How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
An invariant horizontal form on a free proper quotient descends uniquely
Statement
Assume . Let a Lie group act smoothly, freely and properly on a smooth manifold with quotient map . A smooth -form on is the pullback of a smooth -form on if and only if
- is -invariant: for all , where ; and
- is horizontal: whenever some is tangent to the orbit ; equivalently for every fundamental field .
The form is then unique.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , a smooth free proper action of on , the quotient map , and a smooth -form on .
is countable choice; it is used only through the quotient and slice suppliers cited below.
is a smooth manifold and is a smooth surjective submersion. Free proper action quotient manifold.
, and for all . Tangent space of a free proper quotient, Free proper action quotient manifold.
Every has a slice such that is a diffeomorphism onto an open saturated neighbourhood and is a diffeomorphism onto its image. Local slice for a free proper action, Free proper action quotient manifold.
A submersion admits smooth local sections, and a surjective submersion is a quotient map; a form on the base that pulls back to zero is zero because is pointwise onto. The constant-rank theorem for manifolds, For a quotient map , a map out of is continuous iff its composite with is; a continuous map on constant on the fibres of factors uniquely through ; and a composite of quotient maps is a quotient map.
Proof
The conditions are necessary. If , then by [F2], so is -invariant. If is vertical, then by [F2] and therefore , so is horizontal.
For the converse, fix and let for a slice through from [F3]; is open in . For and , choose lifts with and set
The prescription of step 1.2 does not depend on the lifts: two lifts of the same differ by an element of by [F2], and expanding multilinearly every resulting difference term contains a vertical entry, hence vanishes by horizontality.
It does not depend on the chosen point in the fibre: if and are lifts at , then are lifts of the same at by [F2], and -invariance of gives .
Hence is well defined on all of . It is smooth: near any point of the submersion admits a smooth local section by [F4], and there because provides the lifts; the local definitions agree on overlaps since both pull back to , and forms on the base with equal pullback are equal by [F4].
By construction . If is another such form, then , so by [F4]; the descended form is therefore unique.
Depends on
- Free proper action quotient manifold
- Tangent space of a free proper quotient
- Local slice for a free proper action
- The constant-rank theorem for manifolds
- For a quotient map $q : X \to Y$, a map out of $Y$ is continuous iff its composite with $q$ is; a continuous map on $X$ constant on the fibres of $q$ factors uniquely through $q$; and a composite of quotient maps is a quotient map
- The Axiom of Countable Choice ($\mathrm{AC}_\omega$)
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
34 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- John M. Lee, Introduction to Smooth Manifolds, 2nd ed. (standard reference, not scraped)
- Eckhard Meinrenken, Symplectic Geometry (standard reference, not scraped)