On manifolds with corners arxiv: v2 [math.dg] 13 Oct 2010

Transcription

1 On manifolds with corners arxiv: v2 [math.dg] 13 Oct 2010 Dominic Joyce Abstract Manifolds without boundary, and manifolds with boundary, are universally known and loved in Differential Geometry, but manifolds with corners locally modelled on [0, ) k R n k ) have received comparatively little attention. The basic definitions in the subject are not agreed upon, there are several inequivalent definitions in use of manifolds with corners, of boundary, and of smooth map, depending on the applications in mind. We present a theory of manifolds with corners which includes a new notion of smooth map f : X Y. Compared to other definitions, our theory has the advantage of giving a category Man c of manifolds with corners which is particularly well behaved as a category: it has products and direct products, boundaries X behave in a functorial way, and there are simple conditions for the existence of fibre products X ZY in Man c. Our theory is tailored to future applications in Symplectic Geometry, and is part of a project to describe the geometric structure on moduli spaces of J-holomorphic curves in a new way. But we have written it as a separate paper as we believe it is of independent interest. 1 Introduction Most of the literature in Differential Geometry discusses only manifolds without boundary locally modelled on R n ), and a smaller proportion manifolds with boundarylocallymodelled on[0, ) R n 1 ). Onlyafewauthorshaveseriously studied manifolds with corners locally modelled on [0, ) k R n k ). They were first developed by Cerf[1] and Douady[2] in 1961, who were primarily interested in their Differential Geometry. Jänich [5] used manifolds with corners to classify actions of transformation groups on smooth manifolds. Melrose [12, 13] and others study analysis of elliptic operators on manifolds with corners. Laures [10] defines a cobordism theory for manifolds with corners, which has been applied in Topological Quantum Field Theory, by Lauda and Pfeiffer [9] for instance. Margalef-Roig and Outerelo Dominguez [11] generalize manifolds with corners to infinite-dimensional Banach manifolds. How one sets up the theory of manifolds with corners is not universally agreed, but depends on the applications one has in mind. As we explain in Remarks 2.11, 3.3 and 6.3 which relate our work to that of other authors, there are at least four inequivalent definitions of manifolds with corners, two inequivalent definitions of boundary, and including ours) four inequivalent definitions 1

2 of smooth map in use in the literature. The purpose of this paper is to carefully lay down the foundations of a theory of manifolds with corners, which includes a new notion of smooth map f : X Y between manifolds with corners. The main issue here is that in ourtheory) an n-manifold with cornersx has a boundary X which is an n 1)-manifold with corners, and so by induction the k-fold boundary k X is an n k)-manifold with corners. How to define smooth maps f : X Y in the interiors X,Y is clear, but one must also decide whether to impose compatibility conditions on f over k X and l Y, and it is not obvious how best to do this. Our definition gives a nicely behaved category Man c of manifolds with corners, and in particular we can give simple conditions for the existence of fibre products in Man c. The author s interest in manifolds with corners has to do with applications in Symplectic Geometry. Moduli spaces M l,m g,h M,L,J,β) of stable J- holomorphic curves in a symplectic manifold M, ω) with boundary in a Lagrangian L are used in Lagrangian Floer cohomology, open Gromov Witten invariants, and Symplectic Field Theory. What geometric structure should we put on M l,m g,h M,L,J,β)? Hofer, Wysocki and Zehnder [4] make Ml,m g,h M,L,J,β) into a polyfold actually, the zeroes of a Fredholm section of a polyfold bundle over a polyfold). Fukaya, Oh, Ohta and Ono [3] make M l,m g,h M,L,J,β) into a Kuranishi space. But the theory of Kuranishi spaces is still relatively unexplored, and in the author s view even the definition is not satisfactory. In [6] the author will develop theories of d-manifolds and d-orbifolds. Here d- manifolds are a simplified version of Spivak s derived manifolds [16], a differential-geometric offshoot of Jacob Lurie s Derived Algebraic Geometry programme, and d-orbifolds are the orbifold version of d-manifolds. We will argue that the correct way to define Kuranishi spaces is as d-orbifolds with corners, which will help to make [3] more rigorous. In future the author hopes also to show that polyfolds can be truncated to d-orbifolds with corners, building a bridge between the theories of Fukaya et al. [3] and Hofer et al. [4]. To define d-manifolds and d-orbifolds with corners we first need a theory of manifolds with corners, and we develop it here in a separate paper as we believe it is of independent interest. For [6] and later applications in Symplectic Geometry, it is important that boundaries and fibre products in Man c should be well-behaved. The author strongly believes that the theory we set out here, in particular our definition of smooth map, is the right definition for these applications. As evidence for this, note that in [6] we will show that if X,Y are d-manifolds with corners, Z is a manifold with corners, and f : X Z, g : Y Z are arbitrary smooth maps, then a fibre product X f,z,g Y exists in the 2-category dman c of d-manifolds with corners. The fact that this works is crucially dependent on the details of our definition of smooth map. We begin in 2 with definitions and properties of manifolds with corners X, their boundaries X, k-boundaries k X and k-corners C k X) = k X/S k. Section 3 defines and studies smooth maps f : X Y of manifolds with corners, and 4 explains two ways to encode how a smooth f : X Y relates k X and l Y for k,l 0. Sections 5 7 discuss submersions, transversality and fibre 2

3 products of manifolds with corners, and orientations and orientation conventions. The proofs of Theorems 6.4 and 6.11, two of our main results on fibre products, are postponed to 8 and 9. The author would like to thank Franki Dillen for pointing out reference [11]. 2 Manifolds with corners, and boundaries We define manifolds without boundary, with boundary, and with corners. Definition 2.1. Let X be a paracompact Hausdorff topological space. i) An n-dimensional chart on X without boundary is a pair U, φ), where U is an open subset in R n, and φ : U X is a homeomorphism with a nonempty open set φu) in X. ii) An n-dimensional chart on X with boundary for n 1 is a pair U,φ), where U is an open subset in R n or in [0, ) R n 1, and φ : U X is a homeomorphism with a nonempty open set φu). iii) An n-dimensional chart on X with corners for n 1 is a pair U,φ), where U is an open subset in R n k = [0, )k R n k for some 0 k n, and φ : U X is a homeomorphism with a nonempty open set φu). These are increasing order of generality, that is, i) ii) iii). ForbrevitywewillusethenotationR n k = [0, ) k R n k, following[13, 1.1]. Let A R m and B R n and α : A B be continuous. We call α smooth if it extends to a smooth map between open neighbourhoods of A,B, that is, if there exists an open subset A of R m with A A and a smooth map α : A R n with α A α. If A is open we can take A = A and α = α. When m = n we call α : A B a diffeomorphism if it is a homeomorphism and α : A B, α 1 : B A are smooth. Let U, φ),v, ψ) be n-dimensional charts on X, which may be without boundary, or with boundary, or with corners. We call U,φ) and V,ψ) compatible if ψ 1 φ : φ 1 φu) ψv) ) ψ 1 φu) ψv) ) is a diffeomorphism between subsets of R n, in the sense above. An n-dimensional atlas for X without boundary, with boundary, or with corners, is a system {U i,φ i ) : i I} of pairwise compatible n-dimensional charts on X with X = i I φi U i ), where the U i,φ i ) are with boundary, or with corners, respectively. We call such an atlas maximal if it is not a proper subset of any other atlas. Any atlas {U i,φ i ) : i I} is contained in a unique maximal atlas of the same type, the set of all charts U,φ) of this type on X which are compatible with U i,φ i ) for all i I. An n-dimensional manifold without boundary, or with boundary, or with corners, is a paracompact Hausdorff topological space X equipped with a maximal n-dimensional atlas without boundary, or with boundary, or with corners, respectively. Usually we refer to X as the manifold, leaving the atlas implicit, and by a chart U,φ) on the manifold X, we mean an element of the maximal atlas. When we just say manifold, we will usually mean a manifold with corners. 3

4 Here is some notation on co)tangent spaces. Definition 2.2. Let X be an n-manifold with corners. A map f : X R is called smooth if whenever U,φ) is a chart on the manifold X then f φ : U R is a smooth map between subsets of R n,r, in the sense of Definition 2.1. Write C X) for the R-algebra of smooth functions f : X R. Following [7, p. 4], for each x X define the tangent space T x X by T x X = { v :v is a linear map C X) R satisfying vfg) = vf)gx)+fx)vg) for all f,g C X) }, and define the cotangent space T xx = T x X). Both are vector spaces of dimension n. For each x X, we define the inward sector IST x X) of vectors which point into X, as follows: let U,φ) be a chart on X with U R n k open and 0 U with φ0) = x. Then dφ 0 : T 0 R n k = Rn T x X is an isomorphism. Set IST x X) = dφ 0 R n k ) T xx. This is independent of the choice of U,φ). We now study the notion of boundary X for n-manifolds X with corners. Definition 2.3. Let U R n k be open. For each u = u 1,...,u n ) in U, define the depth depth U u of u in U to be the number of u 1,...,u k which are zero. That is, depth U u is the number of boundary faces of U containing u. Let X be an n-manifold with corners. For x X, choose a chart U,φ) on the manifold X with φu) = x for u U, and define the depth depth X x of x in X by depth X x = depth U u. This is independent of the choice of U,φ). For each k = 0,...,n, define the depth k stratum of X to be S k X) = { x X : depth X x = k }. The proof of the next proposition is elementary. Proposition 2.4. Let X be an n-manifold with corners. Then a) X = n k=0 Sk X), and S k X) = n l=k Sl X); b) Each S k X) has the structure of an n k)-manifold without boundary; c) X is a manifold without boundary if and only if S k X) = for k > 0; d) X is a manifold with boundary if and only if S k X) = for k > 1; and e) If x S k X) then IST x X) in T x X is isomorphic to R n k in R n. Also the intersection IST x X) IST x X) in T x X is T x S k X) = R n k. Definition 2.5. LetX beamanifoldwithcorners,andx X. Alocal boundary component β of X at x is a local choice of connected component of S 1 X) near x. That is, for each sufficiently small open neighbourhood V of x in X, β givesa choice of connected component W of V S 1 X) with x W, and any two such choices V,W and V,W must be compatible in the sense that x W W ). 4

5 The meaning of local boundary components in coordinate charts is easy to explain. Suppose U,φ) is a chart on X with φu) = x, where U is an open set in R n k, and write u = u 1,...,u n ). Then S 1 U) = k i=1{ x1,...,x n ) U : x i = 0, x j 0 for j i, j = 1,...,k }. If u i = 0 for some i = 1,...,k, then { x 1,...,x n ) U : x i = 0, x j 0 for j i, j = 1,...,k } is a subset of S 1 U) whose closure contains u, and the intersection of this subset with any sufficiently small open ball about u is connected, so this subset uniquely determines a local boundary component of U at u, and hence a local boundary component of X at x. Thus, the local boundary components of X at x are in 1-1 correspondence with those i = 1,...,k with u i = 0. But the number of such i is the depth depth X x. Hence there are exactly depth X x distinct local boundary components β of X at x for each x X. Definition2.6. LetX beamanifoldwithcorners. Asaset,definetheboundary X = { x,β) : x X, β is a local boundary component for X at x }. 1) Define a map i X : X X by i X : x,β) x. Note that i X need not be injective, as i 1 X x) = depthx x for all x X. If U,φ) is a chart on the manifold X with U R n k open, then for each i = 1,...,k we can define a chart U i,φ i ) on X by U i = { x 1,...,x n 1 ) R n 1 k 1 : x 1,...,x i 1,0,x i,...,x n 1 ) U R n k}, φ i : x 1,...,x n 1 ) φx 1,...,x i 1,0,x i,...,x n 1 ),φ {x i = 0}) ). 2) All such charts on X are compatible, and induce a manifold structure on X. Thus as in Douady [2, 6] we may prove: Proposition 2.7. Let X be an n-manifold with corners. Then X is naturally an n 1)-manifold with corners for n > 0, and X = if n = 0. The map i X : X X is continuous, and we will see in 3 that it is smooth. By considering the local models R n k for X, we see: Lemma 2.8. As a map between topological spaces, i X : X X in Definition 2.6 is continuous, finite that is, i 1 X x) is finite for all x X), and proper that is, if S X is compact then i 1 X S) X is compact). As X is a manifold with corners we can iterate the boundary construction to obtain X, 2 X,..., n X, with k X an n k)-manifold with corners. Proposition 2.9. Let X be an n-manifold with corners. Then for k = 0,...,n there are natural identifications k X = { x,β 1,...,β k ) :x X, β 1,...,β k are distinct local boundary components for X at x }. 3) 5

6 Proof. Consider first the case k = 2. Points of 2 X are of the form x,β 1 ), β ) 2, where x X, and β 1 is a local boundary component of X at x, and β 2 is a local boundary component of X at x,β 1 ). Suppose U,φ) is a chart for X with x = φu) for some u U, where U is open in R n l for l 2, and u = u 1,...,u n ), with u i1 = 0 and φ 1 β 1 ) the local boundary component x i1 = 0 in U. Then 2) gives a chart U i1,φ i1 ) for X with φ i1 u1,...,u i1 1,u i1+1,...,u n ) ) = x,β 1 ). Thus φ 1 i 1 β 2 ) is a local boundary component for U i1, and so is of the form x j = 0 for j = 1,...,l 1. Write i 2 = j if j < i 1 and i 2 = j +1 if j i 1. Then u i2 = 0, as u i2 is the j th coordinate of u 1,...,u i1 1,u i1+1,...,u n ). Let β 2 be the local boundary component φ {x i2 = 0}) of X at x. Then β 2 β 1 as i 2 i 1. We have constructed a 1-1 correspondence between local boundary components β 2 of X at x,β 1 ) and local boundary components β 2 of X at x with β 2 β 1. This 1-1 correspondence is independent of the choice of chart U,φ). Identifying x,β 1 ), β ) 2 with x,β1,β 2 ) gives 3) for k = 2. We prove the general case by induction on k. The case k = 0 is trivial, k = 1 is 1), and k = 2 we have proved above. For the inductive step, having proved 3) for k l < n, we show that at a point of l X identified with p,β 1,...,β l ) under 3), local boundary components of l X are in 1-1 correspondence with local boundary components β l+1 of X at p distinct from β 1,...,β l. Definition Write S k for the symmetric group on k elements, the groupof bijections σ : {1,...,k} {1,...,k}. From 3) we see that k X has a natural, free action of S k by permuting β 1,...,β k, given by σ : x,β 1,...,β k ) x,β σ1),...,β σk) ). Each σ S k acts on k X as an isomorphism of n k)-manifolds with corners a diffeomorphism). Thus, if G is a subgroup of S k, then the quotient k X)/G is also an n k)-manifold with corners. In particular, taking G = S k, we define the k-corners C k X) of X to be C k X) = { x,{β 1,...,β k }) : x X, β 1,...,β k are distinct local boundary components for X at x } = k X/S k, an n k)-manifold with corners. Note that β 1,...,β k are unordered in 4), but ordered in 3). We have isomorphisms C 0 X) = X and C 1 X) = X. Remark We review how our definitions so far relate to those in use by other authors. For manifolds without or with boundary, all definitions the author has found see Kobayashi and Nomizu [7] or Lang [8], for instance) are equivalent to Definition 2.1. However, for manifolds with corners, there are four main inequivalent definitions. Our terminology for a),b),d) follows Jänich [5, 1.1], and for c) follows Monthubert [14, 2.2]. a) Manifolds with corners are as in Definition 2.1. b) A manifold with corners X is called a manifold with faces if each x X lies in the image of depth X x = i 1 X x) different connected components of X under i X : X X. 4) 6

7 c) A manifold with corners X is called a manifold with embedded corners if there exists a decomposition X = 1 X 2 X N X for finite N 0 with i X open and closed in X, such that i X ix : i X X is injective for i = 1,...,N. We allow i X =. d) For each integer N 0, an N -manifold is a manifold with corners X together with a given decomposition X = 1 X N X with i X open and closed in X, such that i X ix : i X X is injective for i = 1,...,N. We allow i X =. Note that N has no relation to dimx. A 0 -manifold is a manifold without boundary, and a 1 -manifold is a manifold with boundary. Note that c) implies b) implies a), and d) becomes c) after forgetting the decomposition X = 1 X N X. An example satisfying a) but not b) d) is the teardrop T = { x,y) R 2 : x 0, y 2 x 2 x 4}, shown in Figure 2.1. For compact X b) also implies c), but one can find pathological examples of noncompact X which satisfy b), but not c) or d). Cerf [1], Douady [2], Margalef-Roig and Outerelo Dominguez [11], and others define manifolds with corners as in a). Melrose [12,13] and authors who follow him define manifolds with corners as in c); Melrose [13, 1.6] calls manifolds with corners in sense a) t-manifolds. Jänich [5, 1.1] defines manifolds with corners in senses a),b) and d), but is primarily interested in d). Laures [10] also works with N - manifolds, in sense d). y x Figure 2.1: The teardrop, a 2-manifold with corners of type a) The boundary X of a manifold with corners X is also defined in different ways in the literature. In our picture, X is a manifold with corners, with an immersion i X : X X which is not necessarily injective, so that X may not be a subset of X. This follows Douady [2, 6], who defines k X in his notation) to be equivalent to our C k X) in 4), so that his 1 X agrees with our X. All the other authors cited define X to be i X X) in our notation, so that X is a subset of X, but is not necessarily a manifold with corners. But in c),d) above, the i X are both subsets of X and manifolds with corners. If X,Y are manifolds with corners of dimensions m,n, there is a natural way to make the product X Y into a manifold with corners, of dimension m+n. The following result on boundary and k-corners of X Y is easy to prove by considering local models R m+n a+b = R m a Rn b for X Y. 7

8 Proposition Let X, Y be manifolds with corners. Then there are natural isomorphisms of manifolds with corners X Y) = X Y) X Y), 5) C k X Y) = i,j 0, i+j=k C ix) C j Y). 6) Note that 5) and 6) imply that k X Y) = k k i=1 i) i X k i Y, 7) dimx Y k=0 C k X Y) = [ dimx i=0 C i X) ] [ dimy j=0 C j Y) ]. 8) We will see in 4 that if X is a manifold with corners then we can make dimx i=0 C i X) behave functorially under smooth maps. The map X C k X) commutes with boundaries. The proof is again an easy exercise by considering local models R m a for X. Proposition Let X be a manifold with corners and k 0. Then there are natural identifications, with the first a diffeomorphism: C k X) ) = Ck X) = { x,β 1,{β 2,...,β k+1 }) : x X, β 1,...,β k+1 are distinct local boundary components for X at x }. 9) The next definition will be used in defining smooth maps in 3. Definition Let X be a manifold with corners, and x,β) X. A boundary defining function for X at x,β) is a pair V,b), where V is an open neighbourhood of x in X and b : V [0, ) is a map, such that b : V R is smooth in the sense of Definition 2.2, and db x : T x V T 0 [0, ) is nonzero, and there exists an open neighbourhood Ṽ of x,β) in i 1 X V) X, with b i X Ṽ 0, and i X Ṽ : Ṽ { x V : bx ) = 0 } is a homeomorphism between Ṽ and an open subset of { x V : bx ) = 0 }. Thus the boundary X is defined near x,β) by the equation b = 0 in X near x. Using the ideas on fibre products of manifolds with corners in 6, one can say more: X near x,β) is naturally isomorphic to the fibre product of manifolds with corners V b,[0, ),i {0} near x,0), where i : {0} [0, ) is the inclusion, and the fibre product exists near x, 0). Here are some properties of such V, b). The proofs are elementary. Proposition Let X be an n-manifold with corners, and x,β) X. a) There exists a boundary defining function V,b) for X at x,β). b) Let V,b) and V,b ) be boundary defining functions for X at x,β). Then there exists an open neighbourhood V of x in V V and a smooth function g : V 0, ) R such that b V b V g. 8

9 c) Let V,b) be a boundary defining function for X at x,β). Then there exists a chart U,φ) on the manifold X, such that U is open in R n k for 0 < k n and 0 U with φ0) = x, and β is the image of the local boundary component x 1 = 0 of U at 0, and φu) V, and b φ x 1 : U [0, ). d) Let U,φ) be a chart on the manifold X, such that U is open in R n k and u U with φu) = x, and β is the image of the local boundary component x i = 0 of U at u for i k. Then φu),x i φ 1) is a boundary defining function for X at x,β). 3 Smooth maps of manifolds with corners Hereisourdefinitionofsmooth maps f : X Y ofmanifoldswith cornersx,y. Definition 3.1. Let X,Y be manifolds with corners of dimensions m,n. A continuous map f : X Y is called weakly smooth if whenever U,φ),V,ψ) are charts on the manifolds X,Y then ψ 1 f φ : f φ) 1 ψv)) V is a smooth map from f φ) 1 ψv)) R m to V R n, where smooth maps between subsets of R m,r n are defined in Definition 2.1. A weakly smooth map f : X Y is called smooth if it satisfies the following additional condition over X, Y. Suppose x X with fx) = y Y, and β is a local boundary component of Y at y. Let V,b) be a boundary defining function for Y at y,β). Then f 1 V) is an open neighbourhood of x in X, and b f : f 1 V) [0, ) is a weakly smooth map. We require that either b f 0 on an open neighbourhood of x in f 1 V), or f 1 V),b f) is a boundary defining function for X at x, β), for some unique local boundary component β of X at x. We also define five special classes of smooth maps: Definition 3.2. Let X,Y be manifolds with corners of dimensions m,n, and f : X Y a weakly smooth map. If x X with fx) = y then in the usual way there is an induced linear map on tangent spaces df x : T x X T y Y. In the notation of Definition 2.2, df x : T x X T y Y maps IST x X) IST y Y), that is, df x maps inward-pointing vectors to inward-pointing vectors. Let x S k X) and y S l Y). Then the inclusion T x S k X)) IST x X) T x X is modelled on {0} R n k [0, ) k R n k R n. Hence T x S k X)) = IST x X) IST x X), and similarly T y S l Y)) = IST y Y) IST y Y). Since df x maps IST x X) IST y Y) it maps IST x X) IST x X) IST y Y) IST y Y), that is, df x maps T x S k X)) T y S l Y)). Hence there is an induced linear map df x ) : T x X/T x S k X)) T y Y/T y S l Y)). 10) Now let f : X Y be a smooth map. 9

10 i) We call f a diffeomorphism if f has a smooth inverse f 1 : Y X. ii) We call f an immersion if df x : T x X T fx) Y is injective for all x X. iii) We call f an embedding if it is an injective immersion. iv) We call f a submersion if df x : T x X T fx) Y and df x : T x S k X)) T fx) S l Y)) are surjective for all x X, where x S k X), fx) S l Y). v) We call f boundary-submersive, or b-submersive, if df x ) in 10) is surjective for all x X. Note that df x surjective implies df x ) surjective, so submersions are automatically b-submersive. Here is how Definition 3.1 relates to other definitions in the literature: Remark 3.3. Weakly smooth maps f : X Y are just the obvious generalization of the usual definition [7, I.1] of smooth maps for manifolds without boundary. If Y = the additional condition in Definition 3.1 is vacuous, and weakly smooth maps are smooth. Note that the definition of smooth maps f : X R in Definition 2.2 is equivalent to Definition 3.1 when Y = R. Our definition of smooth maps between manifolds with corners is not equivalent to any other definition that the author has found in the literature, though it is related. Most authors, such as Cerf [1, I.1.2], define smooth maps of manifolds with corners to be weakly smooth maps, in our notation. But there are also two more complex definitions. Firstly, Monthubert [14, Def. 2.8] defines morphisms of manifolds with corners f : X Y. One can show that these are equivalent to b-submersive smooth maps, in our notation. We prefer our definition, as b-submersive smooth maps do not have all the properties we want. In particular, Theorem 3.4iv),vi) below fail for b-submersive smooth maps. Secondly, Melrose[13, 1.12] defines b-maps between manifolds with corners. Let f : X Y be a weakly smooth map. We call f a b-map if the following holds. Let x X with fx) = y, and let the local boundary components of X at x be β 1,..., β k, and of Y at y be β 1,...,β l. Suppose Ṽi, b i ) is a boundary defining function for X at x, β i ), i = 1,...,k, and V j,b j ) a boundary defining function for Y at y,β j ), j = 1,...,l. Then for all j = 1,...,l either b j f should be zero near x in X, or there should exist e 1j,...,e kj N such that b j f G j k i=1 b eij i near x in X for smooth G j > 0. Thus, a smooth map in the sense of Definition 3.1 is exactly a b-map f : X Y such that for all such x,y and j = 1,...,l, one of e 1j,...,e kj is 1 and the rest are zero. So our smooth maps are a special class of Melrose s b-maps. Here are some properties of smooth maps. The proofs are elementary. Theorem 3.4. Let W,X,Y,Z be manifolds with corners. i) If f : X Y and g : Y Z are smooth then g f : X Z is smooth. ii) The identity map id X : X X is smooth. iii) Diffeomorphisms f : X Y are equivalent to isomorphisms of smooth manifolds, that is, to homeomorphisms of topological spaces f : X Y which identify the maximal atlases on X and Y. 10

11 iv) The map i X : X X in Definition 2.6 is a smooth immersion. v) If f : W Y and g : X Z are smooth, the product f g : W X Y Z given by f g)w,x) = fw),gx) ) is smooth. vi) If f : X Y and g : X Z are smooth, the direct product f,g) : X Y Z given by f,g)x) = fx),gx) ) is smooth. vii) Regarding the empty set as a manifold and the point {0} as a 0-manifold, the unique maps : X and π : X {0} are smooth. Theorem 3.4i),ii) show that manifolds with corners form a category, which we write Man c, with objects manifolds with corners X and morphisms smooth maps f : X Y. We write Man b for the full subcategory of Man c whose objects are manifolds with boundary, and Man for the full subcategory of Man c whoseobjectsaremanifoldswithoutboundary, sothat Man Man b Man c. Theorem 3.4v),vi) have a category-theoretic interpretation in terms of products in Man c, and vii) says that is an initial object in Man c, and {0} is a terminal object in Man c. Here are some examples. Example 3.5. a) IfX isamanifold with corners,the diagonalmap X : X X X, X : x x,x), is a smooth embedding. This follows from Theorem 3.4ii),vi), as X = id X,id X ). If X then X is not b-submersive, so it is not a morphism of manifolds in the sense of Monthubert [14, Def. 2.8]. b) If X,Y are manifolds with corners then the projection π X : X Y X is a smooth submersion. This follows from Theorem 3.4ii),v),vii), by identifying π X : X Y X with id X π : X Y X {0}. c) The inclusion i : [0, ) R is smooth, but it is not a submersion, since at 0 [0, ) the map di 0 : T 0 S 0 [0, ) ) T 0 S 1 R) is not surjective. d) The map f : R [0, ), fx) = x 2 is weakly smooth but not smooth, as the additional condition in Definition 3.1 fails at x = 0. e) The map f : [0, ) 2 [0, ), fx,y) = x + y is weakly smooth but not smooth, as Definition 3.1 fails at x,y) = 0,0). f) The map f : [0, ) 2 [0, ), fx,y) = xy is weakly smooth but not smooth, as Definition 3.1 fails at x,y) = 0,0). However, f is a b-map in the sense of Melrose [13, 1.12], with e 11 = e 21 = 1. 4 Describing how smooth maps act on corners If f : X Y is a smooth map ofmanifolds with corners, then f may relate k X to l Y for k,l 0 in complicated ways. We now explain two different ways to describe these relations. The first involvesadecomposition X Y Y = Ξ f + Ξf and maps ξ f + : Ξf + X and ξf : Ξf X. This will be important in [6] when we define d-manifolds with corners and d-orbifolds with corners, which are derived versions of manifolds and orbifolds with corners. To make this generalization we find it helpful to replace a manifold with corners X by the 11

12 triple X, X,i X ), so we need to characterize smooth maps f : X Y in terms of the triples X, X,i X ),Y, Y,i Y ). Definition 4.1. Let X,Y be manifolds with corners, and f : X Y a smooth map. Consider the smooth maps f : X Y and i Y : Y Y as continuous maps of topological spaces. Then we may form the fibre product of topological spaces X Y Y = X f,y,iy Y, given explicitly by X Y Y = { x,y,β) ) X Y : fx) = y = i Y y,β) }. This is a closed subspace of the topological space X Y, since X, Y are Hausdorff, and so it is a topological space with the subspace topology. By Definition 3.1, for each x,y,β) ) X Y Y, if V,b) is a boundary defining function for Y at y,β), then either b f 0 near x, or f 1 V),b f) is a boundary defining function for X at some x, β). Define subsets Ξ f +,Ξ f of X Y Y by x,y,β) ) Ξ f + if b f 0 near x, and x,y,β) ) Ξ f otherwise. Define maps ξ f + : Ξf + X by ) ξf + x,y,β) = x and ξ f : Ξf X by ξ f ) x,y,β) = x, β), for x, β) as above. It is easy to show that Ξ f ±,ξf ± can also be defined solely in terms of x,y,β) ) and df x, and so they are independent of the choice of V, b), and are well-defined. Here are some properties of these Ξ f ±,ξ±. f A continuous map g : X Y is a finite covering map if every y Y has an open neighbourhood U such that g 1 U) is homeomorphic to U T for some finite set T with the discrete topology, and g : ξ 1 f U) U corresponds to the projection U S U. Proposition 4.2. Let f : X Y be a smooth map of manifolds with corners, and Ξ f ±,ξf ± be as in Definition 4.1, and set n = dimx. Then a) Ξ f ± are open and closed subsets of X Y Y, with X Y Y = Ξ f + Ξf. b) ξ f + : Ξf + X and ξf : Ξf topological spaces, with ξ f + π X Ξ f + X are proper, finite covering maps of and i X ξ f π X Ξ f. c) Part b) implies there is a unique way to make Ξ f + into an n-manifold with corners and Ξ f into an n 1)-manifold with corners so that ξf ± are local diffeomorphisms, and so covering maps of manifolds. Then the projections π X : Ξ f ± X and π Y : Ξ f ± Y are smooth maps. Proof. For a), clearly X Y Y = Ξ f + Ξf. Let x,y,β) ) X Y Y, and V,b) be a boundary defining function for Y at y,β). Then V,b) is also a boundary defining function for Y at any y,β ) sufficiently close to y,β) in Y. Hence if x,y,β ) ) is sufficiently close to x,y,β) ) X Y Y then V,b) is also a boundary defining function for Y at y,β ). We have x,y,β) ) Ξ f + if b f 0 near x. Fixing V,b) this is an open condition in x, so Ξ f + is open in X Y Y, and thus Ξ f = X Y Y) \ Ξ f + is closed in X Y Y. Similarly, ) x,y,β) Ξ f if f 1 V),b f) is a boundary defining function for X at some 12

13 x, β). Fixing V,b) this is an open condition in x, β), so Ξ f is open, and Ξ f + = X Y Y)\Ξ f is closed, proving a). Forb), theidentitiesξ f + π X Ξ f andi X ξ f π X + Ξ f are immediate. First consider ξ f + : Ξf + X. Since i Y : Y Y is proper and finite by Lemma 2.8, π X : X Y Y X is proper and finite by properties of topological fibre products, and so ξ f + = π X Ξ f : Ξf + + X is proper and finite as Ξf + is closed in X Y Y. To see that ξ f + is a covering map, note that it is a local homeomorphism, since as above, given x,y,β) ) Ξ f +, if x is close to x in X then setting y = fx ), V,b) is a boundary defining function for Y at y,β ) for some unique local boundary component β of Y at β, and then x,y,β ) ) Ξ f + with + ξf x,y,β ) ) = x. We have constructed a local inverse x x,y,β ) ) for ξ f + which is clearly continuous, so ξ f + is a local homeomorphism, and thus a finite covering map, as it is finite. Next consider ξ f : Ξf X. As above, given x,y,β) ) Ξ f we may fix a boundary defining function V,b) for Y at y,β), and then for x,y,β ) ) near x,y,β) ) in Ξ f we have ξ f x,y,β ) ) = x, β ), where β is the unique local boundary component of X at x such that f 1 V),b f) is a boundary defining function for X at x, β ). Therefore ξ f is continuous, as β depends continuously on x. As above π X : X Y Y X is proper and finite, so i X ξ f = π X Ξ f : Ξf X is proper and finite as Ξ f is closed, and hence ξ f is proper and finite. We show ξ f is a finite covering map by constructing a local inverse x, β ) x,y,β ) ) as for ξ f +. This proves b). For c), π X : Ξ f + X is ξ f + : Ξ f + X and π X : Ξ f X is i X ξ f : Ξ f X, so π X : Ξ f ± X are smooth as ξf ± are covering maps of manifolds, and so smooth. To see π Y : Ξ f ± Y aresmooth, note that i Y π Y f π X asmaps Ξ f ± Y, so i Y π Y : Ξ f ± Y is smooth, and it follows that π Y : Ξ f ± Y is smooth as π Y is continuous and i Y : Y Y is an immersion. Using Ξ f ±,ξ f ± we can define a decomposition X = f +X f X. Proposition 4.3. Let f : X Y be a smooth map of manifolds with corners. Define f X = ξf Ξf ) and f + X = X \ξf Ξf ), so that X = f + X f X. Then f ±X are open and closed in X, so they are manifolds with corners. Proof. As ξ f : Ξf X is a covering map by Proposition 4.2b), ξf Ξf ) is open in X. Since ξ f is proper and Ξf, X are Hausdorff, ξf Ξf ) is closed in X. So f X, and hence f + X = X \ f X, are open and closed in X. We can characterize b-submersive morphisms f : X Y in Definition 3.2v) in terms of Ξ f,ξ f. The proof is an easy exercise. Lemma 4.4. Let f : X Y be a smooth map of manifolds with corners. Then f is b-submersive if and only if Ξ f = X Y Y, so that Ξ f + =, and ξ f : Ξ f X is injective. 13

14 We nowmoveontooursecondwayofdescribinghowf relates k X and l Y. Equation8) showed that if X is a manifold with cornersthen X i 0 C ix) commutes with products of manifolds. We will explain how to lift a smooth map f : X Y up to a map Cf) : i 0 C ix) j 0 C jy) which is in a generalized sense) smooth, and which is functorial in a very strong sense. Definition 4.5. Let X,Y be smooth manifolds with corners and f : X Y a smooth map. Define Cf) : dimx i=0 C i X) dimy j=0 C j Y) by Cf) : x,{ β 1,..., β i } ) y,{β 1,...,β j } ), where {β 1,...,β j }= { β : x,y,β) ) Ξ f, ξf x,y,β) ) =x, βl ), l=1,...,i }. 11) Definition 4.6. Let {X i : i I} and {Y j : j J} be families of manifolds, where I,J are indexing sets. We do not assume that all X i have the same dimension, or that all Y j have the same dimension, so i I X i and j J Y j need not be manifolds. We call a map f : i I X i j J Y j smooth if f is continuous, and for all i I and j J the map f Xi f 1 Y j) : X i f 1 Y j ) Y j is a smooth map of manifolds. Here Y j is an open and closed subset of the topological space j J Y j, so X i f 1 Y j ) is an open and closed subset of X i as f is continuous, and thus X i f 1 Y j ) is a manifold. The next theorem, in part parallel to Theorem 3.4, gives properties of these maps Cf). The proofs are elementary. The theorem basically says that mapping X i 0 C ix) and f Cf) yields a functor which preserves smoothness, composition, identities, boundaries X, immersions i X : X X, and products and direct products of smooth maps. Theorem 6.11 will also show that the functor preserves strongly transverse fibre products. Theorem 4.7. Let W,X,Y,Z be manifolds with corners. i) If f : X Y is smooth then Cf) : i 0 C ix) j 0 C jy) is smooth in the sense of Definition 4.6. ii) If f : X Y and g : Y Z are smooth then Cg f) = Cg) Cf) : i 0 C ix) k 0 C kz). iii) Cid X ) = id k 0 C kx) : k 0 C kx) k 0 C kx). iv) The diffeomorphisms C k X) = C k X) in 9) identify Ci X ) : k 0 C k X) k 0 C kx) with i k 0 C kx) := k 0 i C k X) = k 0 C kx) k 0 C kx). v) Let f : W Y and g : X Z be smooth maps. Then 8) gives m 0 C mw X) = [ i 0 C iw) ] [ j 0 C jx) ], n 0 C ny Z) = [ k 0 C ky) ] [ l 0 C lz) ]. 12) 14

15 These identify Cf g) : m 0 C mw X) n 0 C ny Z) with Cf) Cg): [ i 0 C iw) ] [ j 0 C jx) ] [ k 0 C ky) ] [ l 0 C lz) ]. vi) Let f : X Y and g : X Z be smooth maps. Then 12) identifies C f,g) ) : j 0 C jx) n 0 C ny Z) with Cf),Cg) ) : j 0 C jx) [ k 0 C ky) ] [ l 0 C lz) ]. vii) Let f : X Y be a b-submersive smooth map. Then Cf) maps C i X) i j 0 C jy) for all i 0. Curiously, there is a second way to define a map i 0 C ix) j 0 C jy) with the same properties. Define Ĉf) : i 0 C ix) j 0 C jy) by Ĉf) : x,{ β 1,..., β i } ) y,{β 1,...,β j } ), where {β 1,...,β j } = { β : x,y,β) ) Ξ f, ξ f x,y,β) ) =x, βl ), 1 l i } { { β : x,y,β) ) Ξ f +}. Then the analogues of Theorems 4.7 and 6.11 also hold for Ĉf),Ĉg),... 5 Submersions Definition 3.2iv) defined submersions f : X Y between manifolds with corners X, Y. We show that submersions are locally isomorphic to projections. Proposition 5.1. Let X, Y be manifolds with corners, f : X Y a submersion, and x X with fx) = y. Then there exist open neighbourhoods X,Y of x,y in X,Y with fx ) = Y, a manifold Z with corners with dimx = dimy + dimz, and a diffeomorphism X = Y Z, such that f X : X Y is identified with π Y : Y Z Y. Proof. Let x X and y = fx) Y, with dimx = m, dimy = n and x S k X), y S l X). Choose charts U,φ), V,ψ) on X,Y with U,V open in R m k,rn l and 0 U, 0 V with φ0) = x, ψ0) = y and f φu) ψv). Write x 1,...,x m ), y 1,...,y n ) for the coordinates on U,V respectively. Write β i for the local boundary component φ {x i = 0}) for i = 1,...,k, and β j for the local boundary component ψ {y j = 0}) for j = 1,...,l. Lemma 4.4 implies that x,y,β j ) ) Ξ f with ξ f x,y,βj ) ) = x, β ij ) for each j = 1,...,l and some i j = 1,...,k, and i 1,...,i l are distinct as ξ f is injective. Thus l k, and reordering x 1,...,x k if necessary we suppose that i j = j. By Proposition 2.15d), ψv),y i ψ 1) is a boundary defining function for Y at y,β i ) for i = 1,...,l, so by Definition 3.1 f 1 ψv)),y i ψ 1 f ) is a boundary defining function for X at x, β i ) for i = 1,...,l. But φu),x i φ 1) is also a boundary defining function for X at x, β i ), so by Proposition 2.15b), making U smaller if necessary we can suppose that y i ψ 1 f φ x i g i 15

16 on U, for some smooth g i : U 0, ) and all i = 1,...,l. Combining this with the surjectivity conditions in Definition 3.2iv), we see that we may choose alternative coordinates x 1,..., x n ) on an open neighbourhood Ũ of 0 in U taking values in Rm k and zero at 0, such that y i ψ 1 f φ, i = 1,...,l, x i, i = l+1,...,k, x i y i k+l ψ 1 f φ, i = k +1,...,n k +l, some function of x k+1,...,x n, i = n k +l+1,...,m. Choose small ǫ > 0 so that [0,ǫ) k ǫ,ǫ) m k Ũ in coordinates x 1,..., x n ). Then defining X = φ { x 1,..., x m ) [0,ǫ) k ǫ,ǫ) m k } ), Y = ψ [0,ǫ) l ǫ,ǫ) n l) and Z = [0,ǫ) k l ǫ,ǫ) m k n+l, the proposition follows. Submersions f : X Y are nicely compatible with the boundaries X, Y. Proposition 5.2. Let f : X Y be a submersion, and X = f + X f X be as in Proposition 4.3. Then f + = f i X f + X : f +X Y is a submersion. There is a natural submersion f : f X Y with f i X f X i Y f. Proof. Lemma 4.4 shows that ξ f : Ξ f = X Y Y X is injective. Since X f = ξ Ξ f f ), it follows that ξ f : X Y Y X f is invertible. Define f : f X Y by f = π Y ξ f ) 1. Then i Y f = i Y π Y ξ f ) 1 = f π X ξ f ) 1 = f i X f X, since i Y π Y = f π X : X Y Y Y and π X ξ f ) 1 = i X f X : f X X as i X ξ f π X Ξ f by Proposition 4.2b). It remains to check that the maps f ± are submersions. Since being a submersion is a local property, by Proposition 5.1 it is enough to show f ± are submersions when f : X Y is a projection π Y : Y Z Y. We have a natural isomorphism Y Z ) = Y Z ) Y Z ). It is easy to see that f + Y Z ) = Y Z, so that f + becomes the projection Y Z Y which is a submersion, and that f Y Z ) = Y Z, so that f becomes the projection Y Z Y which is a submersion. Note that we can iterate this construction to decompose k X, so that 2 X = f+ + f +X) f+ f +X) f + f X) f f X), for instance, and f lifts to a submersion on every piece. 6 Transversality and fibre products of manifolds Let X,Y,Z be manifolds with corners and f : X Z, g : Y Z be smooth maps. From category theory, a fibre product X f,z,g Y in the category Man c consists of a manifold with corners W and smooth maps π X : W X, π Y : W Y such that f π X = g π Y : W Z, satisfying the universal property 16

17 that if W is a manifold with corners and π X : W X, π Y : W Y are smooth maps with f π X = g π Y, then there exists a unique smooth map h : W W with π X = π X h and π Y = π Y h. We now give sufficient conditions for fibre products of manifolds with corners to exist. Definition 6.1. Let X,Y,Z be manifolds with corners and f : X Z, g : Y Z be smooth maps. We call f,g transverse if the following holds. Suppose x X, y Y and z Z with fx) = z = gy), so that there are induced linear maps of tangent spaces df x : T x X T z Z and dg y : T y Y T z Z. Let x S j X), y S k Y) and z S l Z), so that as in Definition 3.2 df x maps T x S j X)) T z S l Z)) and dg y maps T y S k Y)) T z S l Z)). Then we requirethat T z Z = df x T x X)+dg y T y Y) andt z S l Z)) = df x T x S j X)))+ dg y T y S k Y))) for all such x,y,z. From Definition 3.2, if one of f,g is a submersion then f, g are automatically transverse. Remark 6.2. If X,Y,Z are manifolds without boundary then j = k = l = 0 in Definition 6.1, and both conditions reduce to the usual definition T z Z = df x T x X)+dg y T y Y) oftransversesmoothmaps. When X,Y,Z aremanifolds with corners we believe this definition of transversality is new, since it depends heavily on our definition of smooth maps which is also new. Definition 6.1 imposes two transversality conditions on f, g at x, y, z, the first on the corners C 0 X) = X,C 0 Y) = Y,C 0 Z) = Z of X,Y,Z of largest dimension at x,y,z, and the second on the corners C j X) = S j X), C k Y) = S k X), C l Z) = S l Z) locally) of X,Y,Z of smallest dimension at x,y,z. One might think that to prove Theorem 6.4 one would need to impose transversality conditions on corners C a X),C b Y),C c Y) of intermediate dimensions 0 a j, 0 b k, 0 c l as well. In fact these intermediate conditions are implied by our definition of smooth maps, since the requirement for f, g to pull boundary defining functions back to boundary defining functions is a kind of transversality condition at the boundaries. One of the motivations forourdefinition ofsmoothmapsofmanifoldswith cornerswastohaveasimple, not too restrictive condition for the existence of fibre products. Remark 6.3. Margalef-Roig and Outerelo Dominguez [11, 7.2] also define transversality of smooth maps between manifolds with corners, and prove their own version of Theorem 6.4 below. They work with Banach manifolds and C p maps for p = 0,1,...,. For finite-dimensional manifolds, their notion of smooth map map of class ) corresponds to our weakly smooth maps. However, their notion of transversality [11, Def ] is very restrictive. In our notation, if f : X Z and g : Y Z are weakly smooth maps, then f,g are transverse in the sense of [11, Def ] if and only if whenever x X and y Y with fx) = gy) = z Z then z Z, and x S j X), y S k Y) with T z Z = df x T x S j X)))+dg y T y S k Y))). In particular, fx) and gy) cannot intersect in the boundary strata S l Z) for l > 0 but only in the interior Z, so in effect Margalef-Roig and Outerelo Dominguez reduce to the case in which Z =, and then their [11, Prop ] is a special case of Theorem 6.4. So, for example, f,g are generally not transverse in the sense of [11, Def ] if one of f,g is a submersion, or even if f = id X : X X = Z. 17

18 For manifolds without boundary the following theorem is well-known, as in Lang [8, Prop. II.4]. For manifolds with corners Margalef-Roig and Outerelo Dominguez [11, Prop ] prove it with a stricter notion of transversality, as above. We believe this version is new. The proof is given in 8. Theorem 6.4. Suppose X,Y,Z are manifolds with corners and f : X Z, g : Y Z are transverse smooth maps. Then there exists a fibre product W = X f,y,g Z in the category Man c of manifolds with corners, which is given by an explicit construction, as follows. As a topological space W = {x,y) X Y : fx) = gy)}, with the topology induced by the inclusion W X Y, and the projections π X : W X and π Y : W Y map π X : x,y) x, π Y : x,y) y. Let n = dimx+dimy dimz, so that n 0 if W. The maximal atlas on W is the set of all charts U,φ), where U R n k is open and φ : U W is a homeomorphism with a nonempty open set φu) in W, such that π X φ : U X and π Y φ : U Y are smooth maps, and for all u U with φu) = x,y), the following induced linear map of real vector spaces is injective: dπ X φ) u dπ Y φ) u : T u U = R n T x X T y Y. 13) We note one important special case of Theorem 6.4, the intersection of submanifolds. Suppose X,Y are embedded submanifolds of Z, with inclusions i : X Z and j : Y Z. Then we say that X,Y intersect transversely if the smooth embeddings i,j are transverse. Then the fibre product W = X Z Y is just the intersection X Y in Z, and Theorem 6.4 shows that it is also an embedded submanifold of Z. If f,g are not transverse, then a fibre product X f,y,g Z may or may not exist in the category Man c. Even if one exists, from the point of view of derived differential geometry [16], it is in some sense the wrong answer. Here are some examples. Example 6.5. a) The inclusion i : {0} R is not transverse to itself. A fibre product {0} i,r,i {0} does exist in Man c in this case, the point {0}. Note howeverthat it doesnot havethe expected dimension: {0} R {0}hasdimension 0, but Theorem 6.4 predicts the dimension dim{0}+dim{0} dimr = 1. b) Consider the smooth maps f : R R 2 and g : R R 2 given by { x,e x2 sinπ/x)), x 0, fx) = x,0) and gx,y) = 0,0), x = 0. These are not transverse at f0) = g0) = 0,0). The fibre product does not exist in Man c. To see this, note that the topological fibre product R f,r 2,g R is {1/n,0) : 0 n Z} {0,0)}, which has no manifold structure. In the general case of Theorem 6.4, the description of W in terms of X, Y, Z is rather complicated, as can be seen from the proof in 8. Here are 18

19 three cases in which the expression simplifies. The proofs follow from the proof of Theorem 6.4 in 8, or alternatively from equation 21) below with i = 1, since W = C 1 W) and f,g are strongly transverse in each case. Proposition 6.6. Let X, Y be manifolds with corners, and f : X Y a submersion. Then there is a canonical diffeomorphism f X = X f,y,iy Y, 14) which identifies the submersions f : f X Y and π Y : X Y Y Y. Proposition 6.7. Let X, Y be manifolds with corners, Z a manifold without boundary, and f : X Z, g : Y Z be transverse smooth maps. Then f i X : X Z, g : Y Z are transverse, and f : X Z, g i Y : Y Z are transverse, and there is a canonical diffeomorphism X f,z,g Y ) = X f ix,z,g Y ) X f,z,g iy Y ). 15) Proposition 6.8. Let X,Y,Z be manifolds with corners, f : X Z a submersion and g : Y Z smooth. Then there is a canonical diffeomorphism X f,z,g Y ) = f +X f+,z,g Y ) X f,z,g iy Y ). 16) If both f, g are submersions there is also a canonical diffeomorphism X f,z,g Y ) = f + X f +,Z,g Y ) X f,z,g+ g + Y) f X f, Z,g g Y). 17) Equation 16) also holds if f,g are transverse and f is b-submersive, and 17) also holds if f,g are transverse and both are b-submersive. We will also discuss a stronger notion of transversality. To introduce it we prove the following lemma. Lemma 6.9. Let X,Y,Z be manifolds with corners, f : X Z and g : Y Z be transverse smooth maps, and Cf), Cg) be as in 11). Suppose x,{β 1,...,β j }) C j X) and y,{ β 1,..., β k }) C k Y) with Cf)x,{β 1,..., β j }) = Cg)y,{ β 1,..., β k }) = z,{ β 1,..., β l }) in C l Z). Then j +k l. Proof. Since Cf)x,{β 1,...,β j }) = z,{ β 1,..., β l }) it follows that df x maps the vector subspace T x β 1 T x β j in T x X to the vector subspace T z β1 T z βl in T z Z, as the restriction of df x to T x β 1 T x β j is naturally identified with dcf) x,{β1,...,β j}). Similarly, dg y maps T y β1 T y βk in T y Y to T z β1 T z βl in T z Z. Since f,g are transverse, we have T z Z = df x T x X) + dg y T y Y). Passing to the quotients T x X/T x β 1 T x β j ),...,T z Z/T z β1 T z βl ) and using the facts above shows that df x ) Tx X/T x β 1 T x β j ) ) +dg y ) Ty Y/T y β1 T y βk ) ) = T z Z/T z β1 T z βl ). As the vector spaces in 18) have dimensions j,k,l, it follows that j+k l. 18) 19

20 Definition Let X,Y,Z be manifolds with corners and f : X Z, g : Y Z be smooth maps. We call f,g strongly transverse if they are transverse, and whenever there are points in C j X),C k Y),C l Z) with Cf)x,{β 1,...,β j }) = Cg)y,{ β 1,..., β k }) = z,{ β 1,..., β l }) 19) we have either j +k > l or j = k = l = 0. That is, in Lemma 6.9, equality in j +k l is allowed only if j = k = l = 0. Suppose f,g are smooth with f a submersion. Then f,g are automatically transverse, as in Definition 6.1, and in 19), Theorem 4.7v) implies that j l. Hence if k > 0 then j+k > l. If k = 0 then l = 0 as Cg) maps C 0 Y) C 0 Z), so either j +k > l or j = k = l = 0. So f,g are strongly transverse. Also f,g are strongly transverse if f,g are smooth with g a submersion, or if f,g are transverse and Z =. In the situation of Theorem 6.4 we have a Cartesian square W πy π X Y g X f Z, which induces a commutative square i 0 C iw) CπY ) Cπ X) j 0 C jx) Cf) k 0 C ky) Cg) l 0 C lz). 20) Since as in Theorem 4.7 the transformation X i 0 C ix), f Cf) has very good functorial properties, it is natural to wonder whether the right hand square in 20) is also Cartesian. The answer is yes if and only if f,g are strongly transverse. The following theorem will be proved in 9. Theorem Let X,Y,Z be manifolds with corners, and f : X Z, g : Y Z be strongly transverse smooth maps, and write W for the fibre product X f,z,g Y in Theorem 6.4. Then there is a canonical diffeomorphism C i W) = j,k,l 0: i=j+k l Cj X) Cf) 1 C l Z)) ) Cf),Cl Z),Cg) Ck Y) Cg) 1 C l Z)) ) 21) for all i 0, where the fibre products are all transverse and so exist. Hence i 0 C iw) = j 0 C jx) Cf), l 0 C lz),cg) k 0 C ky). 22) Here the right hand commutative square in 20) induces a map from the left hand side of 22) to the right hand side, which gives the identification 22). Suppose f : X Z and g : Y Z are transverse, but not strongly transverse. Then by Definition 6.10 there exist points in C j X),C k Y),C l Z) satisfying 19) with j +k = l but j,k,l not all zero. These give a point in the right hand side of 21) with i = 0 which does not lie in the image of C 0 W) under the natural map, since C 0 W) maps to C 0 X),C 0 Y) and so cannot map to C j X),C k Y) as j,k are not both zero. Thus 21) and 22) are false if f,g are transverse but not strongly transverse. Here is an example of f,g which are transverse but not strongly transverse. 20