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.
Smooth Manifolds and Smooth Maps: Examples and Counterexamples
1 · Prerequisites
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Compactness in Metric Spaces
- Completeness, Completion, and Uniform Continuity
- Connectedness
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Continuity, IVT, EVT, and Uniform Continuity
- Countability and Uncountability
- Countability Axioms and Cardinal Functions
- Filters and Ultrafilters
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Hereditary and Productive Behaviour of the Separation Axioms
- Limits of Real Functions
- limsup, liminf, and Subsequential Limits
- Linear Independence, Bases and Dimension
- Linear Transformations, Rank-Nullity and Quotient Spaces
- Metric Spaces
- Mixed Partials, Taylor Formulae, and Extrema
- Monotone Functions, Discontinuities, and Continuity Sets
- Monotone Sequences, Bolzano-Weierstrass, and Cauchy Completeness
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Ordinal Arithmetic and the First Uncountable Ordinal
- Ordinals, Cardinals, and Transfinite Recursion
- Properties of the Integral and the Working FTC
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Rⁿ as a Normed Space; Vector-Valued Functions
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Separation Axioms: the Hierarchy
- Sequences and Limits
- Smooth Manifolds and Smooth Maps
- Subspaces, Products, and Quotients
- Suprema and Infima
- The Derivative and the Mean Value Theorems
- The Riemann Integral: Definition and Integrability
- The Topology of Euclidean Space
- The Total Derivative in ℝᵐ → ℝⁿ
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Topological Spaces and Continuity
- Topology of ℝ
- Vector Spaces, Linear Subspaces, Span and Direct Sums
2 · Summary
These examples exhibit the standard atlas constructions that drive the page: Euclidean spaces, spheres, projective space, products, and countable disjoint unions. The counterexamples isolate exactly where second countability, two-sided compatibility, and smooth inverses are needed.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
None yet.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
Euclidean spaces and Euclidean open subsets as smooth manifolds
Example
For every , the Euclidean space is a smooth -manifold, with global chart the identity map. More generally, every open subset is a smooth -manifold with its standard restricted smooth structure.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A natural number and an open subset .
Open subsets of Euclidean space carry the standard smooth structure (Open subsets of Euclidean space have the standard smooth structure).
A smooth manifold is a topological manifold equipped with a smooth structure (Smooth manifolds and their smooth charts).
Verification
Taking , the identity chart exhibits as a topological -manifold and [F1] supplies its smooth structure. Hence is a smooth -manifold by [F2].
For a general open subset , [F1] states exactly that inherits the standard smooth structure, so again [F2] makes a smooth -manifold.
The circle from two stereographic charts
Example
Let
Removing the north pole and south pole , define stereographic charts
Their inverses are
These two charts form a smooth atlas on , so they exhibit the circle as a smooth -manifold.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The circle , the poles , and the two stereographic maps .
A smooth atlas is a covering family of pairwise smoothly compatible charts (Smooth atlases).
Smooth compatibility requires both transition maps on the overlap to be smooth (Smoothly compatible charts and the smoothness of Euclidean transition maps).
A smooth manifold is a topological manifold equipped with a smooth structure (Smooth manifolds and their smooth charts).
Verification
The domains and are open in [given] and cover it. The displayed inverse formulas show that each and is a homeomorphism onto : composing the inverse with the chart returns the original point, and composing the chart with the inverse gives . So these are genuine charts.
On the overlap the transition maps are
defined on , hence smooth. Therefore the two charts are smoothly compatible by [F2], and [F1] makes them a smooth atlas. [F1, F2, step 1.1]
This smooth atlas equips with a smooth structure, so [F3] makes the [F3, step 2.1] circle a smooth -manifold.
The -sphere with its standard smooth atlas
Example
For , let
With north and south poles and , the stereographic charts
define a smooth atlas on . Their overlap transition is on .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The sphere and the two stereographic maps .
A smooth atlas is a covering family of pairwise smoothly compatible charts (Smooth atlases).
Smooth compatibility means that both transition maps are smooth on the overlap (Smoothly compatible charts and the smoothness of Euclidean transition maps).
A smooth manifold is a topological manifold equipped with a smooth structure (Smooth manifolds and their smooth charts).
Verification
The domains and are open and cover [given] . The inverse formulas show that both maps are homeomorphisms onto .
On the overlap the transition maps are defined on , so they are smooth rational maps there. Hence the two stereographic charts are smoothly compatible by [F2], and [F1] makes them a smooth atlas on .
Therefore is a smooth manifold by [F3].
Real projective space from affine charts
Example
Real projective space is the quotient of by the relation for , with the quotient topology (The quotient topology of a surjection, quotient maps, saturated sets, and the quotient of a space by an equivalence relation with its canonical projection). For let
The affine coordinate map
defines a chart on , and these charts form a smooth atlas.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The quotient model of , the open sets , and the affine coordinate maps .
The quotient topology is the one for which a subset is open exactly when its full preimage is open (The quotient topology of a surjection, quotient maps, saturated sets, and the quotient of a space by an equivalence relation with its canonical projection).
A smooth atlas is a covering family of pairwise smoothly compatible charts (Smooth atlases).
A smooth manifold is a topological manifold equipped with a smooth structure (Smooth manifolds and their smooth charts).
Verification
The sets cover because every nonzero vector in [F1] has at least one nonzero coordinate. Each is open by [F1], since its preimage is . The inverse chart sends to the projective class with -th coordinate and the remaining coordinates given by the , so each is a homeomorphism .
On the transition map is obtained by [F2, step 1.1] dividing all affine coordinates by the coordinate corresponding to , which is nonzero on the overlap. Thus every transition function is rational with nonvanishing denominator on its domain, hence smooth. Therefore the family is a smooth atlas by [F2].
This atlas equips with a smooth structure, so [F3] makes [F3, step 2.1] a smooth -manifold.
The torus as a product smooth manifold
Example
The torus
is a smooth -manifold with the product smooth structure.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The circle with its two-chart smooth atlas and the product .
The circle is a smooth -manifold (The circle from two stereographic charts).
Products of smooth manifolds carry canonical product smooth structures (Products of smooth manifolds have a canonical product smooth structure).
Verification
By [F1], each factor is a smooth -manifold.
Applying [F2] to the two circle factors gives a canonical product smooth [F2, step 1.1] structure on , making it a smooth -manifold. This is the torus .
A countable disjoint union of lines is a smooth manifold
Example
The countable disjoint union
of countably many copies of the real line is a smooth -manifold.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The countable family of copies of the real line.
Each copy of is a smooth -manifold (Euclidean spaces and Euclidean open subsets as smooth manifolds).
A countable disjoint union of fixed-dimensional smooth manifolds is a smooth manifold (Countable disjoint unions of fixed-dimensional smooth manifolds are smooth manifolds).
Verification
By [F1], every summand is a smooth -manifold.
The index set is countable, so [F2] applies to the family [F2, step 1.1] and yields a smooth -manifold structure on .
The long line is locally Euclidean and Hausdorff but not a manifold under the library convention
Statement refuted
Every Hausdorff locally Euclidean space is a manifold.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The long line and the Axiom of Countable Choice .
The A-page refutation already proves that is Hausdorff and locally Euclidean but not second countable, hence not a manifold under the library convention (Hausdorff and locally Euclidean do not by themselves make a manifold).
The long-ray construction and its order topology are those of The closed long ray under the lexicographic order, and the long line, with the order topology, and its order-theoretic connectedness properties are recorded in The long ray is a linear continuum, hence connected; every one of its at most countable subsets is bounded above, assuming countable choice.
Counterexample
By [L1], the long line is Hausdorff and locally Euclidean.
The same cited refutation shows that fails second countability, so it is not a manifold under the library convention. The structural details of [F1] identify the witness but do not change that conclusion.
Thus is the required counterexample.
Two noncompatible atlases on the real line
Statement refuted
Any two atlases on the same topological manifold are smoothly compatible.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The real line with the two singleton atlases and , where .
The real line is a smooth manifold, so the two displayed charts are charts on one and the same manifold (Euclidean spaces and Euclidean open subsets as smooth manifolds).
A smooth atlas is a covering family of pairwise smoothly compatible charts (Smooth atlases).
Smooth compatibility requires both transition directions to be smooth (Smoothly compatible charts and the smoothness of Euclidean transition maps).
Counterexample
Each singleton family and covers , so [F1, F2] by [F2] each is an atlas provided its single chart is legitimate, and [F1] supplies that legitimacy.
The transition is smooth, but the [F3, step 1.1] reverse transition is not differentiable at . Hence [F3] says the two charts are not compatible.
Therefore and are atlases on the same manifold [step 2.1] that are not compatible, which refutes the statement.
A bijective smooth map with nonsmooth inverse
Statement refuted
Every bijective smooth map is a diffeomorphism.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The bijection , .
The A-page false statement already proves that is smooth and bijective but that is not smooth (A bijective smooth map need not be a diffeomorphism).
A diffeomorphism is a bijective smooth map with smooth inverse (Diffeomorphisms and local diffeomorphisms of manifolds).
Counterexample
By [L1], the map is smooth and bijective.
The same cited refutation shows that is not smooth, so [F1] rules [F1, L1] out being a diffeomorphism.
Hence is the desired counterexample.
An uncountable disjoint union of points is not second-countable
Statement refuted
An arbitrary disjoint union of second-countable manifolds is second-countable.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An uncountable disjoint union of one-point spaces.
The A-page false statement already proves that such a space is discrete and admits no countable basis (An arbitrary disjoint union of second-countable manifolds need not be second-countable).
The topology is the disjoint-union topology of The disjoint union (coproduct) with the final topology of the canonical injections: a set is open exactly when each of its traces is, and second countability means existence of an at most countable basis (Second countability: an at most countable basis for the topology).
Counterexample
By [L1], every singleton of is open and any basis of must contain [L1] uncountably many distinct singleton sets.
Therefore is not second countable in the sense of [F1].
So is the desired counterexample.
Sources
- Rob van der Vorst, Introduction to differentiable manifolds, §1, Example 1.5
- Nigel Hitchin, Differentiable Manifolds, §2.3
- Rob van der Vorst, Introduction to differentiable manifolds, §1, Example 1.6
- Rob van der Vorst, Introduction to differentiable manifolds, §1, Example 1.8
- Rob van der Vorst, Introduction to differentiable manifolds, §1, Example 1.10
- Rob van der Vorst, Introduction to differentiable manifolds, §1
- Long line (topology) (Wikipedia)
- MIT OpenCourseWare, The Long Line
- Nigel Hitchin, Differentiable Manifolds, §2.2
- Rob van der Vorst, Introduction to differentiable manifolds, §2
- Nigel Hitchin, Differentiable Manifolds, §2.4