary?) book like John Lee's book that discusses this explicitly with a proof (which John Lee's book does not seem to).
â user41467
Aug 13 at 19:55
I personally find your answer really helpful and interesting (thank you for that), I believe others too but what I was trying to say was that the OP asked a reference (which you did (Bourbaki)) but I thought it might be helpful also if you could name a widely read? (contemporary?) book like John Lee's book that discusses this explicitly with a proof (which John Lee's book does not seem to).
â user41467
Aug 13 at 19:55
Sure, I will let someone else take charge on that if they want; I do not really want to look through my books to see what author has the best proof. I mainly know from experience that it is irritating to find the Banach case, and posting that reference was my primary motivation.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 20:11
Sure, I will let someone else take charge on that if they want; I do not really want to look through my books to see what author has the best proof. I mainly know from experience that it is irritating to find the Banach case, and posting that reference was my primary motivation.
â Mike Miller
Aug 13 at 20:11
add a comment |Â
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
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2881222%2freference-x-x-g-pi-g-is-principal-g-bundle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
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
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
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