I have come across two different defintions of a topological manifold –
Def 1: A topological manifold of dimension n is a second-countable Hausdorff
space M such that for all $p\in $M, there exists open neighborhood $U$ at $p$ and a homeomorphism $x:U\to x(U)\subseteq \mathbb{R}^{n}$
Def 2: A topological manifold M of dim. n is a Hausdorff topological space with an open cover $C$ with countable elements $U_i\in C$ and a collection of homeomorphism $\phi_i:U_i\to \phi_i(U)\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{n}$ where $\phi_i(U)$ is an open subset in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$.
-
Are these two equivalent? If not, which one of them is the correct one (if any of them is)?
-
Is second-countable same as to have an open cover $C$ with countable elements?
-
Does the target of chart map ($x/\phi$) need to be an open subset in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$?
Best Answer
Definition 1 is missing (or assuming) the requirement that $x(U)$ be open. With that addition, both definitions are equivalent.
Yes. This is because $\mathbb{R}^n$ is itself second countable. To show a countable cover implies a second countable manifold, choose a countable basis $\mathcal{B}$ for $\mathbb{R}^n$ (e.g. balls of rational center/radii), and let $\mathcal{B}'=\{\varphi_i^{-1}(B):B\in\mathcal{B},i\in\mathbb{N}\}$. I claim this is a countable basis for $M$.
Yes, removing that requirement allows for objects which are not conventionally thought of as manifolds, such as graphs or $\mathbb{Q}\subset\mathbb{R}$.