Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 32 references

Notes on the Invariance of Tautness Under Lie Sphere Transformations

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read An embedding of a compact manifold into $S^n$ is taut exactly when its Legendre lift is Lie-taut, making tautness invariant under Lie sphere transformations.

desk verdict A careful, self-aware exposition of Alvarez Paiva's proof; no new results, but the mathematics holds up and the one loose thread is easily tightened. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08834 v1 pith:RKPUA7OR submitted 2025-06-10 math.DG

Thomas E. Cecil This is my paper
classification math.DG MSC 53C4053C42
keywords tautsubmanifoldsLiespheretransformationsLegendrequadriccontactgeometryparabolicpencilsofspheresMorsetheoryČechhomology
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper's aim is to prove that tautness—the property of an embedded compact manifold in the sphere $S^n$ that every nondegenerate spherical distance function has the fewest possible critical points—is unchanged by Lie sphere transformations. The route is to lift a submanifold to its Legendre lift in the contact manifold of projective lines on the Lie quadric, and to define a new property, Lie-tautness, by counting, for almost every such line, how many points of the lift intersect it. The main theorem states that an embedding $\phi:V\to S^n$ is taut precisely when its Legendre lift is Lie-taut. Lie sphere transformations act on these lines and preserve the relevant incidence counts, so Lie-tautness is automatically invariant, and therefore tautness is invariant. If the paper is right, tautness is an intrinsic notion of Lie sphere geometry, not just of spherical metric geometry.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the Legendre lift $\lambda:B^{n-1}\to\Lambda^{2n-1}$: to each point $(x,N)$ of the unit normal bundle it assigns the projective line on the Lie quadric spanned by the point-sphere $[(1,\phi(x),0)]$ and the great-sphere $[(0,N,1)]$. Lie sphere transformations act on these lines, and the entire argument is designed to make tautness visible as a property of these line incidences. The auxiliary function $r_{(p,\xi)}:S^n-\{p\}\to(0,\pi)$ has level sets exactly the unoriented spheres in the parabolic pencil determined by a contact element $(p,\xi)$; Lemma 4.1 says its critical points are precisely the tangency points of those spheres with $\phi(V)$, with degeneracy occurring exactly at curvature spheres, and Lemma 4.2 plus Sard's theorem says almost every $r_{(p,\xi)}$ is a Morse function. The proof then counts the critical points of $r_{(p,\xi)}$ and equates this count with the number of lines intersecting a fixed line on the quadric, which is the definition of Lie-tautness.

What would settle it

Exhibit a compact connected embedding in $S^n$ whose Legendre lift is Lie-taut but for which some closed ball $B$ corresponding to an exceptional contact element has a non-injective map $H_*(\phi^{-1}(B))\to H_*(V)$ in $\mathbb{Z}_2$-homology; equivalently, find two Lie-equivalent embeddings of the same manifold where one is taut and the other is not. A direct numerical check is to apply a non-Möbius Lie sphere transformation, such as a parallel transformation, to a known taut embedding and compute whether every nondegenerate spherical distance function on the image has exactly $\beta(V;\mathbb{Z}_2)$ critical points.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, Theorem 4.1, is an equivalence: for an embedding $\phi:V\to S^n$ of a compact connected manifold with $\dim V<n$, $\phi(V)$ is $\mathbb{Z}_2$-taut in $S^n$ if and only if the Legendre lift $\lambda:B^{n-1}\to\Lambda^{2n-1}$ of $\phi$ is Lie-taut. Lie-tautness asks that for almost every line $\ell$ on the Lie quadric $Q^{n+1}$, the number of points $x\in B^{n-1}$ for which $\lambda(x)$ meets $\ell$ equals $\beta(B^{n-1};\mathbb{Z}_2)/2$. Since a Lie sphere transformation maps lines on the quadric to lines on the quadric and preserves complements of measure-zero sets, Lie-tautness is invariant under such transformations. Corollary 4.2 then concludes that two embeddings whose Legendre lifts are Lie equivalent are taut together. The proof works by replacing spherical distance functions, whose level sets are concentric sphere pencils, with functions $r_{(p,\xi)}$ whose level sets are the parabolic pencil of unoriented spheres at a contact element, and linking the critical-point count of $r_{(p,\xi)}$ to the incidence count defining Lie-tautness.

Load-bearing premise

The converse half of Theorem 4.1 assumes, without a proof in these notes, that every closed ball produced by an exceptional contact element is the limit of a nested decreasing sequence of closed balls from generic contact elements whose preimages shrink down to the exceptional preimage; the Čech-homology injectivity argument needs that approximation to go through.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Corollary 4.2: if two embeddings $\phi,\psi:V\to S^n$ have Lie-equivalent Legendre lifts, then $\phi$ is taut if and only if $\psi$ is taut.
  • Every Lie sphere transformation, including Möbius transformations and parallel transformations, sends a taut submanifold to a taut submanifold.
  • Tautness can be checked by counting, for almost every line on the Lie quadric, how many points of the Legendre lift meet that line; no distance function is needed.
  • The functions $r_{(p,\xi)}$ are Morse for almost every contact element, so the perfect critical-point count can be verified on a generic parabolic pencil rather than on every distance function.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper's claims, the same incidence-counting mechanism would define Lie versions of other tightness-type invariants: any property of a Legendre submanifold expressed by intersection numbers with lines on the quadric becomes automatically invariant under the Lie sphere group.
  • The converse direction of Theorem 4.1 depends on a nontrivial approximation statement (equations (67)-(68)) that the notes do not prove; filling this in would make the equivalence self-contained rather than inherited from the cited Čech-homology pattern.
  • A concrete computational consequence: sampling contact elements and counting critical points of $r_{(p,\xi)}$ gives a finite test for non-tautness of a given embedding, since a single generic contact element with too many critical points already disproves tautness.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript gives an expository proof, following Álvarez Paiva [2] and the author's own book [6], of the invariance of tautness of submanifolds of S^n under Lie sphere transformations. The main technical content is the introduction of the class of Lie-taut Legendre submanifolds and the equivalence (Theorem 4.1) between tautness of an embedding phi:V->S^n and Lie-tautness of its Legendre lift lambda:B^{n-1}->Lambda^{2n-1}. The proof uses functions r_{p,xi} whose level sets are parabolic pencils of unoriented spheres; Lemma 4.1 identifies critical points with tangency and degeneracy with curvature spheres, Lemma 4.2 uses Sard's theorem to show that generic r_{p,xi} are Morse, and Kuiper's Cech-homology criterion is then used to pass from Morse-theoretic counts to injectivity for all closed balls. Corollary 4.2 derives the desired invariance of tautness under Lie sphere transformations.

Significance. If Theorem 4.1 is fully established, the paper provides a detailed and readable written account of a known result, with the two key geometric lemmas proved in full. The Lie-tautness reformulation is natural, and the reduction of tautness to line-intersection counts on the Lie quadric is conceptually useful. The paper is explicitly derivative of [2] and [6], so its value is mainly expository; for that purpose the level of detail is appropriate. However, the converse direction of Theorem 4.1 contains a gap that is load-bearing and needs repair before the main equivalence can be considered proved.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4, equations (67)–(68)] The converse of Theorem 4.1 rests on the assertion, made at equations (67)–(68), that for a closed ball B defined by an exceptional contact element (p,xi) in Z one can find a nested sequence B_i of closed balls coming from non-exceptional contact elements, with phi^{-1}(B_i) decreasing to phi^{-1}(B). The text justifies this solely by saying that Z has measure zero. This inference is not formal. The map from T^1S^n x (0,pi) to the space of closed balls is many-to-one, its fiber over a ball being the choice of boundary point p on the sphere; a measure-zero set Z in T^1S^n can in principle contain the entire fiber over a particular ball, so the complement of Z need not contain a representative of B. Moreover, nestedness of the sublevel sets is an additional geometric condition: one must show, for example, that for a given ball one can choose a sequence of radii s_i decreasing to s, with the same center, such that each intermediate ball has a non-exceptional representative. A Fubini/Sard argument can likely supply this, but it is not written down. Without (67)–(68), the proof establishes injectivity of H_*(phi^{-1}(B))->H_*(V) only for balls coming from generic contact elements, so Theorem 2.2 is not fully applied and the equivalence in Theorem 4.1 is incomplete. Please add a proof of the approximation claim or replace it by a reference to a proved lemma.
  2. [§4, Theorem 4.1, converse] The converse also does not discuss the degenerate cases s=0 and s=pi in the sublevel sets V_s(r_{p,xi}). These give phi^{-1} of a point sphere and phi^{-1} of the whole sphere, respectively; they are trivial for the homology-injection criterion, but a sentence to that effect is needed for the application of Theorem 2.2 to all closed balls. This is a minor omission in itself, but it belongs to the same boundary issue that makes the treatment of exceptional balls incomplete.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3, after equation (7)] There is a typo: 'a a bijective correspondence' should be 'a bijective correspondence'.
  2. [§4, notation] The symbol B^{n-1} is used both for the unit normal bundle and for closed balls B (and B_i) in S^n. In Theorem 4.1 and equations (64)–(68) this is potentially confusing; please use different notation for the unit normal bundle, such as U^{n-1} or N^{n-1}.
  3. [§4, Definition 4.1] Definition 4.1 states Lie-tautness for an arbitrary compact, connected Legendre submanifold lambda:B^{n-1}->Lambda^{2n-1}, but the number beta(B^{n-1};Z_2)/2 need not be an integer for an arbitrary closed manifold (for example, a domain with odd Z_2-Betti sum). The definition is only meaningful for Legendre lifts of embeddings, where beta(B)=2beta(V) by Pinkall's result quoted in Remark 4.1; please restrict the definition accordingly or add an evenness hypothesis.
  4. [§4, Theorem 4.1, forward direction] In the forward direction, after equation (64), the text passes from injectivity for all closed balls in Theorem 2.2 to injectivity for the particular sublevel sets V_s(r_{p,xi}). This is correct, but it may be worth stating explicitly that r_{p,xi} is Morse for the generic (p,xi) chosen, so that Theorem 2.1 applies.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the proof is an expository adaptation of a known argument; one unproved nested-ball approximation is a gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: tautness is characterized by Kuiper's Cech-homology injectivity condition (Theorem 2.2); the functions r_{p,xi} are introduced with level sets forming parabolic pencils of unoriented spheres; Lemma 4.1 identifies critical points of r_{p,xi} with tangencies and degenerate critical points with curvature spheres; Lemma 4.2 uses Sard's theorem to show that, for almost every contact element, r_{p,xi} is a Morse function; Definition 4.1 defines Lie-tautness for Legendre submanifolds by an intersection count; Theorem 4.1 proves the equivalence between tautness of the embedding and Lie-tautness of its Legendre lift; and Lie-tautness is shown to be invariant under Lie sphere transformations, yielding Corollary 4.2. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no quantity is defined in terms of the result it is supposed to prove. The factor 1/2 in Definition 4.1 is justified by the geometric correspondence in Lemma 4.1 together with Pinkall's external result that beta(B^{n-1};Z2)=2beta(V;Z2). The self-citations to the author's book [6] are disclosed, and the lemmas used from that book are reproduced in the text rather than merely invoked. The one load-bearing step that lacks support is the assertion at equations (67)-(68) that, because the exceptional set Z has measure zero, every closed ball B from an exceptional contact element can be approximated by a nested sequence B_i of balls from non-exceptional contact elements with phi^{-1}(B_i) decreasing to phi^{-1}(B). This is an unproved geometric approximation claim and a potential gap, but it is not circular: it is not an instance of defining X in terms of Y, fitting a parameter and calling it a prediction, or reducing the conclusion to a self-citation chain. Thus the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No fitted or empirical parameters appear; the only substantive imported facts are standard theorems (Morse theory, Sard's theorem, Cech homology continuity) and Pinkall's Betti-number identity, all explicitly cited. No new geometric or physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Morse inequalities and the Morse-Cairns criterion (Theorem 2.1) equate a perfect Morse function with injectivity of the induced homology map on sublevel sets.
    Used in Section 2 to define tautness and in Theorem 4.1 to pass between critical point counts and homological injectivity.
  • standard math Sard's theorem ensures the set of contact elements whose parabolic pencil contains a curvature sphere has measure zero.
    Used in Lemma 4.2 and Corollary 4.1 to define 'almost every' for Lie-tautness.
  • standard math Continuity of Cech homology and inverse-limit injectivity transfer injectivity from a nested sequence of sublevel sets to the limit.
    Used in the converse of Theorem 4.1, equations (67)-(69).
  • domain assumption Pinkall's theorem: for the unit normal bundle B^{n-1} of a compact submanifold V^k in S^n with k<n-1, the sum of Z2 Betti numbers satisfies beta(B;Z2)=2 beta(V;Z2).
    Cited as [31] and invoked in Remark 4.1 and Theorem 4.1 to justify the factor 1/2 in Definition 4.1.
  • domain assumption Standard Lie sphere geometry: lines on the Lie quadric Q^{n+1} correspond to parabolic pencils of oriented spheres, and intersection of lines encodes oriented contact.
    Background for Definition 4.1 and the correspondence in equation (62).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Notes on the Invariance of Tautness Under Lie Sphere Transformations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RKPUA7OR

@misc{pith2026250608834,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Notes on the Invariance of Tautness Under Lie Sphere Transformations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RKPUA7OR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08834}
}
abstract

An embedding $\phi:V \rightarrow S^n$ of a compact, connected manifold $V$ into the unit sphere $S^n \subset {\bf R}^{n+1}$ is said to be taut, if every nondegenerate spherical distance function $d_p$, $p \in S^n$, is a perfect Morse function on $V$, i.e., it has the minimum number of critical points on $V$ required by the Morse inequalities. In these notes, we give an exposition of the proof of the invariance of tautness under Lie sphere transformations due to \'{A}lvarez Paiva. First we extend the definition of tautness of submanifolds of $S^n$ to the concept of Lie-tautness of Legendre submanifolds of the contact manifold $\Lambda^{2n-1}$ of projective lines on the Lie quadric $Q^{n+1}$. This definition has the property that if $\phi:V \rightarrow S^n$ is an embedding of a compact, connected manifold $V$, then $\phi(V)$ is a taut submanifold in $S^n$ if and only if the Legendre lift $\lambda$ of $\phi$ is Lie-taut. Furthermore, Lie-tautness is invariant under the action of Lie sphere transformations on Legendre submanifolds. As a consequence, we get that if $\phi:V \rightarrow S^n$ and $\psi:V \rightarrow S^n$ are two embeddings of a compact, connected manifold $V$ into $S^n$, such that their corresponding Legendre lifts are related by a Lie sphere transformation, then $\phi$ is a taut embedding if and only if $\psi$ is a taut embedding. Thus, in that sense, tautness is invariant under Lie sphere transformations. The key idea is to formulate tautness in terms of real-valued functions on $S^n$ whose level sets form a parabolic pencil of unoriented spheres in $S^n$, and then show that this is equivalent to the usual formulation of tautness in terms of spherical distance functions, whose level sets in $S^n$ form a pencil of unoriented concentric spheres.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [2]

    ´Alvarez Paiva,Tautness is invariant under Lie sphere transforma- tions, preprint, 2001; http://www.math.poly.edu/∼alvarez/pdfs/invariance.pdf

    J.C. ´Alvarez Paiva,Tautness is invariant under Lie sphere transforma- tions, preprint, 2001; http://www.math.poly.edu/∼alvarez/pdfs/invariance.pdf

    work page 2001

  2. [6]

    Cecil,Lie sphere geometry, with applications to submanifolds, Second Edition, Universitext, Springer, New York, 2008

    T. Cecil,Lie sphere geometry, with applications to submanifolds, Second Edition, Universitext, Springer, New York, 2008

    work page 2008

  3. [1]

    ´Alvarez Paiva,Contact topology, taut immersions, and Hilbert’s fourth problem, Differential and symplectic topology of knots and curves, 1–21, Amer

    J.C. ´Alvarez Paiva,Contact topology, taut immersions, and Hilbert’s fourth problem, Differential and symplectic topology of knots and curves, 1–21, Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2, 190, Amer. Math. Soc., Provi- dence, RI, 1999

    work page 1999

  4. [3]

    Banchoff,The spherical two-piece property and tight surfaces in spheres, J

    T. Banchoff,The spherical two-piece property and tight surfaces in spheres, J. Differential Geom. 4 (1970), 193–205

    work page 1970

  5. [4]

    Blaschke,Vorlesungen ¨ uber Differentialgeometrie und geometrische Grundlagen von Einsteins Relativit¨ atstheorie, Vol

    W. Blaschke,Vorlesungen ¨ uber Differentialgeometrie und geometrische Grundlagen von Einsteins Relativit¨ atstheorie, Vol. 3, Springer, Berlin, 1929

    work page 1929

  6. [5]

    Carter and A

    S. Carter and A. West,Tight and taut immersions, Proc. London Math. Soc. 25 (1972), 701–720

    work page 1972

  7. [7]

    Cecil and S.-S

    T. Cecil and S.-S. Chern,Tautness and Lie sphere geometry, Math. Ann. 278 (1987), 381–399

    work page 1987

  8. [8]

    Cecil and S.-S

    T. Cecil and S.-S. Chern,Dupin submanifolds in Lie sphere geometry, Differential geometry and topology, Proceedings Tianjin 1986–87, Edi- tors B. Jiang et al., Lecture Notes in Math. 1369, 1–48, Springer, Berlin- New York, 1989

    work page 1986

Show all 32 references
  1. [9]

    Cecil and S.-S

    T.E. Cecil and S.-S. Chern,Tight and Taut Submanifolds, T.E. Cecil and S.-S. Chern, editors, MSRI Publications 32, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997

    1997

  2. [10]

    Cecil, Q.-S

    T.E. Cecil, Q.-S. Chi and G.R. Jensen,Dupin hypersurfaces with four principal curvaturesII, Geom. Dedicata128(2007), 55–95

    2007

  3. [11]

    Cecil and G

    T. Cecil and G. Jensen,Dupin hypersurfaces with three principal curva- tures, Invent. Math. 132 (1998), 121–178. 24

    1998

  4. [12]

    Cecil and G

    T. Cecil and G. Jensen,Dupin hypersurfaces with four principal curva- tures, Geom. Dedicata 79 (2000), 1–49

    2000

  5. [13]

    Cecil and P

    T. Cecil and P. Ryan,Tight and Taut Immersions of Manifolds, Re- search Notes in Math. 107, Pitman, London, 1985

    1985

  6. [14]

    Cecil and P

    T. Cecil and P. Ryan,Geometry of Hypersurfaces, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, New York, 2015

    2015

  7. [15]

    Chern, An introduction to Dupin submanifolds,Differential geom- etry: A symposium in honour of Manfredo do Carmo, (Rio de Janeiro, 1988), Editors H.B

    S.-S. Chern, An introduction to Dupin submanifolds,Differential geom- etry: A symposium in honour of Manfredo do Carmo, (Rio de Janeiro, 1988), Editors H.B. Lawson and K. Tenenblat, 95–102, Pitman Mono- graphs Surveys Pure Appl. Math. 52, Longman Sci. Tech., Harlow, 1991

    1988

  8. [16]

    Eilenberg and N

    S. Eilenberg and N. Steenrod,Foundations of Algebraic Topology, Princeton University Press, 1952

    1952

  9. [17]

    Jensen, E

    G. Jensen, E. Musso and L. Nicolodi,Surfaces in classical geometries, Springer, Universitext, New York, 2016

    2016

  10. [18]

    Kuiper,On convex maps, Nieuw Archief voor Wisk

    N. Kuiper,On convex maps, Nieuw Archief voor Wisk. 10 (1962), 147– 164

    1962

  11. [19]

    Kuiper,Minimal total absolute curvature for immersions, Invent

    N. Kuiper,Minimal total absolute curvature for immersions, Invent. Math. 10 (1970), 209–238

    1970

  12. [20]

    Kuiper,Tight embeddings and maps

    N. Kuiper,Tight embeddings and maps. Submanifolds of geometrical class three inE n, The Chern Symposium 1979 (Proc. Internat. Sympos., Berkeley, Calif., 1979), 97–145, Springer, Berlin–New York, 1980

    1979

  13. [21]

    Kuiper,Taut sets in three space are very special, Topology 23 (1984), 323–336

    N. Kuiper,Taut sets in three space are very special, Topology 23 (1984), 323–336

    1984

  14. [22]

    Lie, ¨Uber Komplexe, inbesondere Linien- und Kugelkomplexe, mit Anwendung auf der Theorie der partieller Differentialgleichungen, Math

    S. Lie, ¨Uber Komplexe, inbesondere Linien- und Kugelkomplexe, mit Anwendung auf der Theorie der partieller Differentialgleichungen, Math. Ann. 5 (1872), 145–208, 209–256 (Ges. Abh. 2, 1–121)

  15. [23]

    Milnor,Morse Theory, Ann

    J. Milnor,Morse Theory, Ann. Math. Stud. 51, Princeton U. Press, Princeton, NJ, 1963

    1963

  16. [24]

    Miyaoka,Compact Dupin hypersurfaces with three principal curva- tures, Math

    R. Miyaoka,Compact Dupin hypersurfaces with three principal curva- tures, Math. Z. 187 (1984), 433–452. 25

    1984

  17. [25]

    Miyaoka,Taut embeddings and Dupin hypersurfaces, Differential Ge- ometry of Submanifolds, Proc

    R. Miyaoka,Taut embeddings and Dupin hypersurfaces, Differential Ge- ometry of Submanifolds, Proc. Conf. Kyoto, Japan, 1984, Lecture Notes in Math. 1090, 15–23, Springer, Berlin–New York, 1984

    1984

  18. [26]

    Miyaoka,Dupin hypersurfaces and a Lie invariant, Kodai Math

    R. Miyaoka,Dupin hypersurfaces and a Lie invariant, Kodai Math. J. 12 (1989), 228–256

    1989

  19. [27]

    Miyaoka,Dupin hypersurfaces with six principal curvatures, Kodai Math

    R. Miyaoka,Dupin hypersurfaces with six principal curvatures, Kodai Math. J. 12 (1989), 308–315

    1989

  20. [28]

    Morse and S

    M. Morse and S. Cairns,Critical Point Theory in Global Analysis and Differential Topology, Academic Press, New York, 1969

    1969

  21. [29]

    Pinkall,Dupin ’sche Hyperfl¨ achen inE 4, Manuscr

    U. Pinkall,Dupin ’sche Hyperfl¨ achen inE 4, Manuscr. Math. 51 (1985), 89–119 (see also an English translation by T.E. Cecil, Mathematics De- partment Faculty Scholarship 22. College of the Holy Cross. https://crossworks.holycross.edu/math fac scholarship/22/

    1985

  22. [30]

    Pinkall,Dupin hypersurfaces, Math

    U. Pinkall,Dupin hypersurfaces, Math. Ann. 270 (1985), 427–440

    1985

  23. [31]

    Pinkall,Curvature properties of taut submanifolds, Geom

    U. Pinkall,Curvature properties of taut submanifolds, Geom. Dedicata 20 (1986), 79–83

    1986

  24. [32]

    Terng and G

    C.-L. Terng and G. Thorbergsson,Taut immersions into complete Rie- mannian manifolds, Tight and Taut Submanifolds, MSRI Publications 32, 181–228, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997. Department of Mathematics and Computer Science College of the Holy Cross Worcester, MA 01610, U.S.A. e...

    1997

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.