Mixing
Can the Gauss-Bonnet theorem be proven from Stokes's theorem?
$begingroup$
In a comment to this question, John Ma claims that the Gauss-Bonnet theorem can be proven from Stokes's theorem, but does not explain how.
For two dimensions, Stokes's theorem says that for any smooth 2-manifold (i.e. surface) $S$ and one-form $omega$ defined on $S$,
$$oint_{partial S} omega = iint_S domega.$$
I could vaguely imagine coming up with some kind of one-form $omega$ that depends on the metric, such that (a) along the boundary curve $omega$ maps the boundary tangent vector to the geodesic curvature and (b) in the surface interior $ast domega$ equals the Gaussian curvature. (In more concrete vector-field language, this corresponds to a vector field $vec{omega}$ defined over the surface such that (a) on the boundary curve $vec{omega} cdot dvec{l}$ equals the curve's geodesic curvature and (b) in the surface interior $(vec{nabla} times vec{omega}) cdot dvec{S}$ equals the Gaussian curvature.) This would reproduce part of the Gauss-Bonnet formula, but how could you possibly get out the Euler characteristic term?
differential-geometry algebraic-topology stokes-theorem
asked Feb 1 at 4:54
tparkertparker
1,941834
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In a comment to this question, John Ma claims that the Gauss-Bonnet theorem can be proven from Stokes's theorem, but does not explain how.
For two dimensions, Stokes's theorem says that for any smooth 2-manifold (i.e. surface) $S$ and one-form $omega$ defined on $S$,
$$oint_{partial S} omega = iint_S domega.$$
I could vaguely imagine coming up with some kind of one-form $omega$ that depends on the metric, such that (a) along the boundary curve $omega$ maps the boundary tangent vector to the geodesic curvature and (b) in the surface interior $ast domega$ equals the Gaussian curvature. (In more concrete vector-field language, this corresponds to a vector field $vec{omega}$ defined over the surface such that (a) on the boundary curve $vec{omega} cdot dvec{l}$ equals the curve's geodesic curvature and (b) in the surface interior $(vec{nabla} times vec{omega}) cdot dvec{S}$ equals the Gaussian curvature.) This would reproduce part of the Gauss-Bonnet formula, but how could you possibly get out the Euler characteristic term?
differential-geometry algebraic-topology stokes-theorem
asked Feb 1 at 4:54
tparkertparker
1,941834
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
The proof given by Chern in "A simple intrinsic proof of the Gauss-Bonnet formula for closed Riemannian manifolds" is based on Stokes' theorem.
$endgroup$
– JHF
Feb 1 at 13:24
$begingroup$
For the 2-dimensional G-B theorem, you can see (most of) the argument on p. 105 of my differential geometry text. The local-to-global argument to get to $chi(M)$ is the standard triangulation argument. If you recognize $chi$ as the sum of the indices of a vector field, you can turn the proof into a direct argument, taking out little balls $B$ around each zero and seeing that $int_{partial B} baromega_{12}$ gives the index of the vector field.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Feb 1 at 17:12
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In a comment to this question, John Ma claims that the Gauss-Bonnet theorem can be proven from Stokes's theorem, but does not explain how.
For two dimensions, Stokes's theorem says that for any smooth 2-manifold (i.e. surface) $S$ and one-form $omega$ defined on $S$,
$$oint_{partial S} omega = iint_S domega.$$
I could vaguely imagine coming up with some kind of one-form $omega$ that depends on the metric, such that (a) along the boundary curve $omega$ maps the boundary tangent vector to the geodesic curvature and (b) in the surface interior $ast domega$ equals the Gaussian curvature. (In more concrete vector-field language, this corresponds to a vector field $vec{omega}$ defined over the surface such that (a) on the boundary curve $vec{omega} cdot dvec{l}$ equals the curve's geodesic curvature and (b) in the surface interior $(vec{nabla} times vec{omega}) cdot dvec{S}$ equals the Gaussian curvature.) This would reproduce part of the Gauss-Bonnet formula, but how could you possibly get out the Euler characteristic term?
differential-geometry algebraic-topology stokes-theorem
asked Feb 1 at 4:54
tparkertparker
1,941834
$endgroup$
In a comment to this question, John Ma claims that the Gauss-Bonnet theorem can be proven from Stokes's theorem, but does not explain how.
For two dimensions, Stokes's theorem says that for any smooth 2-manifold (i.e. surface) $S$ and one-form $omega$ defined on $S$,
$$oint_{partial S} omega = iint_S domega.$$
I could vaguely imagine coming up with some kind of one-form $omega$ that depends on the metric, such that (a) along the boundary curve $omega$ maps the boundary tangent vector to the geodesic curvature and (b) in the surface interior $ast domega$ equals the Gaussian curvature. (In more concrete vector-field language, this corresponds to a vector field $vec{omega}$ defined over the surface such that (a) on the boundary curve $vec{omega} cdot dvec{l}$ equals the curve's geodesic curvature and (b) in the surface interior $(vec{nabla} times vec{omega}) cdot dvec{S}$ equals the Gaussian curvature.) This would reproduce part of the Gauss-Bonnet formula, but how could you possibly get out the Euler characteristic term?
differential-geometry algebraic-topology stokes-theorem
differential-geometry algebraic-topology stokes-theorem
asked Feb 1 at 4:54
tparkertparker
1,941834
asked Feb 1 at 4:54
tparkertparker
1,941834
edited Feb 1 at 13:59
tparker
asked Feb 1 at 4:54
tparkertparker
1,941834
asked Feb 1 at 4:54
tparkertparker
1,941834
asked Feb 1 at 4:54
tparkertparker
1,941834
1,941834
3
$begingroup$
The proof given by Chern in "A simple intrinsic proof of the Gauss-Bonnet formula for closed Riemannian manifolds" is based on Stokes' theorem.
$endgroup$
– JHF
Feb 1 at 13:24
$begingroup$
For the 2-dimensional G-B theorem, you can see (most of) the argument on p. 105 of my differential geometry text. The local-to-global argument to get to $chi(M)$ is the standard triangulation argument. If you recognize $chi$ as the sum of the indices of a vector field, you can turn the proof into a direct argument, taking out little balls $B$ around each zero and seeing that $int_{partial B} baromega_{12}$ gives the index of the vector field.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Feb 1 at 17:12
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
The proof given by Chern in "A simple intrinsic proof of the Gauss-Bonnet formula for closed Riemannian manifolds" is based on Stokes' theorem.
$endgroup$
– JHF
Feb 1 at 13:24
$begingroup$
For the 2-dimensional G-B theorem, you can see (most of) the argument on p. 105 of my differential geometry text. The local-to-global argument to get to $chi(M)$ is the standard triangulation argument. If you recognize $chi$ as the sum of the indices of a vector field, you can turn the proof into a direct argument, taking out little balls $B$ around each zero and seeing that $int_{partial B} baromega_{12}$ gives the index of the vector field.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Feb 1 at 17:12
3
3
$begingroup$
The proof given by Chern in "A simple intrinsic proof of the Gauss-Bonnet formula for closed Riemannian manifolds" is based on Stokes' theorem.
$endgroup$
– JHF
Feb 1 at 13:24
$begingroup$
The proof given by Chern in "A simple intrinsic proof of the Gauss-Bonnet formula for closed Riemannian manifolds" is based on Stokes' theorem.
$endgroup$
– JHF
Feb 1 at 13:24
$begingroup$
For the 2-dimensional G-B theorem, you can see (most of) the argument on p. 105 of my differential geometry text. The local-to-global argument to get to $chi(M)$ is the standard triangulation argument. If you recognize $chi$ as the sum of the indices of a vector field, you can turn the proof into a direct argument, taking out little balls $B$ around each zero and seeing that $int_{partial B} baromega_{12}$ gives the index of the vector field.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Feb 1 at 17:12
$begingroup$
For the 2-dimensional G-B theorem, you can see (most of) the argument on p. 105 of my differential geometry text. The local-to-global argument to get to $chi(M)$ is the standard triangulation argument. If you recognize $chi$ as the sum of the indices of a vector field, you can turn the proof into a direct argument, taking out little balls $B$ around each zero and seeing that $int_{partial B} baromega_{12}$ gives the index of the vector field.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Feb 1 at 17:12
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
See Differential Forms and Applications (by Manfredo P. Do Carmo ) chapter 6 section 1. The proof of Gauss-Bonnet's Theorem presented by Do Carmo in his text is essentially the same as given by S.S. Chern and use the Stokes' theorem. The original proof of S.S. Chern is found here.
answered Feb 1 at 20:45
MathOverviewMathOverview
8,94743164
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Could you gist it for me? I don't have access to the book or the paper.
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 2:57
$begingroup$
@tparker I only have access to the Portuguese version of the Do Carmo book I bought recently.
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:42
$begingroup$
For paper see the link. scholar.google.com.br/…
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:45
$begingroup$
I'm afraid this proof is too advanced for me to understand :(
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 15:11
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3095843%2fcan-the-gauss-bonnet-theorem-be-proven-from-stokess-theorem%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
$begingroup$
See Differential Forms and Applications (by Manfredo P. Do Carmo ) chapter 6 section 1. The proof of Gauss-Bonnet's Theorem presented by Do Carmo in his text is essentially the same as given by S.S. Chern and use the Stokes' theorem. The original proof of S.S. Chern is found here.
answered Feb 1 at 20:45
MathOverviewMathOverview
8,94743164
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Could you gist it for me? I don't have access to the book or the paper.
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 2:57
$begingroup$
@tparker I only have access to the Portuguese version of the Do Carmo book I bought recently.
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:42
$begingroup$
For paper see the link. scholar.google.com.br/…
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:45
$begingroup$
I'm afraid this proof is too advanced for me to understand :(
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 15:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
See Differential Forms and Applications (by Manfredo P. Do Carmo ) chapter 6 section 1. The proof of Gauss-Bonnet's Theorem presented by Do Carmo in his text is essentially the same as given by S.S. Chern and use the Stokes' theorem. The original proof of S.S. Chern is found here.
answered Feb 1 at 20:45
MathOverviewMathOverview
8,94743164
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Could you gist it for me? I don't have access to the book or the paper.
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 2:57
$begingroup$
@tparker I only have access to the Portuguese version of the Do Carmo book I bought recently.
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:42
$begingroup$
For paper see the link. scholar.google.com.br/…
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:45
$begingroup$
I'm afraid this proof is too advanced for me to understand :(
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 15:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
See Differential Forms and Applications (by Manfredo P. Do Carmo ) chapter 6 section 1. The proof of Gauss-Bonnet's Theorem presented by Do Carmo in his text is essentially the same as given by S.S. Chern and use the Stokes' theorem. The original proof of S.S. Chern is found here.
answered Feb 1 at 20:45
MathOverviewMathOverview
8,94743164
$endgroup$
See Differential Forms and Applications (by Manfredo P. Do Carmo ) chapter 6 section 1. The proof of Gauss-Bonnet's Theorem presented by Do Carmo in his text is essentially the same as given by S.S. Chern and use the Stokes' theorem. The original proof of S.S. Chern is found here.
answered Feb 1 at 20:45
MathOverviewMathOverview
8,94743164
edited Feb 1 at 21:10
answered Feb 1 at 20:45
MathOverviewMathOverview
8,94743164
answered Feb 1 at 20:45
MathOverviewMathOverview
8,94743164
answered Feb 1 at 20:45
MathOverviewMathOverview
8,94743164
8,94743164
$begingroup$
Could you gist it for me? I don't have access to the book or the paper.
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 2:57
$begingroup$
@tparker I only have access to the Portuguese version of the Do Carmo book I bought recently.
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:42
$begingroup$
For paper see the link. scholar.google.com.br/…
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:45
$begingroup$
I'm afraid this proof is too advanced for me to understand :(
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 15:11
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Could you gist it for me? I don't have access to the book or the paper.
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 2:57
$begingroup$
@tparker I only have access to the Portuguese version of the Do Carmo book I bought recently.
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:42
$begingroup$
For paper see the link. scholar.google.com.br/…
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:45
$begingroup$
I'm afraid this proof is too advanced for me to understand :(
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 15:11
$begingroup$
Could you gist it for me? I don't have access to the book or the paper.
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 2:57
$begingroup$
Could you gist it for me? I don't have access to the book or the paper.
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 2:57
$begingroup$
@tparker I only have access to the Portuguese version of the Do Carmo book I bought recently.
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:42
$begingroup$
@tparker I only have access to the Portuguese version of the Do Carmo book I bought recently.
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:42
$begingroup$
For paper see the link. scholar.google.com.br/…
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:45
$begingroup$
For paper see the link. scholar.google.com.br/…
$endgroup$
– MathOverview
Feb 2 at 11:45
$begingroup$
I'm afraid this proof is too advanced for me to understand :(
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 15:11
$begingroup$
I'm afraid this proof is too advanced for me to understand :(
$endgroup$
– tparker
Feb 2 at 15:11
add a comment |
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.
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3095843%2fcan-the-gauss-bonnet-theorem-be-proven-from-stokess-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
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
3
$begingroup$
The proof given by Chern in "A simple intrinsic proof of the Gauss-Bonnet formula for closed Riemannian manifolds" is based on Stokes' theorem.
$endgroup$
– JHF
Feb 1 at 13:24
$begingroup$
For the 2-dimensional G-B theorem, you can see (most of) the argument on p. 105 of my differential geometry text. The local-to-global argument to get to $chi(M)$ is the standard triangulation argument. If you recognize $chi$ as the sum of the indices of a vector field, you can turn the proof into a direct argument, taking out little balls $B$ around each zero and seeing that $int_{partial B} baromega_{12}$ gives the index of the vector field.
$endgroup$
– Ted Shifrin
Feb 1 at 17:12