Harmonic coordinates

Last updated January 30, 2024

In Riemannian geometry, a branch of mathematics, harmonic coordinates are a certain kind of coordinate chart on a smooth manifold, determined by a Riemannian metric on the manifold. They are useful in many problems of geometric analysis due to their regularity properties.

In two dimensions, certain harmonic coordinates known as isothermal coordinates have been studied since the early 1800s. Harmonic coordinates in higher dimensions were developed initially in the context of Lorentzian geometry and general relativity by Albert Einstein and Cornelius Lanczos (see harmonic coordinate condition).^[1] Following the work of Dennis DeTurck and Jerry Kazdan in 1981, they began to play a significant role in the geometric analysis literature, although Idzhad Sabitov and S.Z. Šefel had made the same discovery five years earlier.^[2]

Definition

Let $(M, g)$ be a Riemannian manifold of dimension $n$ . One says that a coordinate chart $(x 1, ..., x n)$ , defined on an open subset $U$ of $M$ , is harmonic if each individual coordinate function $x i$ is a harmonic function on $U$ .^[3] That is, one requires that

\Delta ^{g}x^{i}=0.\,

where $∆ g$ is the Laplace–Beltrami operator. Trivially, the coordinate system is harmonic if and only if, as a map $U \to ℝ n$ , the coordinates are a harmonic map. A direct computation with the local definition of the Laplace-Beltrami operator shows that $(x 1, ..., x n)$ is a harmonic coordinate chart if and only if

\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{n}g^{ij}\Gamma _{ij}^{k}=0{\text{ for all }}k=1,\ldots ,n,

in which $Γ k ij$ are the Christoffel symbols of the given chart.^[4] Relative to a fixed "background" coordinate chart $(V, y)$ , one can view $(x 1, ..., x n)$ as a collection of functions $x \circ y -1$ on an open subset of Euclidean space. The metric tensor relative to $x$ is obtained from the metric tensor relative to $y$ by a local calculation having to do with the first derivatives of $x \circ y -1$ , and hence the Christoffel symbols relative to $x$ are calculated from second derivatives of $x \circ y -1$ . So both definitions of harmonic coordinates, as given above, have the qualitative character of having to do with second-order partial differential equations for the coordinate functions.

Using the definition of the Christoffel symbols, the above formula is equivalent to

2\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{n}g^{ij}{\frac {\partial g_{jk}}{\partial x^{i}}}=\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{n}g^{ij}{\frac {\partial g_{ij}}{\partial x^{k}}}.

Existence and basic theory

Harmonic coordinates always exist (locally), a result which follows easily from standard results on the existence and regularity of solutions of elliptic partial differential equations.^[5] In particular, the equation $∆ g u j = 0$ has a solution in some open set around any given point $p$ , such that $u (p)$ and $du p$ are both prescribed.

The basic regularity theorem concerning the metric in harmonic coordinates is that if the components of the metric are in the Hölder space $C k, α$ when expressed in some coordinate chart, regardless of the smoothnness of the chart itself, then the transition function from that coordinate chart to any harmonic coordinate chart will be in the Hölder space $C k + 1, α$ .^[6] In particular this implies that the metric will also be in $C k, α$ relative to harmonic coordinate charts.^[7]

As was first discovered by Cornelius Lanczos in 1922, relative to a harmonic coordinate chart, the Ricci curvature is given by

R_{ij}=-{\frac {1}{2}}\sum _{a,b=1}^{n}g^{ab}{\frac {\partial ^{2}g_{ij}}{\partial x^{a}\partial x^{b}}}+\partial g\ast \partial g\ast g^{-1}\ast g^{-1}.

The fundamental aspect of this formula is that, for any fixed $i$ and $j$ , the first term on the right-hand side is an elliptic operator applied to the locally defined function $g ij$ . So it is automatic from elliptic regularity, and in particular the Schauder estimates, that if $g$ is $C 2$ and $Ric(g)$ is $C k, α$ relative to a harmonic coordinate charts, then $g$ is $C k + 2, α$ relative to the same chart.^[8] More generally, if $g$ is $C k, α$ (with $k$ larger than one) and $Ric(g)$ is $C l, α$ relative to some coordinate charts, then the transition function to a harmonic coordinate chart will be $C k + 1, α$ , and so $Ric(g)$ will be $C min(l, k), α$ in harmonic coordinate charts. So, by the previous result, $g$ will be $C min(l, k) + 2, α$ in harmonic coordinate charts.^[9]

As a further application of Lanczos' formula, it follows that an Einstein metric is analytic in harmonic coordinates.^[10] In particular, this shows that any Einstein metric on a smooth manifold automatically determines an analytic structure on the manifold, given by the collection of harmonic coordinate charts.

Due to the above analysis, in discussing harmonic coordinates it is standard to consider Riemannian metrics which are at least twice-continuously differentiable. However, with the use of more exotic function spaces, the above results on existence and regularity of harmonic coordinates can be extended to settings where the metric has very weak regularity.^[11]

Harmonic coordinates in asymptotically flat spaces

Harmonic coordinates were used by Robert Bartnik to understand the geometric properties of asymptotically flat Riemannian manifolds.^[12] Suppose that one has a complete Riemannian manifold $(M, g)$ , and that there is a compact subset $K$ of $M$ together with a diffeomorphism $Φ$ from $M ∖ K$ to $ℝ n ∖ B R (0)$ , such that $Φ * g$ , relative to the standard Euclidean metric $δ$ on $ℝ n ∖ B R (0)$ , has eigenvalues which are uniformly bounded above and below by positive numbers, and such that $(Φ * g)(x)$ converges, in some precise sense, to $δ$ as $x$ diverges to infinity. Such a diffeomorphism is known as a structure at infinity or as asymptotically flat coordinates for $(M, g)$ .^[13]

Bartnik's primary result is that the collection of asymptotically flat coordinates (if nonempty) has a simple asymptotic structure, in that the transition function between any two asymptotically flat coordinates is approximated, near infinity, by an affine transformation.^[14] This is significant in establishing that the ADM energy of an asymptotically flat Riemannian manifold is a geometric invariant which does not depend on a choice of asymptotically flat coordinates.^[15]

The key tool in establishing this fact is the approximation of arbitrary asymptotically flat coordinates for $(M, g)$ by asymptotically flat coordinates which are harmonic. The key technical work is in the establishment of a Fredholm theory for the Laplace-Beltrami operator, when acting between certain Banach spaces of functions on $M$ which decay at infinity.^[16] Then, given any asymptotically flat coordinates $Φ$ , from the fact that

\Delta ^{g}\Phi ^{k}=-\sum _{i=1}^{n}\sum _{j=1}^{n}g^{ij}\Gamma _{ij}^{k},

which decays at infinity, it follows from the Fredholm theory that there are functions $z k$ which decay at infinity such that $Δ g Φ k = Δ g z k$ , and hence that $Φ k - z k$ are harmonic. This provides the desired asymptotically flat harmonic coordinates. Bartnik's primary result then follows from the fact that the vector space of asymptotically-decaying harmonic functions on $M$ has dimension $n + 1$ , which has the consequence that any two asymptotically flat harmonic coordinates on $M$ are related by an affine transformation.^[17]

Bartnik's work is predicated on the existence of asymptotically flat coordinates. Building upon his methods, Shigetoshi Bando, Atsushi Kasue, and Hiraku Nakajima showed that the decay of the curvature in terms of the distance from a point, together with polynomial growth of the volume of large geodesic balls and the simple-connectivity of their complements, implies the existence of asymptotically flat coordinates.^[18] The essential point is that their geometric assumptions, via some of the results discussed below on harmonic radius, give good control over harmonic coordinates on regions near infinity. By the use of a partition of unity, these harmonic coordinates can be patched together to form a single coordinate chart, which is the main objective.^[19]

Harmonic radius

A foundational result, due to Michael Anderson, is that given a smooth Riemannian manifold, any positive number $α$ between 0 and 1 and any positive number $Q$ , there is a number $r$ which depends on $α$ , on $Q$ , on upper and lower bounds of the Ricci curvature, on the dimension, and on a positive lower bound for the injectivity radius, such that any geodesic ball of radius less than $r$ is the domain of harmonic coordinates, relative to which the $C 1, α$ size of $g$ and the uniform closeness of $g$ to the Euclidean metric are both controlled by $Q$ .^[20] This can also be reformulated in terms of "norms" of pointed Riemannian manifolds, where the $C 1, α$ -norm at a scale $r$ corresponds to the optimal value of $Q$ for harmonic coordinates whose domains are geodesic balls of radius $r$ .^[21] Various authors have found versions of such "harmonic radius" estimates, both before and after Anderson's work.^[22] The essential aspect of the proof is the analysis, via standard methods of elliptic partial differential equations, for the Lanczos formula for the Ricci curvature in a harmonic coordinate chart.^[23]

So, loosely speaking, the use of harmonic coordinates show that Riemannian manifolds can be covered by coordinate charts in which the local representations of the Riemannian metric are controlled only by the qualitative geometric behavior of the Riemannian manifold itself. Following ideas set forth by Jeff Cheeger in 1970, one can then consider sequences of Riemannian manifolds which are uniformly geometrically controlled, and using the coordinates, one can assemble a "limit" Riemannian manifold.^[24] Due to the nature of such "Riemannian convergence", it follows, for instance, that up to diffeomorphism there are only finitely many smooth manifolds of a given dimension which admit Riemannian metrics with a fixed bound on Ricci curvature and diameter, with a fixed positive lower bound on injectivity radius.^[25]

Such estimates on harmonic radius are also used to construct geometrically-controlled cutoff functions, and hence partitions of unity as well. For instance, to control the second covariant derivative of a function by a locally defined second partial derivative, it is necessary to control the first derivative of the local representation of the metric. Such constructions are fundamental in studying the basic aspects of Sobolev spaces on noncompact Riemannian manifolds.^[26]

Related Research Articles

In differential geometry, a Riemannian manifold or Riemannian space(M, g), so called after the German mathematician Bernhard Riemann, is a real, smooth manifold M equipped with a positive-definite inner product g_p on the tangent space T_pM at each point p.

In the mathematical field of differential geometry, a metric tensor is an additional structure on a manifold $M$ that allows defining distances and angles, just as the inner product on a Euclidean space allows defining distances and angles there. More precisely, a metric tensor at a point $p$ of $M$ is a bilinear form defined on the tangent space at $p$ , and a metric tensor on $M$ consists of a metric tensor at each point $p$ of $M$ that varies smoothly with $p$ .

In differential geometry, the Ricci curvature tensor, named after Gregorio Ricci-Curbastro, is a geometric object which is determined by a choice of Riemannian or pseudo-Riemannian metric on a manifold. It can be considered, broadly, as a measure of the degree to which the geometry of a given metric tensor differs locally from that of ordinary Euclidean space or pseudo-Euclidean space.

In the mathematical field of Riemannian geometry, the scalar curvature is a measure of the curvature of a Riemannian manifold. To each point on a Riemannian manifold, it assigns a single real number determined by the geometry of the metric near that point. It is defined by a complicated explicit formula in terms of partial derivatives of the metric components, although it is also characterized by the volume of infinitesimally small geodesic balls. In the context of the differential geometry of surfaces, the scalar curvature is twice the Gaussian curvature, and completely characterizes the curvature of a surface. In higher dimensions, however, the scalar curvature only represents one particular part of the Riemann curvature tensor.

In mathematics, the uniformization theorem states that every simply connected Riemann surface is conformally equivalent to one of three Riemann surfaces: the open unit disk, the complex plane, or the Riemann sphere. The theorem is a generalization of the Riemann mapping theorem from simply connected open subsets of the plane to arbitrary simply connected Riemann surfaces.

In the mathematical fields of differential geometry and geometric analysis, the Ricci flow, sometimes also referred to as Hamilton's Ricci flow, is a certain partial differential equation for a Riemannian metric. It is often said to be analogous to the diffusion of heat and the heat equation, due to formal similarities in the mathematical structure of the equation. However, it is nonlinear and exhibits many phenomena not present in the study of the heat equation.

In mathematics and especially differential geometry, a Kähler manifold is a manifold with three mutually compatible structures: a complex structure, a Riemannian structure, and a symplectic structure. The concept was first studied by Jan Arnoldus Schouten and David van Dantzig in 1930, and then introduced by Erich Kähler in 1933. The terminology has been fixed by André Weil. Kähler geometry refers to the study of Kähler manifolds, their geometry and topology, as well as the study of structures and constructions that can be performed on Kähler manifolds, such as the existence of special connections like Hermitian Yang–Mills connections, or special metrics such as Kähler–Einstein metrics.

In the mathematical field of differential geometry, Ricci-flatness is a condition on the curvature of a (pseudo-)Riemannian manifold. Ricci-flat manifolds are a special kind of Einstein manifold. In theoretical physics, Ricci-flat Lorentzian manifolds are of fundamental interest, as they are the solutions of Einstein's field equations in vacuum with vanishing cosmological constant.

Mikhael Leonidovich Gromov is a Russian-French mathematician known for his work in geometry, analysis and group theory. He is a permanent member of Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques in France and a professor of mathematics at New York University.

In the mathematical field of Riemannian geometry, the fundamental theorem of Riemannian geometry states that on any Riemannian manifold there is a unique affine connection that is torsion-free and metric-compatible, called the Levi-Civita connection or (pseudo-)Riemannian connection of the given metric. Because it is canonically defined by such properties, often this connection is automatically used when given a metric.

In geometry, the line element or length element can be informally thought of as a line segment associated with an infinitesimal displacement vector in a metric space. The length of the line element, which may be thought of as a differential arc length, is a function of the metric tensor and is denoted by .

Richard Melvin Schoen is an American mathematician known for his work in differential geometry and geometric analysis. He is best known for the resolution of the Yamabe problem in 1984.

The positive energy theorem refers to a collection of foundational results in general relativity and differential geometry. Its standard form, broadly speaking, asserts that the gravitational energy of an isolated system is nonnegative, and can only be zero when the system has no gravitating objects. Although these statements are often thought of as being primarily physical in nature, they can be formalized as mathematical theorems which can be proven using techniques of differential geometry, partial differential equations, and geometric measure theory.

In the mathematical field of differential geometry, a smooth map between Riemannian manifolds is called harmonic if its coordinate representatives satisfy a certain nonlinear partial differential equation. This partial differential equation for a mapping also arises as the Euler-Lagrange equation of a functional called the Dirichlet energy. As such, the theory of harmonic maps contains both the theory of unit-speed geodesics in Riemannian geometry and the theory of harmonic functions.

In the mathematical field of differential geometry, the existence of isothermal coordinates for a (pseudo-)Riemannian metric is often of interest. In the case of a metric on a two-dimensional space, the existence of isothermal coordinates is unconditional. For higher-dimensional spaces, the Weyl–Schouten theorem characterizes the existence of isothermal coordinates by certain equations to be satisfied by the Riemann curvature tensor of the metric.

In differential geometry, normal coordinates at a point p in a differentiable manifold equipped with a symmetric affine connection are a local coordinate system in a neighborhood of p obtained by applying the exponential map to the tangent space at p. In a normal coordinate system, the Christoffel symbols of the connection vanish at the point p, thus often simplifying local calculations. In normal coordinates associated to the Levi-Civita connection of a Riemannian manifold, one can additionally arrange that the metric tensor is the Kronecker delta at the point p, and that the first partial derivatives of the metric at p vanish.

In mathematics, specifically in differential geometry, isothermal coordinates on a Riemannian manifold are local coordinates where the metric is conformal to the Euclidean metric. This means that in isothermal coordinates, the Riemannian metric locally has the form

In the mathematical field of differential geometry, any (pseudo-)Riemannian metric determines a certain class of paths known as geodesics. Beltrami's theorem, named for Italian mathematician Eugenio Beltrami, is a result on the inverse problem of determining a (pseudo-)Riemannian metric from its geodesics.

In mathematics, a harmonic morphism is a (smooth) map $:(M^{m},g)\to (N^{n},h)}$ between Riemannian manifolds that pulls back real-valued harmonic functions on the codomain to harmonic functions on the domain. Harmonic morphisms form a special class of harmonic maps i.e. those that are horizontally (weakly) conformal.

In the mathematical field of differential geometry, a biharmonic map is a map between Riemannian or pseudo-Riemannian manifolds which satisfies a certain fourth-order partial differential equation. A biharmonic submanifold refers to an embedding or immersion into a Riemannian or pseudo-Riemannian manifold which is a biharmonic map when the domain is equipped with its induced metric. The problem of understanding biharmonic maps was posed by James Eells and Luc Lemaire in 1983. The study of harmonic maps, of which the study of biharmonic maps is an outgrowth, had been an active field of study for the previous twenty years. A simple case of biharmonic maps is given by biharmonic functions.

References

Footnotes

↑ Einstein 1916; Lanczos 1922.
↑ DeTurck & Kazdan 1981; Sabitov & Šefel 1976.
↑ Besse 2008, p. 143; Hebey 1999, p. 13; Petersen 2016, p. 409; Sakai 1996, p. 313.
↑ DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Lemma 1.1.
↑ Besse 2008, p. 143; Petersen 2016, Lemma 11.2.5.
↑ DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Lemma 1.2; Besse 2008, Proposition 5.19.
↑ DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Theorem 2.1.
↑ DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Theorem 4.5(b); Besse 2008, Theorem 5.20b.
↑ DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Theorem 4.5(c).
↑ DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Theorem 5.2; Besse 2008, Theorem 5.26.
↑ Taylor 2000, Sections 3.9 & 3.10.
↑ Bartnik 1986.
↑ Bartnik 1986, Definition 2.1; Lee & Parker 1987, p. 75-76.
↑ Bartnik 1986, Corollary 3.22; Lee & Parker 1987, Theorem 9.5.
↑ Bartnik 1986, Theorem 4.2; Lee & Parker 1987, Theorem 9.6.
↑ Bartnik 1986, Sections 1 & 2; Lee & Parker 1987, Theorem 9.2.
↑ Bartnik 1986, p. 678; Lee & Parker 1987, p. 78.
↑ Bando, Kasue & Nakajima 1989, Theorem 1.1 & Remark 1.8(2).
↑ Bando, Kasue & Nakajima 1989, pp. 324–325.
↑ Anderson 1990, Lemma 2.2; Hebey 1999, Definition 1.1 & Theorem 1.2.
↑ Petersen 2016, Sections 11.3.1 & 11.3.4.
↑ Hebey 1999, Theorem 1.2; Petersen 2016, Theorem 11.4.15; Sakai 1996, Theorem A6.10.
↑ Anderson 1990, pp. 434–435; Petersen 2016, pp. 427, 429.
↑ Anderson 1990, Lemma 2.1; Petersen 2016, Theorem 11.3.6 and Corollaries 11.3.7 & 11.3.8; Sakai 1996, p. 313.
↑ Anderson 1990, Theorem 1.1; Petersen 2016, Corollary 11.4.4; Sakai 1996, Remark A6.12.
↑ Hebey 1999, Proposition 3.2, Proposition 3.3, Theorem 3.4, Theorem 3.5.

Textbooks

Besse, Arthur L. (1987). Einstein manifolds. Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (3). Vol. 10. Reprinted in 2008. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74311-8. ISBN 3-540-15279-2. MR 0867684. Zbl 0613.53001.
Hebey, Emmanuel (1999). Nonlinear analysis on manifolds: Sobolev spaces and inequalities. Courant Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Vol. 5. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society. doi:10.1090/cln/005. ISBN 0-9658703-4-0. MR 1688256. Zbl 0981.58006.
Petersen, Peter (2016). Riemannian geometry. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Vol. 171 (Third edition of 1998 original ed.). Springer, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26654-1. ISBN 978-3-319-26652-7. MR 3469435. Zbl 1417.53001.
Sakai, Takashi (1996). Riemannian geometry. Translations of Mathematical Monographs. Vol. 149. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society. doi:10.1090/mmono/149. ISBN 0-8218-0284-4. MR 1390760. Zbl 0886.53002.
Taylor, Michael E. (2000). Tools for PDE. Pseudodifferential operators, paradifferential operators, and layer potentials. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. Vol. 81. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society. doi:10.1090/surv/081. ISBN 0-8218-2633-6. MR 1766415. Zbl 0963.35211.

Articles

Anderson, Michael T. (1990). "Convergence and rigidity of manifolds under Ricci curvature bounds". Inventiones Mathematicae . 102 (2): 429–445. Bibcode:1990InMat.102..429A. doi:10.1007/bf01233434. MR 1074481. S2CID 121062092. Zbl 0711.53038.
Bando, Shigetoshi; Kasue, Atsushi; Nakajima, Hiraku (1989). "On a construction of coordinates at infinity on manifolds with fast curvature decay and maximal volume growth". Inventiones Mathematicae . 97 (2): 313–349. Bibcode:1989InMat..97..313B. doi:10.1007/BF01389045. MR 1001844. S2CID 122863673. Zbl 0682.53045.
Bartnik, Robert (1986). "The mass of an asymptotically flat manifold". Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics . 39 (5): 661–693. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.625.6978 . doi:10.1002/cpa.3160390505. ISSN 0010-3640. MR 0849427. Zbl 0598.53045.
— (2021). "The mass of an asymptotically flat manifold". In Chruściel, Piotr T.; Isenberg, James A.; Yau, Shing-Tung (eds.). Selected works of Robert A. Bartnik. Somerville, MA: International Press. pp. 661–693. ISBN 978-1-57146-397-5. MR 4362675. Zbl 1464.53042.
DeTurck, Dennis M.; Kazdan, Jerry L. (1981). "Some regularity theorems in Riemannian geometry". Annales Scientifiques de l'École Normale Supérieure . Quatrième Série. 14 (3): 249–260. doi: 10.24033/asens.1405 . MR 0644518. Zbl 0486.53014.
Einstein, A. (1916). "Näherungsweise Integration der Feldgleichungen der Gravitation" (PDF). Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: 688–696. doi:10.1002/3527608958.ch7. ISBN 9783527406098. JFM 46.1293.02.
— (1997). "Approximative integration of the field equations of gravitation". The collected papers of Albert Einstein. Vol. 6. The Berlin years: writings, 1914–1917. Translated by Engel, Alfred. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. pp. 201–210. ISBN 0-691-01734-4. MR 1492181. Zbl 0979.01031.
Lanczos, Kornel (1922). "Ein vereinfachendes Koordinatensystem für Einsteinschen Gravitationsgleichungen". Physikalische Zeitschrift . 23: 537–539. JFM 48.1023.01.
Lee, John M.; Parker, Thomas H. (1987). "The Yamabe problem". Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society . New Series. 17 (1): 37–91. doi: 10.1090/s0273-0979-1987-15514-5 . MR 0888880. Zbl 0633.53062.
Sabitov, I. H.; Šefel, S. Z. (1976). "Connections between the order of smoothness of a surface and that of its metric". Siberian Mathematical Journal . 17 (4): 916–925. doi:10.1007/bf00971679. MR 0425855. S2CID 120917151. Zbl 0386.53014.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[FOOTNOTEEinstein1916Lanczos1922-1] Einstein 1916; Lanczos 1922.

[FOOTNOTEDeTurckKazdan1981SabitovŠefel1976-2] DeTurck & Kazdan 1981; Sabitov & Šefel 1976.

[FOOTNOTEBesse2008143Hebey199913Petersen2016409Sakai1996313-3] Besse 2008, p. 143; Hebey 1999, p. 13; Petersen 2016, p. 409; Sakai 1996, p. 313.

[FOOTNOTEDeTurckKazdan1981Lemma_1.1-4] DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Lemma 1.1.

[FOOTNOTEBesse2008143Petersen2016Lemma_11.2.5-5] Besse 2008, p. 143; Petersen 2016, Lemma 11.2.5.

[FOOTNOTEDeTurckKazdan1981Lemma_1.2Besse2008Proposition_5.19-6] DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Lemma 1.2; Besse 2008, Proposition 5.19.

[FOOTNOTEDeTurckKazdan1981Theorem_2.1-7] DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Theorem 2.1.

[FOOTNOTEDeTurckKazdan1981Theorem_4.5(b)Besse2008Theorem_5.20b-8] DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Theorem 4.5(b); Besse 2008, Theorem 5.20b.

[FOOTNOTEDeTurckKazdan1981Theorem_4.5(c)-9] DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Theorem 4.5(c).

[FOOTNOTEDeTurckKazdan1981Theorem_5.2Besse2008Theorem_5.26-10] DeTurck & Kazdan 1981, Theorem 5.2; Besse 2008, Theorem 5.26.

[FOOTNOTETaylor2000Sections_3.9_&_3.10-11] Taylor 2000, Sections 3.9 & 3.10.

[FOOTNOTEBartnik1986-12] Bartnik 1986.

[FOOTNOTEBartnik1986Definition_2.1LeeParker198775-76-13] Bartnik 1986, Definition 2.1; Lee & Parker 1987, p. 75-76.

[FOOTNOTEBartnik1986Corollary_3.22LeeParker1987Theorem_9.5-14] Bartnik 1986, Corollary 3.22; Lee & Parker 1987, Theorem 9.5.

[FOOTNOTEBartnik1986Theorem_4.2LeeParker1987Theorem_9.6-15] Bartnik 1986, Theorem 4.2; Lee & Parker 1987, Theorem 9.6.

[FOOTNOTEBartnik1986Sections_1_&_2LeeParker1987Theorem_9.2-16] Bartnik 1986, Sections 1 & 2; Lee & Parker 1987, Theorem 9.2.

[FOOTNOTEBartnik1986678LeeParker198778-17] Bartnik 1986, p. 678; Lee & Parker 1987, p. 78.

[FOOTNOTEBandoKasueNakajima1989Theorem_1.1_&_Remark_1.8(2)-18] Bando, Kasue & Nakajima 1989, Theorem 1.1 & Remark 1.8(2).

[FOOTNOTEBandoKasueNakajima1989324–325-19] Bando, Kasue & Nakajima 1989, pp. 324–325.

[FOOTNOTEAnderson1990Lemma_2.2Hebey1999Definition_1.1_&_Theorem_1.2-20] Anderson 1990, Lemma 2.2; Hebey 1999, Definition 1.1 & Theorem 1.2.

[FOOTNOTEPetersen2016Sections_11.3.1_&_11.3.4-21] Petersen 2016, Sections 11.3.1 & 11.3.4.

[FOOTNOTEHebey1999Theorem_1.2Petersen2016Theorem_11.4.15Sakai1996Theorem_A6.10-22] Hebey 1999, Theorem 1.2; Petersen 2016, Theorem 11.4.15; Sakai 1996, Theorem A6.10.

[FOOTNOTEAnderson1990434–435Petersen2016427,_429-23] Anderson 1990, pp. 434–435; Petersen 2016, pp. 427, 429.

[FOOTNOTEAnderson1990Lemma_2.1Petersen2016Theorem_11.3.6_and_Corollaries_11.3.7_&_11.3.8Sakai1996313-24] Anderson 1990, Lemma 2.1; Petersen 2016, Theorem 11.3.6 and Corollaries 11.3.7 & 11.3.8; Sakai 1996, p. 313.

[FOOTNOTEAnderson1990Theorem_1.1Petersen2016Corollary_11.4.4Sakai1996Remark_A6.12-25] Anderson 1990, Theorem 1.1; Petersen 2016, Corollary 11.4.4; Sakai 1996, Remark A6.12.

[FOOTNOTEHebey1999Proposition_3.2,_Proposition_3.3,_Theorem_3.4,_Theorem_3.5-26] Hebey 1999, Proposition 3.2, Proposition 3.3, Theorem 3.4, Theorem 3.5.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]