Boundary of the set of points away from manifold is a hypersurface












1












$begingroup$


(This is part of Problem 6-6 from Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds textbook.)




Suppose $Msubset mathbb{R}^n$ is a compact embedded submanifold. For
any $epsilon>0$, let $M_epsilon$ be the set of all points in
$mathbb{R}^n$ whose distance from $M$ is less than $epsilon$. Show
that for sufficiently small $epsilon$, $partial M_epsilon$ is a
compact embedded hypersurface in $mathbb{R}^n$.




I thought to use the tubular neighbourhood theorem (since we have an embedded submanifold) and showing for some sufficiently small tubular neighbourhood, maybe we can prove that the boundary of the tubular neighbourhood is an embedded $(n-1)$-dimensional embedded manifold (and relate $epsilon$ to the distance function in the definition of a tubular neighbourhood). However, I have no idea how to prove that (or if it's even the right approach).



For reference, I'm using Lee's definition of a tubular neighbourhood. That is, $E(V)$ where $E(x,v)=x+v$ and $V={(x,v)in NM : |v|<delta(x)}$ for positive continuous $delta: M rightarrow mathbb{R}$.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    1












    $begingroup$


    (This is part of Problem 6-6 from Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds textbook.)




    Suppose $Msubset mathbb{R}^n$ is a compact embedded submanifold. For
    any $epsilon>0$, let $M_epsilon$ be the set of all points in
    $mathbb{R}^n$ whose distance from $M$ is less than $epsilon$. Show
    that for sufficiently small $epsilon$, $partial M_epsilon$ is a
    compact embedded hypersurface in $mathbb{R}^n$.




    I thought to use the tubular neighbourhood theorem (since we have an embedded submanifold) and showing for some sufficiently small tubular neighbourhood, maybe we can prove that the boundary of the tubular neighbourhood is an embedded $(n-1)$-dimensional embedded manifold (and relate $epsilon$ to the distance function in the definition of a tubular neighbourhood). However, I have no idea how to prove that (or if it's even the right approach).



    For reference, I'm using Lee's definition of a tubular neighbourhood. That is, $E(V)$ where $E(x,v)=x+v$ and $V={(x,v)in NM : |v|<delta(x)}$ for positive continuous $delta: M rightarrow mathbb{R}$.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1


      2



      $begingroup$


      (This is part of Problem 6-6 from Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds textbook.)




      Suppose $Msubset mathbb{R}^n$ is a compact embedded submanifold. For
      any $epsilon>0$, let $M_epsilon$ be the set of all points in
      $mathbb{R}^n$ whose distance from $M$ is less than $epsilon$. Show
      that for sufficiently small $epsilon$, $partial M_epsilon$ is a
      compact embedded hypersurface in $mathbb{R}^n$.




      I thought to use the tubular neighbourhood theorem (since we have an embedded submanifold) and showing for some sufficiently small tubular neighbourhood, maybe we can prove that the boundary of the tubular neighbourhood is an embedded $(n-1)$-dimensional embedded manifold (and relate $epsilon$ to the distance function in the definition of a tubular neighbourhood). However, I have no idea how to prove that (or if it's even the right approach).



      For reference, I'm using Lee's definition of a tubular neighbourhood. That is, $E(V)$ where $E(x,v)=x+v$ and $V={(x,v)in NM : |v|<delta(x)}$ for positive continuous $delta: M rightarrow mathbb{R}$.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      (This is part of Problem 6-6 from Lee's Introduction to Smooth Manifolds textbook.)




      Suppose $Msubset mathbb{R}^n$ is a compact embedded submanifold. For
      any $epsilon>0$, let $M_epsilon$ be the set of all points in
      $mathbb{R}^n$ whose distance from $M$ is less than $epsilon$. Show
      that for sufficiently small $epsilon$, $partial M_epsilon$ is a
      compact embedded hypersurface in $mathbb{R}^n$.




      I thought to use the tubular neighbourhood theorem (since we have an embedded submanifold) and showing for some sufficiently small tubular neighbourhood, maybe we can prove that the boundary of the tubular neighbourhood is an embedded $(n-1)$-dimensional embedded manifold (and relate $epsilon$ to the distance function in the definition of a tubular neighbourhood). However, I have no idea how to prove that (or if it's even the right approach).



      For reference, I'm using Lee's definition of a tubular neighbourhood. That is, $E(V)$ where $E(x,v)=x+v$ and $V={(x,v)in NM : |v|<delta(x)}$ for positive continuous $delta: M rightarrow mathbb{R}$.







      differential-geometry manifolds smooth-manifolds






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Dec 9 '18 at 7:06









      Frederic Chopin

      321111




      321111










      asked Dec 7 '18 at 0:20









      FunctionalDefectFunctionalDefect

      255




      255






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1





          +50







          $begingroup$

          As you suggest, using the tubular neighborhood theorem is the right idea.



          Summary. The core point is as follows: Let $y in mathbb{R}^n$ have $d(y,M) = ell$. Then since $M$ is compact there exists a point $x in M$ with $d(y,x) = ell$, and the line segment from $x$ to $y$ in $mathbb{R}^n$ intersects $M$ orthogonally at $x$. (This last fact is a multivariable calculus exercise: The gradient of $d(cdot, y)$ is orthogonal to $M$ at any minimum.) This lets you relate "distance from $M$" to a condition on the normal bundle of $M$, which lets you use tubular neighborhoods.



          I'll flesh out some details without being too careful, but I think everything below is fairly rote given the above:



          Review of stuff in Lee. Some reminders so that we're on the same page: Let $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ be an embedded submanifold. The points of the normal bundle $NM$ of $M$ are pairs $(x, v)$ with $x in M$ and $v in T_{x}mathbb{R}^n$ normal to $M$. There's a map $E : NM to mathbb{R}^n$ given by $E(x,v) = x+v$.



          Suppose $f: M to mathbb{R}$ is a positive continuous function on $M$ and let $V$ be the subset of $NM$ given by
          $$
          V = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < f(x) rbrace.
          $$

          If $U = E(V)$ is open and $E$ restricts to a diffeomorphism $V cong U$, then $U$ is called a tubular neighborhood of $M$ in $mathbb{R}^n$. Lee proves (it is Theorem 10.19 in my copy) that every embedded $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ has a tubular neighborhood.



          Notation. For any $delta > 0$ we define $V_delta subset NM$ by
          $$
          V_delta = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < delta rbrace.
          $$

          When $E$ gives a diffeomorphism of $V_delta$ onto an open subset of $mathbb{R}^n$, we denote by $U_delta$ the image of $V_delta$.



          When $M$ is compact, any $f$ giving a tubular neighborhood has a positive minimum, and so there exists a constant $delta > 0$ such that $M$ has a tubular neighborhood of the form $U_delta = E(V_delta)$.



          Let $epsilon < delta$.



          The Main Point. $M_epsilon$ is contained within $U_delta = E(V_delta)$. This follows from the discussion in our summary at the top; if $x$ is a point in $M$ closest to $y$, then $y$ is the image under $E$ of $(x, y-x)$, which is in $V_delta$.



          In fact, this argument shows that $M_epsilon = U_epsilon$.



          It follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the image under $E$ of the set
          $$
          partial V_epsilon = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| = epsilon rbrace.
          $$

          Since $partial V_epsilon$ is clearly an embedded submanifold of $V_delta$, and $E$ is a diffeomorphism from $V_delta$ onto $U_delta$, it follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is an embedded submanifold of $U_delta$ (and hence of $mathbb{R}^n$).



          Similarly, since $partial V_epsilon$ has codimension $1$, we see that $partial M_epsilon$ does as well.



          (In fact this shows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the diffeomorpic to the bundle of unit $(n-m)$-spheres in $NM$; we can picture $partial M_epsilon$ as a "hollow tube" around $M$ whose "cross-section" at any $x in M$ is an $(n-m)$-sphere. It follows easily from this that $partial M_epsilon$ is compact.)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you so much for your help!
            $endgroup$
            – Frederic Chopin
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:14










          • $begingroup$
            Very thorough answer, thanks
            $endgroup$
            – FunctionalDefect
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:16











          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
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3029266%2fboundary-of-the-set-of-points-away-from-manifold-is-a-hypersurface%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          1





          +50







          $begingroup$

          As you suggest, using the tubular neighborhood theorem is the right idea.



          Summary. The core point is as follows: Let $y in mathbb{R}^n$ have $d(y,M) = ell$. Then since $M$ is compact there exists a point $x in M$ with $d(y,x) = ell$, and the line segment from $x$ to $y$ in $mathbb{R}^n$ intersects $M$ orthogonally at $x$. (This last fact is a multivariable calculus exercise: The gradient of $d(cdot, y)$ is orthogonal to $M$ at any minimum.) This lets you relate "distance from $M$" to a condition on the normal bundle of $M$, which lets you use tubular neighborhoods.



          I'll flesh out some details without being too careful, but I think everything below is fairly rote given the above:



          Review of stuff in Lee. Some reminders so that we're on the same page: Let $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ be an embedded submanifold. The points of the normal bundle $NM$ of $M$ are pairs $(x, v)$ with $x in M$ and $v in T_{x}mathbb{R}^n$ normal to $M$. There's a map $E : NM to mathbb{R}^n$ given by $E(x,v) = x+v$.



          Suppose $f: M to mathbb{R}$ is a positive continuous function on $M$ and let $V$ be the subset of $NM$ given by
          $$
          V = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < f(x) rbrace.
          $$

          If $U = E(V)$ is open and $E$ restricts to a diffeomorphism $V cong U$, then $U$ is called a tubular neighborhood of $M$ in $mathbb{R}^n$. Lee proves (it is Theorem 10.19 in my copy) that every embedded $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ has a tubular neighborhood.



          Notation. For any $delta > 0$ we define $V_delta subset NM$ by
          $$
          V_delta = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < delta rbrace.
          $$

          When $E$ gives a diffeomorphism of $V_delta$ onto an open subset of $mathbb{R}^n$, we denote by $U_delta$ the image of $V_delta$.



          When $M$ is compact, any $f$ giving a tubular neighborhood has a positive minimum, and so there exists a constant $delta > 0$ such that $M$ has a tubular neighborhood of the form $U_delta = E(V_delta)$.



          Let $epsilon < delta$.



          The Main Point. $M_epsilon$ is contained within $U_delta = E(V_delta)$. This follows from the discussion in our summary at the top; if $x$ is a point in $M$ closest to $y$, then $y$ is the image under $E$ of $(x, y-x)$, which is in $V_delta$.



          In fact, this argument shows that $M_epsilon = U_epsilon$.



          It follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the image under $E$ of the set
          $$
          partial V_epsilon = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| = epsilon rbrace.
          $$

          Since $partial V_epsilon$ is clearly an embedded submanifold of $V_delta$, and $E$ is a diffeomorphism from $V_delta$ onto $U_delta$, it follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is an embedded submanifold of $U_delta$ (and hence of $mathbb{R}^n$).



          Similarly, since $partial V_epsilon$ has codimension $1$, we see that $partial M_epsilon$ does as well.



          (In fact this shows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the diffeomorpic to the bundle of unit $(n-m)$-spheres in $NM$; we can picture $partial M_epsilon$ as a "hollow tube" around $M$ whose "cross-section" at any $x in M$ is an $(n-m)$-sphere. It follows easily from this that $partial M_epsilon$ is compact.)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you so much for your help!
            $endgroup$
            – Frederic Chopin
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:14










          • $begingroup$
            Very thorough answer, thanks
            $endgroup$
            – FunctionalDefect
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:16
















          1





          +50







          $begingroup$

          As you suggest, using the tubular neighborhood theorem is the right idea.



          Summary. The core point is as follows: Let $y in mathbb{R}^n$ have $d(y,M) = ell$. Then since $M$ is compact there exists a point $x in M$ with $d(y,x) = ell$, and the line segment from $x$ to $y$ in $mathbb{R}^n$ intersects $M$ orthogonally at $x$. (This last fact is a multivariable calculus exercise: The gradient of $d(cdot, y)$ is orthogonal to $M$ at any minimum.) This lets you relate "distance from $M$" to a condition on the normal bundle of $M$, which lets you use tubular neighborhoods.



          I'll flesh out some details without being too careful, but I think everything below is fairly rote given the above:



          Review of stuff in Lee. Some reminders so that we're on the same page: Let $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ be an embedded submanifold. The points of the normal bundle $NM$ of $M$ are pairs $(x, v)$ with $x in M$ and $v in T_{x}mathbb{R}^n$ normal to $M$. There's a map $E : NM to mathbb{R}^n$ given by $E(x,v) = x+v$.



          Suppose $f: M to mathbb{R}$ is a positive continuous function on $M$ and let $V$ be the subset of $NM$ given by
          $$
          V = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < f(x) rbrace.
          $$

          If $U = E(V)$ is open and $E$ restricts to a diffeomorphism $V cong U$, then $U$ is called a tubular neighborhood of $M$ in $mathbb{R}^n$. Lee proves (it is Theorem 10.19 in my copy) that every embedded $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ has a tubular neighborhood.



          Notation. For any $delta > 0$ we define $V_delta subset NM$ by
          $$
          V_delta = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < delta rbrace.
          $$

          When $E$ gives a diffeomorphism of $V_delta$ onto an open subset of $mathbb{R}^n$, we denote by $U_delta$ the image of $V_delta$.



          When $M$ is compact, any $f$ giving a tubular neighborhood has a positive minimum, and so there exists a constant $delta > 0$ such that $M$ has a tubular neighborhood of the form $U_delta = E(V_delta)$.



          Let $epsilon < delta$.



          The Main Point. $M_epsilon$ is contained within $U_delta = E(V_delta)$. This follows from the discussion in our summary at the top; if $x$ is a point in $M$ closest to $y$, then $y$ is the image under $E$ of $(x, y-x)$, which is in $V_delta$.



          In fact, this argument shows that $M_epsilon = U_epsilon$.



          It follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the image under $E$ of the set
          $$
          partial V_epsilon = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| = epsilon rbrace.
          $$

          Since $partial V_epsilon$ is clearly an embedded submanifold of $V_delta$, and $E$ is a diffeomorphism from $V_delta$ onto $U_delta$, it follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is an embedded submanifold of $U_delta$ (and hence of $mathbb{R}^n$).



          Similarly, since $partial V_epsilon$ has codimension $1$, we see that $partial M_epsilon$ does as well.



          (In fact this shows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the diffeomorpic to the bundle of unit $(n-m)$-spheres in $NM$; we can picture $partial M_epsilon$ as a "hollow tube" around $M$ whose "cross-section" at any $x in M$ is an $(n-m)$-sphere. It follows easily from this that $partial M_epsilon$ is compact.)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you so much for your help!
            $endgroup$
            – Frederic Chopin
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:14










          • $begingroup$
            Very thorough answer, thanks
            $endgroup$
            – FunctionalDefect
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:16














          1





          +50







          1





          +50



          1




          +50



          $begingroup$

          As you suggest, using the tubular neighborhood theorem is the right idea.



          Summary. The core point is as follows: Let $y in mathbb{R}^n$ have $d(y,M) = ell$. Then since $M$ is compact there exists a point $x in M$ with $d(y,x) = ell$, and the line segment from $x$ to $y$ in $mathbb{R}^n$ intersects $M$ orthogonally at $x$. (This last fact is a multivariable calculus exercise: The gradient of $d(cdot, y)$ is orthogonal to $M$ at any minimum.) This lets you relate "distance from $M$" to a condition on the normal bundle of $M$, which lets you use tubular neighborhoods.



          I'll flesh out some details without being too careful, but I think everything below is fairly rote given the above:



          Review of stuff in Lee. Some reminders so that we're on the same page: Let $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ be an embedded submanifold. The points of the normal bundle $NM$ of $M$ are pairs $(x, v)$ with $x in M$ and $v in T_{x}mathbb{R}^n$ normal to $M$. There's a map $E : NM to mathbb{R}^n$ given by $E(x,v) = x+v$.



          Suppose $f: M to mathbb{R}$ is a positive continuous function on $M$ and let $V$ be the subset of $NM$ given by
          $$
          V = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < f(x) rbrace.
          $$

          If $U = E(V)$ is open and $E$ restricts to a diffeomorphism $V cong U$, then $U$ is called a tubular neighborhood of $M$ in $mathbb{R}^n$. Lee proves (it is Theorem 10.19 in my copy) that every embedded $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ has a tubular neighborhood.



          Notation. For any $delta > 0$ we define $V_delta subset NM$ by
          $$
          V_delta = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < delta rbrace.
          $$

          When $E$ gives a diffeomorphism of $V_delta$ onto an open subset of $mathbb{R}^n$, we denote by $U_delta$ the image of $V_delta$.



          When $M$ is compact, any $f$ giving a tubular neighborhood has a positive minimum, and so there exists a constant $delta > 0$ such that $M$ has a tubular neighborhood of the form $U_delta = E(V_delta)$.



          Let $epsilon < delta$.



          The Main Point. $M_epsilon$ is contained within $U_delta = E(V_delta)$. This follows from the discussion in our summary at the top; if $x$ is a point in $M$ closest to $y$, then $y$ is the image under $E$ of $(x, y-x)$, which is in $V_delta$.



          In fact, this argument shows that $M_epsilon = U_epsilon$.



          It follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the image under $E$ of the set
          $$
          partial V_epsilon = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| = epsilon rbrace.
          $$

          Since $partial V_epsilon$ is clearly an embedded submanifold of $V_delta$, and $E$ is a diffeomorphism from $V_delta$ onto $U_delta$, it follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is an embedded submanifold of $U_delta$ (and hence of $mathbb{R}^n$).



          Similarly, since $partial V_epsilon$ has codimension $1$, we see that $partial M_epsilon$ does as well.



          (In fact this shows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the diffeomorpic to the bundle of unit $(n-m)$-spheres in $NM$; we can picture $partial M_epsilon$ as a "hollow tube" around $M$ whose "cross-section" at any $x in M$ is an $(n-m)$-sphere. It follows easily from this that $partial M_epsilon$ is compact.)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          As you suggest, using the tubular neighborhood theorem is the right idea.



          Summary. The core point is as follows: Let $y in mathbb{R}^n$ have $d(y,M) = ell$. Then since $M$ is compact there exists a point $x in M$ with $d(y,x) = ell$, and the line segment from $x$ to $y$ in $mathbb{R}^n$ intersects $M$ orthogonally at $x$. (This last fact is a multivariable calculus exercise: The gradient of $d(cdot, y)$ is orthogonal to $M$ at any minimum.) This lets you relate "distance from $M$" to a condition on the normal bundle of $M$, which lets you use tubular neighborhoods.



          I'll flesh out some details without being too careful, but I think everything below is fairly rote given the above:



          Review of stuff in Lee. Some reminders so that we're on the same page: Let $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ be an embedded submanifold. The points of the normal bundle $NM$ of $M$ are pairs $(x, v)$ with $x in M$ and $v in T_{x}mathbb{R}^n$ normal to $M$. There's a map $E : NM to mathbb{R}^n$ given by $E(x,v) = x+v$.



          Suppose $f: M to mathbb{R}$ is a positive continuous function on $M$ and let $V$ be the subset of $NM$ given by
          $$
          V = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < f(x) rbrace.
          $$

          If $U = E(V)$ is open and $E$ restricts to a diffeomorphism $V cong U$, then $U$ is called a tubular neighborhood of $M$ in $mathbb{R}^n$. Lee proves (it is Theorem 10.19 in my copy) that every embedded $M subseteq mathbb{R}^n$ has a tubular neighborhood.



          Notation. For any $delta > 0$ we define $V_delta subset NM$ by
          $$
          V_delta = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| < delta rbrace.
          $$

          When $E$ gives a diffeomorphism of $V_delta$ onto an open subset of $mathbb{R}^n$, we denote by $U_delta$ the image of $V_delta$.



          When $M$ is compact, any $f$ giving a tubular neighborhood has a positive minimum, and so there exists a constant $delta > 0$ such that $M$ has a tubular neighborhood of the form $U_delta = E(V_delta)$.



          Let $epsilon < delta$.



          The Main Point. $M_epsilon$ is contained within $U_delta = E(V_delta)$. This follows from the discussion in our summary at the top; if $x$ is a point in $M$ closest to $y$, then $y$ is the image under $E$ of $(x, y-x)$, which is in $V_delta$.



          In fact, this argument shows that $M_epsilon = U_epsilon$.



          It follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the image under $E$ of the set
          $$
          partial V_epsilon = lbrace (x, v) in NM : |v| = epsilon rbrace.
          $$

          Since $partial V_epsilon$ is clearly an embedded submanifold of $V_delta$, and $E$ is a diffeomorphism from $V_delta$ onto $U_delta$, it follows that $partial M_epsilon$ is an embedded submanifold of $U_delta$ (and hence of $mathbb{R}^n$).



          Similarly, since $partial V_epsilon$ has codimension $1$, we see that $partial M_epsilon$ does as well.



          (In fact this shows that $partial M_epsilon$ is the diffeomorpic to the bundle of unit $(n-m)$-spheres in $NM$; we can picture $partial M_epsilon$ as a "hollow tube" around $M$ whose "cross-section" at any $x in M$ is an $(n-m)$-sphere. It follows easily from this that $partial M_epsilon$ is compact.)







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 10 '18 at 13:28









          mollyerinmollyerin

          2,68576




          2,68576












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you so much for your help!
            $endgroup$
            – Frederic Chopin
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:14










          • $begingroup$
            Very thorough answer, thanks
            $endgroup$
            – FunctionalDefect
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:16


















          • $begingroup$
            Thank you so much for your help!
            $endgroup$
            – Frederic Chopin
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:14










          • $begingroup$
            Very thorough answer, thanks
            $endgroup$
            – FunctionalDefect
            Dec 10 '18 at 22:16
















          $begingroup$
          Thank you so much for your help!
          $endgroup$
          – Frederic Chopin
          Dec 10 '18 at 22:14




          $begingroup$
          Thank you so much for your help!
          $endgroup$
          – Frederic Chopin
          Dec 10 '18 at 22:14












          $begingroup$
          Very thorough answer, thanks
          $endgroup$
          – FunctionalDefect
          Dec 10 '18 at 22:16




          $begingroup$
          Very thorough answer, thanks
          $endgroup$
          – FunctionalDefect
          Dec 10 '18 at 22:16


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          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.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3029266%2fboundary-of-the-set-of-points-away-from-manifold-is-a-hypersurface%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          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







          Popular posts from this blog

          Mont Emei

          Province de Neuquén

          Journaliste