The Tangent Bundle
Having built a tangent space at each point, we now assemble them. Gathering the tangent spaces of a manifold into
a single set is straightforward; the substantive discovery is that this set is not merely an indexed family of
vector spaces but a smooth manifold in its own right, of twice the dimension, on which the original projection back
to \(M\) is a smooth map. This object — the tangent bundle — is where vector fields live, where flows are
integrated, and where the global geometry of \(M\) first becomes visible; it is also the prototype of the vector
bundles that organize all of differential geometry.
The tangent bundle as a set
Definition: The Tangent Bundle
Let \(M\) be a smooth manifold. The tangent bundle of \(M\) is the disjoint union of all its
tangent spaces,
\[
TM = \coprod_{p \in M} T_pM,
\]
whose elements we write as pairs \((p, v)\) with \(p \in M\) and \(v \in T_pM\). The
projection \(\pi : TM \to M\) sends a tangent vector to the point at which it is based,
\(\pi(p, v) = p\). When the base point is clear we abbreviate \((p, v)\) to \(v\) and write \(v_p\) when we
wish to emphasize it.
The disjoint union is essential: a tangent vector carries its base point as part of its identity, so that vectors
at different points are never identified even when they have the same components in some chart. As a first
example, the Euclidean tangent bundle is a product. Since
\(T_a\mathbb{R}^n \cong \mathbb{R}^n\)
canonically at every point, collecting these identifications gives
\(T\mathbb{R}^n \cong \mathbb{R}^n \times \mathbb{R}^n\), with the projection \(\pi\) becoming the projection onto
the first factor. We will see that this product structure is special to flat spaces and a few other manifolds; in
general \(TM\) is not a product, and detecting when it fails to be one is a recurring theme of the subject.
The smooth structure on \(TM\)
The charts of \(M\) induce charts on \(TM\) in the obvious way: over a coordinate domain, a tangent vector is
determined by the coordinates of its base point together with its components, giving \(2n\) numbers. Verifying
that these fit together into a smooth structure is an application of the
smooth manifold chart lemma,
the same tool that built the Grassmannian from charts.
Proposition: The Tangent Bundle Is a Smooth Manifold
For any smooth \(n\)-manifold \(M\), the tangent bundle \(TM\) has a natural topology and smooth structure
making it a \(2n\)-dimensional smooth manifold, with respect to which the projection \(\pi : TM \to M\) is
smooth.
Proof:
We first construct the charts. Given a smooth chart \((U, \varphi)\) for \(M\) with coordinate functions
\((x^1, \dots, x^n)\), the preimage \(\pi^{-1}(U) \subseteq TM\) consists of all tangent vectors based at
points of \(U\). Define \(\widetilde\varphi : \pi^{-1}(U) \to \mathbb{R}^{2n}\) by recording the base-point
coordinates and the components in the coordinate basis,
\[
\widetilde\varphi\!\left( v^i\,\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\bigg|_p \right)
= \bigl(x^1(p), \dots, x^n(p),\, v^1, \dots, v^n\bigr).
\]
Its image is \(\varphi(U) \times \mathbb{R}^n\), an open subset of \(\mathbb{R}^{2n}\), and it is a bijection
onto its image because its inverse is given explicitly by
\[
\widetilde\varphi^{-1}(x^1, \dots, x^n, v^1, \dots, v^n)
= v^i\,\frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\bigg|_{\varphi^{-1}(x)} .
\]
Now let \((U, \varphi)\) and \((V, \psi)\) be two smooth charts for \(M\), with corresponding charts
\((\pi^{-1}(U), \widetilde\varphi)\) and \((\pi^{-1}(V), \widetilde\psi)\) on \(TM\). The sets
\(\widetilde\varphi\bigl(\pi^{-1}(U) \cap \pi^{-1}(V)\bigr) = \varphi(U \cap V) \times \mathbb{R}^n\) and
likewise for \(\widetilde\psi\) are open in \(\mathbb{R}^{2n}\) — the base factor \(\varphi(U \cap V)\) is
open in \(\mathbb{R}^n\) because \(U \cap V\) is open in \(M\) and \(\varphi\) is a homeomorphism onto its
image — and using the
component transformation law
the transition map is
\[
\begin{align*}
\widetilde\psi \circ \widetilde\varphi^{-1}(x, v)
= \Big( &\tilde x^1(x), \dots, \tilde x^n(x), \\\\
&\frac{\partial \tilde x^1}{\partial x^j}(x)\, v^j, \dots,
\frac{\partial \tilde x^n}{\partial x^j}(x)\, v^j \Big),
\end{align*}
\]
which is smooth, since the base-point part is the smooth transition map of \(M\) and the fiber part is
polynomial in \(v\) with smooth coefficients.
Choosing a countable cover \(\{U_i\}\) of \(M\) by smooth coordinate domains yields a countable cover
\(\{\pi^{-1}(U_i)\}\) of \(TM\) by sets carrying these charts, and the conditions of the chart lemma are met.
For the Hausdorff condition, two tangent vectors in the same fiber lie in a common chart, while vectors
\((p, v)\) and \((q, w)\) in different fibers can be separated by taking disjoint coordinate domains
\(U \ni p\) and \(V \ni q\) in \(M\), whose preimages \(\pi^{-1}(U)\) and \(\pi^{-1}(V)\) are disjoint chart
domains separating the two. The chart lemma therefore endows \(TM\) with a \(2n\)-dimensional smooth structure.
Finally, in the charts \((U, \varphi)\) and \((\pi^{-1}(U), \widetilde\varphi)\) the projection has the
coordinate representation \(\pi(x, v) = x\), which is smooth.
The coordinates \((x^i, v^i)\) furnished by these charts are called the natural coordinates on
\(TM\) associated with the chart \((U, \varphi)\) of \(M\). If \(M\) has boundary, the same construction works with
one cosmetic change: rearranging the natural coordinates of a boundary chart to place the fiber components first,
as \((v^i, x^i)\), turns the natural chart into a boundary chart, so that \(TM\) is a smooth manifold with
boundary. We will not need this refinement and treat \(M\) as boundaryless by default.
Proposition: Tangent Bundles of Single-Chart Manifolds Are Products
If \(M\) is a smooth \(n\)-manifold with or without boundary that can be covered by a single smooth chart, then
\(TM\) is diffeomorphic to \(M \times \mathbb{R}^n\).
Proof:
If \((U, \varphi)\) is a global smooth chart, then \(U = M\) and \(\varphi\) is a diffeomorphism onto an open
subset of \(\mathbb{R}^n\) or \(\mathbb{H}^n\). The construction above makes the natural chart
\(\widetilde\varphi\) a bijection from \(TM = \pi^{-1}(M)\) onto \(\varphi(M) \times \mathbb{R}^n\), and the
smooth structure on \(TM\) is defined precisely by declaring \(\widetilde\varphi\) to be a diffeomorphism.
Composing with \(\varphi^{-1} \times \mathrm{Id}\) gives a diffeomorphism \(TM \cong M \times \mathbb{R}^n\).
Why "Bundle" and Not "Product"
The local picture is always a product: over any coordinate domain, \(TM\) looks like \(U \times \mathbb{R}^n\),
and the single-chart case above makes the whole bundle a product. It is tempting to conclude that \(TM\) is
globally \(M \times \mathbb{R}^n\) for every \(M\), but this is false for most manifolds. The local product
structure can fail to extend to a global one: as the coordinate domains are glued together, the fibers are
identified through the component transformation law, and the resulting twisting can obstruct any global
splitting of \(TM\) as a product. The word bundle records exactly this gap between the local product
structure and the global geometry that may obstruct it. The tangent bundle is the first and most important
example of a vector bundle.
The global differential
A smooth map between manifolds differentiates pointwise to a family of differentials, one at each point. Assembling
these into a single map between tangent bundles globalizes the differential, turning the pointwise linearization
into a smooth map of \(2n\)-dimensional manifolds.
Definition: The Global Differential
Let \(F : M \to N\) be a smooth map. The global differential (or global tangent
map) is the map
\[
dF : TM \to TN
\]
whose restriction to each tangent space \(T_pM\) is the pointwise
differential \(dF_p\); that
is, \(dF(p, v) = (F(p), dF_p(v))\). We continue to write \(dF_p(v)\) for the action of the differential at a
single point and \(dF(v)\) for the global map applied to a tangent vector \(v \in TM\).
Proposition: Properties of the Global Differential
Let \(F : M \to N\) and \(G : N \to P\) be smooth maps. The global differential \(dF : TM \to TN\) is smooth,
and it satisfies
(a) \(d(G \circ F) = dG \circ dF\);
(b) \(d(\mathrm{Id}_M) = \mathrm{Id}_{TM}\);
(c) if \(F\) is a diffeomorphism, then \(dF : TM \to TN\) is a diffeomorphism, with inverse
\((dF)^{-1} = d(F^{-1})\).
Proof:
For smoothness, work in natural coordinates. With respect to charts \((\pi^{-1}(U), \widetilde\varphi)\) on
\(TM\) and \((\pi^{-1}(V), \widetilde\psi)\) on \(TN\), the coordinate representation of \(dF\) records the
base-point map \(\widehat F\) together with the action of the differential on components, which by the
coordinate formula for the differential
is multiplication by the Jacobian of \(\widehat F\). Both parts are smooth functions of \((x, v)\), so \(dF\) is
smooth.
Properties (a)–(c) follow immediately from the corresponding
pointwise properties
of the differential. Each identity holds on every fiber \(T_pM\) by the pointwise statement, and since the
global differential is defined fiber by fiber, the fiberwise identities assemble into the stated global ones.
For instance \(d(G \circ F)\) restricts on \(T_pM\) to \(d(G \circ F)_p = dG_{F(p)} \circ dF_p\), which is the
restriction of \(dG \circ dF\); as this holds at every \(p\), the two global maps coincide.
With \(TM\) established as a smooth manifold and \(dF\) as a smooth map between such manifolds, the differential
has graduated from a pointwise gadget to a global construction. The remaining sections of this chapter exploit this
globalization in two directions: by following individual tangent vectors along curves, which recovers the
velocity-based picture from which Lie algebras were first defined, and by re-examining what a tangent vector is
from several equivalent points of view.
Velocity Vectors of Curves
The derivation definition of a tangent vector is intrinsic and clean, but it is far from the picture most people
carry of a tangent vector as the velocity of a moving point. This section reconciles the two. A smooth curve in
\(M\) has, at each instant, a velocity that is a tangent vector in the derivation sense; conversely every tangent
vector arises this way. The result restores the geometric image and, in doing so, completes a debt left open when
we first defined Lie algebras as velocities of curves through the identity.
The velocity of a curve
By a curve in \(M\) we mean a smooth map \(\gamma : J \to M\) from an interval
\(J \subseteq \mathbb{R}\); it is a parametrized curve, carrying not just an image but a rate of traversal. The
standard coordinate vector \(d/dt|_{t_0}\) spans the one-dimensional tangent space \(T_{t_0}\mathbb{R}\) — written
\(d/dt\) rather than \(\partial/\partial t\) by the usual convention for a single variable — and pushing it forward
by \(\gamma\) produces the velocity.
Definition: Velocity of a Curve
Let \(\gamma : J \to M\) be a smooth curve and \(t_0 \in J\). The velocity of \(\gamma\) at
\(t_0\) is the tangent vector
\[
\gamma'(t_0) = d\gamma\!\left( \frac{d}{dt}\bigg|_{t_0} \right) \in T_{\gamma(t_0)}M,
\]
also written \(\dot\gamma(t_0)\) or \(\tfrac{d\gamma}{dt}(t_0)\). It acts on a smooth function \(f\) by
differentiating \(f\) along the curve,
\[
\gamma'(t_0)\, f = (f \circ \gamma)'(t_0).
\]
In any chart, writing the component functions of \(\gamma\) as \(\gamma^i(t) = x^i \circ \gamma(t)\), the
coordinate formula for the differential
gives
\[
\gamma'(t_0) = \frac{d\gamma^i}{dt}(t_0)\, \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\bigg|_{\gamma(t_0)},
\]
so the components of the velocity are the ordinary derivatives of the component functions, exactly as in
Euclidean space.
Every tangent vector is a velocity
The construction can be reversed: any tangent vector, however abstractly defined, is realized as the velocity of an
explicit curve. This is the precise statement licensing the geometric picture.
Proposition: Every Tangent Vector Is a Velocity
Let \(M\) be a smooth manifold with or without boundary and \(p \in M\). Every \(v \in T_pM\) is the velocity
\(\gamma'(0)\) of some smooth curve \(\gamma\) in \(M\) with \(\gamma(0) = p\).
Proof:
Suppose first that \(p\) is an interior point, which includes the boundaryless case. Let \((U, \varphi)\) be a
smooth chart centered at \(p\), and write \(v = v^i\,\partial/\partial x^i|_p\). For sufficiently small
\(\varepsilon > 0\), define \(\gamma : (-\varepsilon, \varepsilon) \to U\) by the coordinate representation
\[
\gamma(t) = \varphi^{-1}(t v^1, \dots, t v^n).
\]
This is a smooth curve with \(\gamma(0) = \varphi^{-1}(0) = p\), and computing its velocity from the component
formula gives
\[
\gamma'(0) = \frac{d(t v^i)}{dt}\bigg|_{0}\, \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\bigg|_p
= v^i\, \frac{\partial}{\partial x^i}\bigg|_p = v.
\]
Now suppose \(p \in \partial M\), and let \((U, \varphi)\) be a smooth boundary chart centered at \(p\), with
\(v = v^i\,\partial/\partial x^i|_p\) as before. The coordinate formula \(\gamma(t) = \varphi^{-1}(tv^1, \dots, tv^n)\)
represents a point of \(M\) only when \(t v^n \geq 0\), since the chart maps into the half-space
\(\mathbb{H}^n = \{x^n \geq 0\}\). We accommodate this by restricting the domain according to the sign of
\(v^n\): if \(v^n = 0\) we take the domain \((-\varepsilon, \varepsilon)\) as before; if \(v^n > 0\) we take
\([0, \varepsilon)\); and if \(v^n < 0\) we take \((-\varepsilon, 0]\). In each case the same coordinate formula
defines a smooth curve in \(M\) with \(\gamma(0) = p\) and \(\gamma'(0) = v\).
Closing the Lie Algebra Definition
We can now complete the identification begun when tangent spaces were first defined. The
Lie algebra of a matrix
group \(G\) was introduced as the set of velocity vectors \(\gamma'(0)\) of smooth curves through the identity,
\(\mathfrak{g} = \{\gamma'(0) : \gamma(0) = I\}\). At the time, both halves of that phrase were provisional: we
had neither a tangent space at \(I\) to contain the velocities nor a definition of velocity itself. The
derivation construction supplied the first, identifying \(\mathfrak{g}\) with \(T_I G\); the present
proposition supplies the second, making \(\gamma'(0)\) a genuine tangent vector and showing that every element
of \(T_I G\) is realized as such a velocity. The original definition of the Lie algebra is therefore exactly
correct as stated, now resting on solid ground: \(\mathfrak{g}\) is the tangent space \(T_I G\), and its
elements are precisely the velocities of curves through the identity.
Velocities under composition
Velocities transform predictably under smooth maps: pushing a curve forward by \(F\) and then taking its velocity
is the same as taking the velocity and then applying the differential. This is the curve-level form of the chain
rule.
Proposition: The Velocity of a Composite Curve
Let \(F : M \to N\) be a smooth map and \(\gamma : J \to M\) a smooth curve. For any \(t_0 \in J\), the velocity
at \(t_0\) of the composite curve \(F \circ \gamma : J \to N\) is
\[
(F \circ \gamma)'(t_0) = dF\bigl(\gamma'(t_0)\bigr).
\]
Proof:
Returning to the definition of velocity and using the
chain rule for differentials,
\[
\begin{align*}
(F \circ \gamma)'(t_0)
&= d(F \circ \gamma)\!\left( \frac{d}{dt}\bigg|_{t_0} \right) \\\\
&= dF \circ d\gamma\!\left( \frac{d}{dt}\bigg|_{t_0} \right)
= dF\bigl(\gamma'(t_0)\bigr).
\end{align*}
\]
Read in reverse, this proposition becomes a practical computational tool. To evaluate \(dF_p(v)\) one need not pass
through coordinates at all: it suffices to choose any curve realizing \(v\) and differentiate the image curve.
Corollary: Computing the Differential via a Velocity Vector
Let \(F : M \to N\) be a smooth map, \(p \in M\), and \(v \in T_pM\). For any smooth curve \(\gamma\) with
\(\gamma(0) = p\) and \(\gamma'(0) = v\),
\[
dF_p(v) = (F \circ \gamma)'(0).
\]
Proof:
Such a curve exists by the proposition that every tangent vector is a velocity, and the previous proposition
gives \((F \circ \gamma)'(0) = dF(\gamma'(0)) = dF_p(v)\). In particular the left-hand side does not depend on
which realizing curve \(\gamma\) is chosen, since the right-hand side \(dF_p(v)\) makes no reference to
\(\gamma\).
Recovering the Exponential Picture
This corollary retroactively justifies the calculations that defined matrix Lie groups. The
one-parameter subgroups
\(t \mapsto e^{tX}\) were treated throughout as curves to be differentiated, with \(X\) recovered as
\(\tfrac{d}{dt}\big|_0 e^{tX}\). That manipulation is now legitimate on the nose: \(X\) is the velocity at the
identity of the smooth curve \(\gamma(t) = e^{tX}\), an element of \(T_I G = \mathfrak{g}\), and the corollary
is the general principle that lets one read off a differential by differentiating along such a curve. The
informal "differentiate the exponential" of the earlier development and the formal differential \(dF_p\) are
one and the same operation.
The velocity perspective and the derivation perspective are now seen to be two views of a single object. The final
section confirms that this multiplicity of viewpoints is the rule rather than the exception, surveying several
equivalent definitions of the tangent space and indicating where each is put to use downstream.
Alternative Definitions of the Tangent Space
The derivation definition is one of several routes to the tangent space, and a reader consulting the literature
will meet the others. Each characterizes \(T_pM\) up to canonical isomorphism, and each has a setting in which it
is the natural choice; later chapters draw on all three. We describe them in turn, indicating how each is shown
equivalent to the derivation definition and where each reappears downstream. The equivalences are stated as
sketches with references to the results that close them, in keeping with the principle that every argument the
site relies on is resolved within the site.
Tangent vectors as derivations of the space of germs
The most common alternative is built from germs of smooth functions, which localize a function to an arbitrarily
small neighborhood of a point.
Definition: Germs and the Germ Algebra
A smooth function element on \(M\) is an ordered pair \((f, U)\) with \(U \subseteq M\) open
and \(f : U \to \mathbb{R}\) smooth. Fixing \(p \in M\), declare two function elements whose domains contain
\(p\) equivalent, \((f, U) \sim (g, V)\), if \(f \equiv g\) on some neighborhood of \(p\). The equivalence class
of \((f, U)\) is the germ of \(f\) at \(p\), written \([f]_p\); the domain may be dropped from
the notation, since restricting \(f\) to any neighborhood of \(p\) represents the same germ. The set of all
germs at \(p\), denoted \(C^\infty_p(M)\), is a real vector space and an associative algebra under
\[
\begin{align*}
c\,[f]_p &= [cf]_p, \\\\
[f]_p + [g]_p &= [f + g]_p, \\\\
[f]_p\,[g]_p &= [fg]_p,
\end{align*}
\]
each defined on the intersection of the relevant domains, with zero element the germ of the zero function.
Definition: Tangent Vectors as Germ Derivations
A derivation of \(C^\infty_p(M)\) is a linear map \(v : C^\infty_p(M) \to \mathbb{R}\)
satisfying the Leibniz rule
\[
v[fg]_p = f(p)\, v[g]_p + g(p)\, v[f]_p.
\]
The space of all such derivations is denoted \(\mathcal{D}_pM\). It is canonically isomorphic to the tangent
space, \(\mathcal{D}_pM \cong T_pM\).
Proof Sketch:
A
derivation at \(p\)
in our sense acts on global smooth functions, but
locality
shows its value depends only on the germ, so it descends to a map on \(C^\infty_p(M)\); this gives a linear map
\(T_pM \to \mathcal{D}_pM\). It is injective because if a global derivation descends to the zero germ
derivation, then by locality it annihilates every global function and so is itself zero; and surjective because
a germ derivation can be evaluated on global functions through their
germs — the
extension lemma
guarantees every germ is the germ of a global smooth function, so no germ derivation is missed. The two spaces
are thus identified.
The germ definition makes the local nature of the tangent space especially transparent, with no bump functions
required. This is decisive in settings where bump functions are unavailable: since there are no analytic functions
that vanish on an open set without vanishing identically, the germ definition is the only one available on
real-analytic and complex-analytic manifolds. Its cost is a further layer of abstraction atop an already abstract
construction.
Tangent vectors as equivalence classes of curves
A second approach formalizes the idea of two curves "having the same velocity" at a point and defines a tangent
vector to be such a class of curves.
Definition: Tangent Vectors as Curve Classes
Consider all smooth curves \(\gamma : J \to M\) with \(0 \in J\) and \(\gamma(0) = p\). Declare two such curves
equivalent, \(\gamma_1 \sim \gamma_2\), if
\[
(f \circ \gamma_1)'(0) = (f \circ \gamma_2)'(0)
\]
for every smooth real-valued function \(f\) defined near \(p\). The set of equivalence classes is denoted
\(V_pM\), and there is a canonical bijection \(V_pM \leftrightarrow T_pM\).
Proof Sketch:
The velocity map \([\gamma] \mapsto \gamma'(0)\) sends a curve class to a tangent vector, and it is well defined
precisely because two curves are declared equivalent exactly when their velocities act identically on all
functions — which is to say when \(\gamma_1'(0) = \gamma_2'(0)\). It is surjective because every tangent vector
is the velocity of some curve, as shown earlier in this chapter, and injective by the very definition of the
equivalence relation. The differential of a smooth map
\(F : M \to N\) is then simply \([\gamma] \mapsto [F \circ \gamma]\), and the velocity at \(t_0\) of a curve
\(\gamma\) is the class of the reparametrized curve \(t \mapsto \gamma(t_0 + t)\).
This definition is the most geometrically intuitive of the three. Its serious drawback is that the vector-space
structure on \(V_pM\) is not at all obvious: adding two curve classes has no evident meaning until one transports
the operation across the bijection from \(T_pM\). The curve picture nonetheless becomes essential when tangent
spaces to submanifolds are characterized as classes of curves constrained to lie in the submanifold, and again when
the velocity of a one-parameter group of motions is read directly as a curve class.
Tangent vectors as equivalence classes of \(n\)-tuples
The final approach is the most computational and, historically, the first.
Definition: Tangent Vectors as \(n\)-Tuple Classes
A tangent vector at \(p\) is a rule assigning to each smooth coordinate chart containing \(p\) an ordered
\(n\)-tuple \((v^1, \dots, v^n) \in \mathbb{R}^n\), subject to the requirement that the tuples assigned to
overlapping charts transform according to the
component transformation law
\[
\tilde v^j = \frac{\partial \tilde x^j}{\partial x^i}(\widehat p)\, v^i.
\]
This is the oldest definition of all, and many physicists still think of tangent vectors this way. The
correspondence with the derivation definition assigns to a tangent vector \(v\) the tuple of its components
\(v^i = v(x^i)\) in each chart; the transformation law is then exactly the change-of-components rule already
established, so the assignment is consistent across charts and reversible. In this approach the velocity of a curve
is given by the usual Euclidean formula in coordinates, and the differential of a smooth map is determined by its
Jacobian; one then has to verify, through tedious but routine computations with the chain rule, that these
operations are well defined independently of the chosen coordinates. The pattern of objects-with-a-transformation-law
is the prototype of the tensor, where the same idea is applied to multi-indexed arrays.
Which of these characterizations one takes as the definition is a matter of taste. The derivation definition
adopted here, abstract as it first appears, has several advantages: tangent vectors are concrete objects with no
equivalence classes involved, the vector-space structure on \(T_pM\) is immediate, and the differential and the
velocity of a curve acquire coordinate-free definitions directly. These are the qualities that recommend it as the
foundation, even as the alternative pictures remain the right language in their own settings.