First, I have to admit that I stealed some problems from Prof Valentino Tosatti's final problems, with some modifications (problem 1,2,3). Here is his course website and the final with solution.
I will write not below the most concise solution, but some remark and explanations along the way.
1. (15 pt) Let be a Lie group, its Lie algebra. Let be identified with by Endow with the natural induced Lie group structure, such that if are two curves in , then Write down the product law of using identification with , i.e.
Solution: First consider the product of curves this is a curve passing through point at . We use left-multiplication by to pull-back this curve so that it passes through at , then take its derivative where we used Lebniz rule. If you wish, you can think of this as matrix multiplication, i.e., pretend as by matrices and as an invertible matrix.
2. (15 pt) Let acts on by Show that the action is free, and the quotient is diffeomorphic to .
Solution: See Tosatti's solution above.
3. (20 pt) Let be a smooth manifold, be a connection on . Recall the torsion is defined as
Solution: For part 1 and 2, see Tosatti's solution above. For part 3, we first need to recall that the torsion tensor is linear in both slots, i.e., for whatever vector fields , and smooth functions , we always have in other words, only depends on the value of the vector fields and pointwise at , not depends on how and varies near . This is what it means to be a tensor (see Lee or Nicolascu for the discussion).
Hence, if someone write for any vector field and , then it is automatically wrong, because .
For a point , to specify that is, we only need to ask how acts on two basis vectors in . Let be a set of basis vectors in , we extend them to be a left-invariant vector fields on , then is a basis on . We have then Here, these term vanishes because is a flat section with respect to the connection .
4.(15 pt) Let the Hopf fibration. Let be a 2-form on such that is non-zero.
Solution: part (1) should be easy, since is a closed 2-form in . Since , hence closed 2-form are also exact, that means, there exist some such that .
part (2) is kind of evil, admittedly. If you sit down and take a piece of paper and take coordinates on and , you may still not be able to find the answer. The answer is where are coordinate on , and we restrict this one-form to .
The reason that I put this problem here is to introduce a few concepts: (… is final exam a good place to introduce new concepts? anyway..)
And one remark: the word 'non-vanishing' means the 3-form is non-zero at each point .
5. (10 pt) Let be a Riemannian manifold, a closed geodesic is a geodesic such that and .
Solution: (a) If a manifold has a non-trivial , ie., there exists a loop on that cannot shrink to a point, then we can take that loop, shrink it as much as possible, then we get a geodesic. The condition on is to ensure that is non-trivial.
(b) Of course, you can use google to get '3 geodesic theorem' and the Lyusternik–Fet theorem. But it is more fun to come up with some sketch of idea yourself. Recall, if the metric on is the round metric, then great circles are geodesic, however it is unstable, and a slight perturbation will make it either slip off to the left or to the right. But in general, how to look for the analog of great circle?
The idea is to consider an interval worth of loops, parametrized by , for example, take various horizontal slices of the , where corresponds to the constant loop at south-pole, the constant loop at north pole, and the equator. Of course, for generic metric, the equator will not be a geodesic. Then, we try to 'pull the rope taut' simultaneously for all the loops, or run the 'curve-shortening-flow' on the free loop space . The point is that, there will be some loop that 'hangs' in the middle, and do not shrink to a point.
OK, now what about ? To learn this subject properly, one can read this book Lectures on Closed Geodesics.
6. (15 pt) Let be a knot, that is, a smooth embedded submanifold in diffeomorphic to .
Solution: One can make the metric blow-up near the knot , so that the distance to the knot will be . How to make that happen? Consider how to put a metric on the open interval to make the metric complete? We can write for some smooth function on , and we want to make sure Then, if you recall that , then you can cook up some so that near and near . (Of course, to feel safe, you can let for near ).
part (2) again is about being non-trivial. Similar to problem 5 part (a).
7. (10 pt) Let . Let (resp. ) be the flat connection on , where the flat sections are left (resp. right)-invariant vector fields. Prove that there is no 1-parameter family of flat connections connecting and , i.e. and
Solution: Let's consider a general Lie group first. Given an element , then we can locally extend to flat section in a open neighborhood of , using parallel transport. If furthermore is simply connected, then we can get global flat sections extending . By replacing with its universal cover, we may assume is simply connected. Then, we have
Lemma: If is simply connected, then we have a bijection of sets \{ \z{Flat connections on } \} \leftrightarrow \{ \z{ trivializations , such that on is the identity map. \} Both space has natural topology (for example, the space of flat section induce topology from the space of all connections) and this above bijection is actually a homeomorphism.
Then, finding a path connecting left and right flat connection and is equivalent to finding a path between left and right trivializations and of . Consider the 'difference' of two trivializations: that fixes the slot, and is linear on the slot. Hence we get a family of maps such that is the constant map to , and is the adjoint representation . Then the question boils down to: is the adjoint representation homotopic to the constant map?
We claim that, in the case (or more generally compact semi-simple Lie group), there is a non-trivial , such that is the Cartan 3-form (up to a constant) (see Nicolascu page 280, Prop 7.4.21, or Homework 12). Since the cohomology class of should be invariant, hence in , which contradict with being a constant map. Thus, the map is not homotopic to a constant map.
The form on can be defined as following
Some of you tried to construct a linear interpolation of connections , and find that it is not flat for . That is only circusmstancial evidence that there are no path within flat connections between and , but not a proof.
This final has some challenging problems, e.g. problem 4-b, 5-b, 7. Hence it is OK if you find it hard, or cannot do all the problems. I hope this final is thought-provoking enough. And I also hope this class serves as a beginning as a journey to the wonderful subject. Eventually, what matters is the discussion, the examples, the intuitions and the guesses (and of course theorems and proofs).