In this article, we will explore the fascinating world of Hopf–Rinow theorem and all the implications this topic has on our society. Hopf–Rinow theorem is a topic that has captured the attention of experts and fans alike, generating passionate debates and sparking growing interest in its many facets. Throughout these pages, we will delve into the history, impact and possible future implications of Hopf–Rinow theorem, analyzing every detail and offering a comprehensive vision of this topic that is so relevant today. From its origins to its most recent applications, this article dives into a comprehensive analysis of Hopf–Rinow theorem with the goal of providing the reader with a deep and enriching understanding of this exciting topic.
Gives equivalent statements about the geodesic completeness of Riemannian manifolds
Furthermore, any one of the above implies that given any two points there exists a length minimizing geodesic connecting these two points (geodesics are in general critical points for the length functional, and may or may not be minima).
In the Hopf–Rinow theorem, the first characterization of completeness deals purely with the topology of the manifold and the boundedness of various sets; the second deals with the existence of minimizers to a certain problem in the calculus of variations (namely minimization of the length functional); the third deals with the nature of solutions to a certain system of ordinary differential equations.
In fact these properties characterize completeness for locally compact length-metric spaces.[4]
The theorem does not hold for infinite-dimensional manifolds. The unit sphere in a separable Hilbert space can be endowed with the structure of a Hilbert manifold in such a way that antipodal points cannot be joined by a length-minimizing geodesic.[5] It was later observed that it is not even automatically true that two points are joined by any geodesic, whether minimizing or not.[6]
The theorem also does not generalize to Lorentzian manifolds: the Clifton–Pohl torus provides an example (diffeomorphic to the two-dimensional torus) that is compact but not complete.[7]