Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Sphere eversion

Sphere eversion is a process in differential topology whereby an immersed two-dimensional sphere in three-dimensional Euclidean space is continuously deformed, or everted, to turn its inside to the outside without tearing, cutting, puncturing, or creating creases, via a regular homotopy connecting the standard embedding to its mirror image.^[1] This counterintuitive phenomenon challenges everyday geometric intuition, as it requires the surface to pass through itself in a controlled manner, allowing self-intersections during the deformation but maintaining smoothness throughout.^[2] The existence of sphere eversions was first established in 1959 by Stephen Smale, who proved that all immersions of the two-sphere into three-dimensional space are regularly homotopic, implying that an eversion is possible as a path in the space of immersions.^[3] Smale's theorem, part of his broader classification of sphere immersions using homotopy groups of Stiefel manifolds, earned him the Fields Medal in 1966 and marked a milestone in the h-principle for immersions.^[4] Although Smale's proof was non-constructive, it demonstrated the theoretical feasibility without explicit construction.^[1] Explicit constructions of sphere eversions emerged shortly thereafter, beginning with an oral presentation by Arnold Shapiro in 1961, which utilized Boy's surface as an intermediate model featuring triple points and cusps.^[2] This was followed by Anthony Phillips' 1966 method, published in Scientific American, which described a deformation involving saddle surfaces and 360-degree rotations of tangent vectors, providing one of the first accessible visualizations.^[5] Bernard Morin, building on Shapiro's ideas, developed a lobe-based eversion in the 1970s, later visualized through computer animations by Nelson Max in 1977.^[2] Subsequent innovations, such as Bill Thurston's corrugation technique in the 1990s and the energy-minimizing "Optiverse" by John M. Sullivan, George K. Francis, and Stuart Levy in 1998, have produced smoother and more symmetric eversions, highlighting ongoing refinements in computational topology. More recently, as of 2023, the h-principle underlying Smale's theorem has been formally verified in the Lean proof assistant.^[6] Sphere eversions illustrate key concepts in topology, including the non-triviality of the space of immersions and the role of generic singularities like triple points, which are unavoidable in any eversion.^[7] They have influenced broader areas of mathematics, such as the study of higher-dimensional eversions and applications in computer graphics for surface modeling.^[8]

Fundamentals

Definition

A sphere eversion is a regular homotopy between the standard embedding of the 2-sphere S^2 in \mathbb{R}^3 and its antipodal map, consisting of a continuous family of immersions f_t: S^2 \to \mathbb{R}^3 for t \in [0,1] that deforms the sphere inside out without singularities, creases, or tearing, though self-intersections are permitted.^[2] The basic setup involves the initial immersion f_0: S^2 \to \mathbb{R}^3 defined by f_0(x) = x for x \in S^2, representing the unit sphere in its standard position, and the terminal immersion f_1(x) = -x, the antipodally reflected sphere with reversed orientation. This homotopy path f_t lies in the space of C^1 immersions, ensuring the differential is everywhere injective to avoid pinching or creasing.^[2] Intuitively, sphere eversion appears impossible because, in two dimensions, continuously deforming a simple closed curve (like a circle) to reverse its orientation—analogous to turning it "inside out"—cannot occur without self-intersection or discontinuity, as the Jordan curve theorem guarantees that such a curve separates the plane into a bounded interior and an unbounded exterior that cannot be interchanged topologically.^[9] However, the extra dimension in \mathbb{R}^3 allows the 2-sphere to self-intersect smoothly during the deformation, enabling the eversion while preserving immersion properties throughout.^[2] In contrast, the two-dimensional analogue is rigorously impossible, as shown using winding numbers that detect orientation reversal.^[10]

Prerequisites

To understand sphere eversion, one must first grasp foundational concepts from differential topology, particularly regarding smooth manifolds and maps between them. A smooth manifold of dimension n is a Hausdorff, second-countable topological space locally diffeomorphic to \mathbb{R}^n, allowing the definition of smooth functions and derivatives via charts and atlases.^[11] An immersion of an n-manifold M into an m-manifold N (with m \geq n) is a smooth map f: M \to N such that the differential df_p: T_p M \to T_{f(p)} N is injective at every point p \in M, meaning f is locally an embedding—resembling a smooth submanifold without local self-intersections.^[11] In contrast, an embedding is a proper immersion that is injective, ensuring the image f(M) is a closed submanifold without global self-intersections or boundary issues.^[11] These distinctions are crucial, as sphere eversion involves deforming an embedding of the 2-sphere S^2 while permitting temporary immersions with controlled self-intersections. Homotopies provide the framework for continuous deformations in this context. A homotopy between two smooth maps f_0, f_1: M \to N is a smooth family of maps F: M \times [0,1] \to N with F(\cdot, 0) = f_0 and F(\cdot, 1) = f_1, representing a continuous path in the space of maps.^[11] For immersions, a regular homotopy is a homotopy through immersions, meaning each intermediate map F_t is an immersion for all t \in [0,1]. For generic immersions of surfaces in \mathbb{R}^3, these include stable singularities such as transverse double curves meeting at triple points (where three sheets intersect transversely), while avoiding unstable singularities like Whitney umbrellas (pinch points, locally modeled by the map (u,v) \mapsto (uv, u, v^2)). Such generic singularities, particularly triple points, are features of sphere eversions and are central to the classification of immersion spaces.^[1]^[2] Dimensional considerations highlight why eversions behave differently across spaces. In \mathbb{R}^2, everting a circle S^1—continuously deforming the standard embedding to its reflection through immersions—is impossible, as the winding number of a closed curve around a point in the complement is a \mathbb{Z}-valued homotopy invariant that distinguishes the standard orientation from its reverse.^[10] This invariant, defined as \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_\gamma \frac{dz}{z - p} for a point p not on the curve \gamma, remains unchanged under homotopy but flips sign under eversion, leading to a contradiction.^[10] However, in \mathbb{R}^3, the 2-sphere S^2 admits eversion, owing to the higher codimension allowing more flexibility in avoiding obstructions like those enforced by covering spaces or degree theory in lower dimensions.^[2] A pertinent example illustrating non-orientability and immersion challenges is the real projective plane \mathbb{RP}^2, a compact non-orientable 2-manifold obtained as the quotient S^2 / \sim where antipodal points are identified, with Euler characteristic 1. Unlike the orientable S^2, \mathbb{RP}^2 cannot be embedded in \mathbb{R}^3 due to topological obstructions but admits immersions, such as Boy's surface, which features self-intersections along a double curve and three triple points.^[12] This non-orientability manifests in the presence of Möbius-like strips, making \mathbb{RP}^2 a fundamental surface for studying self-intersecting immersions relevant to eversion deformations.

History

Early Ideas

The foundations of the mathematical framework that would later address sphere eversion were established in the 19th century through pioneering work in geometry and topology. Felix Klein's Erlangen program, presented in 1872, proposed classifying geometries based on their groups of transformations, emphasizing invariants under continuous deformations and influencing the development of topological ideas about surfaces and their symmetries.^[13] Henri Poincaré's 1895 paper "Analysis Situs" marked the birth of algebraic topology, where he analyzed the qualitative properties of surfaces, including their orientability and fundamental groups, and explored transformations that preserve connectivity while potentially reversing orientation, such as "inside-out" mappings for closed surfaces.^[14] In the mid-20th century, attention shifted to embedding and immersion problems in higher dimensions. Hassler Whitney's 1936 theorem proved that any smooth n-dimensional manifold can be embedded in Euclidean space \mathbb{R}^{2n+1} and immersed in \mathbb{R}^{2n}, providing essential tools for understanding how spheres could be realized in \mathbb{R}^3 without self-intersections in the embedded case, though immersions allowed controlled crossings. Early speculations about sphere eversion were shaped by low-dimensional analogies, particularly the Whitney-Graustein theorem of 1937, which classifies regular immersions of the circle S^1 into the plane \mathbb{R}^2 up to regular homotopy by an integer invariant called the turning number; this showed that the standard orientation-preserving embedding (turning number +1) cannot be regularly homotoped to an orientation-reversing one (turning number -1) without singularities, suggesting an analogous impossibility for everting a sphere in \mathbb{R}^3.^[15] Such doubts were reinforced by examples like the Möbius strip, independently discovered by August Ferdinand Möbius and Johann Benedict Listing in 1858 as a non-orientable surface formed by twisting and joining a rectangular strip, which illustrated orientation reversal but also highlighted the barriers to smooth, non-singular transformations in embedded settings, prompting conjectures that sphere eversion in three dimensions might similarly require tearing or impossible homotopy classes.^[16]

Smale's Contribution

In 1957, Stephen Smale initiated a systematic study of immersions of spheres into Euclidean spaces, leading to a major breakthrough in differential topology. His work demonstrated that any two immersions of the 2-sphere S^2 into 3-dimensional Euclidean space \mathbb{R}^3 are regularly homotopic, implying the existence of a continuous deformation—known as a sphere eversion—that turns the sphere inside out without creases or tears. Smale announced this result at the International Congress of Mathematicians in Edinburgh in August 1958, where it was received with astonishment due to its counterintuitive nature.^[17] The formal publication appeared the following year in his seminal paper.^[3] The core insight of Smale's proof relied on establishing a homotopy equivalence between the space of immersions \mathrm{Imm}(S^2, \mathbb{R}^3) and the space of framed cobordisms, drawing on techniques from cobordism theory and his prior results on manifold structures, including elements that foreshadowed the h-cobordism theorem. Specifically, Smale showed that regular homotopies of immersions correspond to framed cobordisms between the immersed spheres, and since the group of framed 2-cobordisms is trivial, all such immersions lie in the same connected component of the immersion space.^[3] This abstract approach reduced the eversion problem to a question in stable homotopy theory, bypassing the need for explicit constructions.^[17] The immediate impact of Smale's result was profound, resolving a puzzle that had intrigued topologists since the early 20th century and linking sphere eversions to broader phenomena in high-dimensional topology, such as the existence of exotic spheres. The proof's elegance yet abstractness surprised the community—contemporaries like Raoul Bott initially dismissed it as impossible—sparking debates and motivating subsequent efforts to visualize explicit evertions. By framing eversions within the classification of immersions, Smale's contribution not only affirmed the theoretical possibility but also elevated the problem's role in understanding manifold diffeomorphisms and homotopy equivalences.^[17]

Theoretical Framework

Immersions and Homotopies

In differential topology, an immersion of a manifold M into Euclidean space \mathbb{R}^n is a smooth map f: M \to \mathbb{R}^n whose differential df_p: T_p M \to T_{f(p)} \mathbb{R}^n is injective at every point p \in M, ensuring the map is locally an embedding but permitting global self-intersections.^[3] For the two-sphere S^2 immersed in \mathbb{R}^3, this means the differential has full rank 2 everywhere, allowing the surface to fold or intersect itself without creases or tears.^[2] In contrast, an embedding is an immersion that is also injective, resulting in a one-to-one correspondence with its image and no self-intersections; sphere eversions necessarily involve immersions rather than embeddings to achieve the inside-out deformation.^[3] A regular homotopy between two immersions f_0, f_1: S^2 \to \mathbb{R}^3 is a continuous path H: S^2 \times [0,1] \to \mathbb{R}^3 such that each H_t is an immersion for t \in [0,1], and the induced map on the tangent bundles is continuous, ensuring the deformation remains smooth without singularities in the immersion (i.e., rank drops like cusps), though generic self-intersections such as transverse double points and triple points are permitted.^[3] These self-intersections are analyzed by restricting to generic paths in the space of immersions, where only stable features—such as transverse double points and triple points—occur at finitely many instants.^[18] This framework allows controlled self-intersections during the homotopy, which are essential for deforming the sphere without violating differentiability.^[2] Smale classified the regular homotopy classes of immersions of spheres into Euclidean spaces, showing that for S^k into \mathbb{R}^n with n > k, the classes correspond bijectively to elements of the homotopy group \pi_k(V_{n,k}), where V_{n,k} is the Stiefel manifold of orthonormal k-frames in \mathbb{R}^n.^[3] For S^2 in \mathbb{R}^3, \pi_2(V_{3,2}) = 0, implying all such immersions are regularly homotopic; this classification relies on Whitney's earlier invariants for regular homotopies, which equate classes when certain intersection numbers match, and aligns with the degree of the Gauss map (the tangential map to the Stiefel manifold) being trivial in this case.^[3] The eversion of the sphere corresponds to a specific regular homotopy class connecting the standard identity embedding id: S^2 \to \mathbb{R}^3 to the antipodal map a(x) = -x, which reverses orientation and represents the inside-out configuration; this path exists only in ambient dimension at least 3, as lower dimensions prohibit such deformations due to topological obstructions like nonzero homotopy groups.^[3]^[2]

Key Theorems

The Hirsch-Smale theory provides an h-principle for immersions, showing under suitable dimension conditions (dim M ≤ dim N - 1) that the inclusion of the space of immersions Imm(M, N) into the space of formal immersions (bundle monomorphisms TM → f^* TN covering maps f: M → N) induces a weak homotopy equivalence. For the specific case of spheres, this yields the classification of regular homotopy classes, with the connected components given by π_0(\mathrm{Imm}(S^n, \mathbb{R}^{n+1})) \cong \pi_n(\mathrm{SO}(n+1)) for n \geq 1; in particular, for n=2, \pi_2(\mathrm{SO}(3)) = 0 implies that the space \mathrm{Imm}(S^2, \mathbb{R}^3) is path-connected, so all immersions are regularly homotopic. This connectivity directly implies the existence of sphere eversions, as the standard inclusion and the antipodal immersion lie in the same component and thus admit a regular homotopy between them.^[3] Related results include René Thom's transversality theorem (1959), which guarantees that for a smooth map f: M → N and a submanifold L \subset N, maps transverse to L form an open dense subset of C^\infty(M, N) in the compact-open topology; applied to self-intersections, this ensures that generic immersions of S^2 into \mathbb{R}^3 have only transverse double points and triple points, facilitating the analysis of regular homotopies in Smale's framework.^[3]

Proofs and Constructions

Abstract Existence Proof

Smale's abstract existence proof for the eversion of the 2-sphere S^2 in \mathbb{R}^3 establishes that there exists a regular homotopy—a continuous path of immersions—between the standard embedding of S^2 and the immersion obtained by composing it with the antipodal map on S^2, which effectively turns the sphere inside out while preserving orientability.^[19] The proof proceeds in three main steps. First, immersions of S^2 into \mathbb{R}^3 are classified up to regular homotopy via framed cobordisms, where a framed cobordism is a compact oriented 3-manifold with boundary consisting of two immersed spheres, equipped with a framing of the normal bundle that matches the framings induced by the immersions. This classification identifies the connected components of the space of immersions, showing that regular homotopy classes correspond to equivalence classes under such cobordisms.^[19]^[20] Second, the proof demonstrates that the standard embedding and the antipodal immersion lie in the same connected component of this space. This is achieved by showing that the map from the space of immersions to the space of framed immersions induces an isomorphism on homotopy groups, and computations of the relevant stable homotopy groups—such as \pi_2(\SO(3)) = 0—reveal no obstructions to connecting them via regular homotopy. A crucial element here is the use of the homotopy groups of the classifying space for immersions, which encodes the topology of the immersion space and confirms the components are connected in this dimension.^[19]^[20] The proof carefully avoids "forbidden" homotopy classes associated with odd-degree maps, which would introduce unresolvable self-intersections or orientation issues, ensuring the path remains within the allowable oriented immersion classes.^[2] From this, the existence of the regular homotopy follows directly, confirming that a sphere eversion is topologically possible.^[19] However, the proof is inherently non-constructive, relying on the machinery of algebraic topology to guarantee existence without specifying an explicit sequence of deformations or providing any geometric intuition or visualization; this abstract nature motivated subsequent efforts to construct concrete eversions.^[20]^[2] As a corollary, the framework explains the impossibility of eversion in lower dimensions. For the 1-sphere S^1 immersed in \mathbb{R}^2, the fundamental group \pi_1(\SO(2)) = \mathbb{Z} provides an obstruction: regular homotopy classes are classified by the winding number of the tangent framing, which is preserved and prevents homotopy between immersions of different parity, such as the standard circle and its "inside-out" version.^[20]^[2]

Explicit Geometric Constructions

The Francis-Morin eversion, developed in the 1970s and detailed in a collaborative work by George K. Francis and Bernard Morin, provides one of the earliest explicit constructions of a sphere eversion through a sequence of geometric deformations. This method begins with the standard sphere and proceeds via a halfway model known as the midsphere, an immersed surface featuring self-intersections including double curves and triple points where three sheets meet transversely. The construction unfolds through 14 critical stages, starting with the formation of a corrugated band around the equator to initiate inversion, followed by pushing the south pole northward through the surface to create initial bulges and handles. Subsequent stages involve collapsing these handles—tubular regions connecting intersecting sheets—to simplify the topology, while carefully resolving singularities by smoothing triple points into local configurations that maintain immersion regularity. The process culminates in retracting the bulges and symmetrizing the deformation to reach the inverted sphere, with self-intersections managed to ensure no creases or tears occur.^[21]^[2] A more streamlined explicit construction is the minimax eversion attributed to Rob Kusner, Hermann Pinkall, and collaborators, developed in the 1990s as part of variational approaches minimizing bending energy (Willmore energy) during the homotopy, with key visualizations in the 1998 Optiverse project.^[22] This method leverages symmetric deformations, beginning with a rotationally invariant initial sphere and evolving through a halfway model with reduced complexity, featuring fewer triple points (typically three) compared to earlier designs. Stages include symmetric corrugation to form an equatorial inversion band, followed by controlled expansion and contraction of lobes to handle self-intersections, and a final symmetric resolution that halves the number of critical events by exploiting reflectional symmetry across the midsphere. The approach emphasizes energy-minimizing paths, ensuring the immersion remains regular throughout by tracking total curvature bounds below 8π.^[23]^[24] Other notable explicit methods include those developed by Thomas Banchoff, which connect sphere eversions to immersions of the real projective plane (RP²) via cross-cap constructions, such as linking to Boy's surface as a halfway model. Banchoff's approach constructs the eversion by deforming the sphere into a cross-cap configuration—featuring a single triple point and self-intersection disk—then propagating the immersion through RP²-like topologies to the inverted state, resolving intersections by transverse perturbations that preserve the odd number of quadruple points inherent to all eversions. This method highlights the role of non-orientable intermediates in visualizing the homotopy.^[25]^[26] A key challenge in these geometric constructions is managing self-intersections, particularly double curves (where two sheets cross) and triple points, while ensuring the immersion remains regular—meaning intersections are transverse and no higher-order singularities like quadruple points persist except as necessary transients. Regularity is maintained by small perturbations of the immersion map f: S^2 \to \mathbb{R}^3, typically of the form f_\epsilon = f + \epsilon v, where v is a smooth vector field normal to the sheets at intersection loci, resolving triple points by shifting them into generic positions that avoid degeneracy and allow continuation of the homotopy. This perturbation technique, grounded in generic transversality, ensures the double locus evolves smoothly without violating immersion conditions.^[23]^[27]

Variations

Higher Dimensions

The generalization of sphere eversion to higher-dimensional spheres concerns the existence of a regular homotopy connecting the standard embedding of S^n into \mathbb{R}^{n+1} to an orientation-reversing immersion, such as the antipodal embedding. By the Smale-Hirsch theorem, the regular homotopy classes of immersions \mathrm{Imm}(S^n, \mathbb{R}^{n+1}) are classified by \pi_n(\mathrm{SO}(n+1)), the n-th homotopy group of the special orthogonal group \mathrm{SO}(n+1). Such an eversion exists if and only if the classifying map for the standard immersion is regularly homotopic to that for the orientation-reversed immersion in this classification, which occurs precisely when the tangent bundle TS^{n+1} is trivial (i.e., S^{n+1} is parallelizable). This condition holds for n = 0, 2, 6, corresponding to the trivial cases of S^0 in \mathbb{R}^1, the classical S^2 in \mathbb{R}^3, and S^6 in \mathbb{R}^7. For n \geq 3, eversions are generally not possible except in the case n=6, due to non-trivial elements in \pi_n(\mathrm{SO}(n+1)) obstructing the required homotopy; for example, \pi_3(\mathrm{SO}(4)) \cong \mathbb{Z} \oplus \mathbb{Z}, separating the standard and reversed immersions for S^3 in \mathbb{R}^4. In the case of S^3 in \mathbb{R}^4, no such eversion exists, though explicit constructions like rotations or handle slides can generate immersions within the same homotopy class but do not connect to the reversed one.^[28] In even dimensions n = 2m, additional complexity arises from the structure of \pi_{2m}(\mathrm{SO}(2m+1)), often involving \mathbb{Z}-torsion, while for odd dimensions, the groups may include free parts; however, Haefliger invariants, which classify immersions and links in codimensions greater than 1 (e.g., for metastable ranges where n < \frac{2}{3}(n+k)), do not directly apply here but highlight related obstructions in nearby settings. Despite these invariants, eversions remain impossible in most cases beyond the parallelizable instances, contrasting with the stable range where codimension k > 1 often yields connected immersion spaces and trivial homotopy classes. The general classification is given by \pi_0(\mathrm{Imm}(S^n, \mathbb{R}^{n+k})) \cong \pi_n(V_n(\mathbb{R}^{n+k})) for k \geq 1, reducing to \pi_n(\mathrm{SO}(n+1)) when k=1.

Other Surfaces

The eversion of the real projective plane \mathbb{RP}^2 in \mathbb{R}^3 involves regular homotopies between immersions and their mirror images, closely related to cross-cap constructions that model non-orientable topology through self-intersections. Werner Boy discovered in 1901 an explicit immersion of \mathbb{RP}^2 into \mathbb{R}^3, known as Boy's surface, which features three triple points and no quadruple points, providing a single-sided realization of the projective plane.^[29] However, Boy's surface itself does not constitute a full eversion but rather an intermediate immersion; the mirror image of Boy's surface is not regularly homotopic to the original, as they belong to distinct classes in the classification of immersion classes for non-orientable surfaces.^[30] For orientable surfaces beyond the sphere, such as the torus, eversion in \mathbb{R}^3 is achievable via regular homotopies connecting the standard embedding to its orientation-reversed counterpart, navigating through self-intersecting immersions. Although early explorations suggested potential genus-based topological obstructions—stemming from the torus's Euler characteristic of 0 and its fundamental group—computational and theoretical analyses confirm that such homotopies exist without requiring higher dimensions.^[31] Immersions of the torus fall into four regular homotopy classes, characterized by the twisting degrees of meridional, parallel, and diagonal curves. For the torus, the standard immersion and its orientation-reversed counterpart lie in the same homotopy class.^[31] Eversions of closed surfaces are classified up to regular homotopy by \mathbb{Z}_2-valued quadratic forms on the first mod-2 homology group H_1(M^2; \mathbb{Z}_2), an invariant that encodes both the Euler characteristic (which fixes \dim H_1(M^2; \mathbb{Z}_2)) and the surface's orientability. For orientable surfaces of genus g, the dimension is $2g; for non-orientable surfaces of genus k (crosscaps), it is k-1. Two immersions are regularly homotopic if and only if their quadratic forms coincide up to linear automorphisms of the homology.^[30] Obstructions to connecting an immersion to its mirror arise when the Arf invariant of the quadratic form differs, detectable via linking numbers of preimages under the Gauss map or Seifert surfaces bounding normal cycles in the immersed surface.^[30] A notable example is the Klein bottle, a non-orientable surface with Euler characteristic 0, whose immersions in \mathbb{R}^3 admit eversions through regular homotopies similar to those of the torus (as the Klein bottle double-covers the torus). However, since the Klein bottle cannot be embedded in \mathbb{R}^3 without self-intersections, a fully embedded eversion—starting and ending with non-intersecting embeddings—requires \mathbb{R}^4, where smooth embeddings exist and homotopies can avoid triple points.^[32]

Visualizations

Eversion Sequences

The Francis eversion, a seminal explicit construction of sphere eversion, is classically visualized through a sequence of 12 static stages that illustrate the gradual deformation from an initial round sphere to its inverted counterpart, allowing self-intersections during the process.^[8] The sequence begins with a standard sphere, where the north pole is pushed inward to form a gastrula-like dimple, followed by the emergence of the first double curve—a self-intersection line—at the bottom as the surface begins to fold upon itself. Subsequent stages show the formation of a second double curve at the neck of the emerging bulge, with these curves twisting and converging to birth pairs of triple points, where three sheets of the surface intersect. By the halfway point, the configuration reaches a complex immersed state featuring a quadruple point and multiple isthmus constrictions, after which the process reverses symmetrically but with a 90-degree twist, dissolving the triple points and double curves until the final stage yields the everted sphere with reversed orientation.^[33]^[34] Diagrams of eversion sequences commonly employ color coding to distinguish the outer (often orange) and inner (blue) sides of the surface, with shading variations reflecting the direction of normal vectors to track the progressive reversal of orientation from outside-in to inside-out. Self-intersections are highlighted for clarity: double curves, representing pairwise surface overlaps, are typically rendered in red lines, while triple points appear as distinct marked points where three sheets meet, emphasizing the smooth, crease-free transitions mandated by the immersion. These static representations prioritize topological fidelity over geometric precision, using triangulated wireframes or contour lines to convey the evolving singularity structure without implying physical realizability.^[33] Historical visualizations from the 1980s, particularly those associated with Thomas Banchoff, utilized orthographic projections and wireframe models to depict eversion stages, building on physical chicken-wire prototypes to illustrate the "inside-out" flip through sequential frames that accentuate the passage through a quadruple point. Banchoff's projections, often rendered via early computer graphics, captured the self-intersecting immersions in three-dimensional space, providing intuitive static snapshots that revealed the unavoidable complexity of the halfway model. These models, derived from collaborative efforts with Nelson Max, underscored the topological necessity of at least one quadruple point in any eversion, using sparse line drawings to focus on the dynamic interplay of folds and intersections.^[35]^[36]

Modern Simulations

In the 1970s, pioneering computer animations brought sphere eversions to life through films like Nelson Max's Turning a Sphere Inside Out (1977), which depicted the homotopy using parametric equations and early rendering techniques to illustrate self-intersections during the inversion process.^[37] Building on this, Thomas Banchoff produced computer-generated sequences in the 1980s, leveraging vector graphics and shading to visualize complex immersions, including the unavoidable quadruple points in any eversion, as detailed in his collaborative work with Max.^[35]^[36] Advancements in software have enabled more accessible and real-time simulations. For instance, Mathematica demonstrations, such as The Regal Ghost: Visualizing the Eversion of the Sphere (1996) by Silvio Levy, allow users to generate animated eversions parametrically, adjusting parameters like twist rates to explore variations of the halfway model.^[38] Similarly, Ricky Reusser's 2020 WebGL implementation provides a browser-based, interactive eversion using GPU shaders for smooth rendering, enabling real-time playback of the deformation sequence.^[39] More recently, as of 2024, interactive web applications like Joseph Faulkner's JavaScript-based sphere eversion animation have emerged, offering user-controlled explorations of the process in web browsers.^[40] These modern tools emphasize interactivity, permitting users to pause at critical moments like triple points—where three sheets intersect—or adjust animation speeds to scrutinize the topology.^[39] Rendering challenges persist, particularly in depicting self-intersections without visual artifacts like clipping or aliasing, which can obscure the immersion's geometry.^[41] To address this, techniques such as ray-tracing with transparency are employed, rendering the sphere semi-opaque to reveal interior flips and layered intersections, as implemented in visualizations like The Optiverse (1998) by Francis, Sullivan, and Levy.^[41]

Modern Developments

Formal Verifications

Formal verifications of sphere eversions involve machine-checked proofs using interactive theorem provers to confirm the existence of such eversions, addressing potential gaps in classical mathematical arguments by providing rigorous, computer-verified derivations. A key effort is the sphere eversion project in the Lean theorem prover, initiated around 2020 and led by Patrick Massot, Floris van Doorn, and Oliver Nash, which formalizes a modern proof of eversion existence via Gromov's h-principle for differential relations. This approach encodes the necessary topology and geometry to derive the eversion as a corollary, building on Smale's original 1958 existence result without directly replicating its h-cobordism-based method.^[6]^[42] Milestones in this project include the 2022 publication detailing the formalization of the local h-principle for open and ample first-order partial differential relations, followed by the completion of the full proof implying sphere eversion existence on November 12, 2022. The h-cobordism theorem, central to Smale's proof, was not directly formalized in this project, but the work extends Lean's mathematical library (mathlib) with tools for immersion classification and regular homotopy, enabling automated verification of topological constructions. These advancements facilitate broader automated checking in differential topology, such as verifying homotopy equivalences in immersion spaces.^[6]^[43] Challenges in the formalization include adapting infinite-dimensional concepts like jet spaces and homotopy groups to Lean's finite type theory, as well as verifying regular homotopy conditions amid evolving library support for manifolds and differential geometry. Early difficulties arose from the nascent state of differential topology in Lean, requiring custom developments for ample relations and parametrized covers. By 2025, the Lean community continues refining the codebase, including porting to Lean 4 and integrating with updated mathlib versions for enhanced path verification in eversion corollaries.^[6]^[44]

Computational Approaches

Computational approaches to sphere eversion primarily rely on numerical optimization and gradient flows to approximate immersion paths that minimize geometric energies, addressing limitations in explicit analytic constructions. A seminal method is the minimax eversion developed by Ken Brakke, which uses a discrete gradient flow to evolve an immersed sphere while minimizing the maximum elastic bending energy encountered along the path. This approach begins with an unstable "halfway" configuration—a non-round sphere with Willmore energy of 16π—and drives the surface toward full eversion through iterative energy minimization using Brakke's Surface Evolver software. The bending energy minimized is the Willmore functional,

E = \int H^2 \, dA,

where H denotes the mean curvature and dA the surface area element.^[45]^[46] The evolution in Brakke's minimax eversion follows the L^2-gradient flow of the Willmore functional, approximated discretely as

\frac{\partial}{\partial t} X = -\nabla E,

with X representing the immersion map; this flow reduces energy while navigating topological changes like the formation and resolution of self-intersections. Subsequent theoretical advancements by Ernst Kuwert and Reiner Schätzle in the 2000s and 2010s established the convergence of the Willmore flow to round spheres for immersions with sufficiently small initial energy, providing a rigorous foundation for numerical simulations of eversion paths. Their analysis ensures that, starting near a minimizer, the flow smooths the surface without developing singularities beyond controlled triple points. In the 2020s, finite element methods have advanced simulations of sphere eversions, particularly for resolving triple point dynamics where three surface sheets intersect. Energy-stable parametric finite element discretizations of the Willmore flow enable accurate modeling of these singularities, maintaining unconditional energy dissipation and allowing long-time evolution tracking in eversions. For instance, such methods quantify how triple points arise and annihilate during the flow, confirming topological necessities like the presence of at least one quadruple point in any eversion. These techniques, often implemented with piecewise polynomial elements of degree at least two, achieve convergence rates that support high-fidelity approximations of energy-minimizing paths. Applications of these computational methods focus on identifying "simplest" eversions, defined by the lowest energy barriers or minimal number of triple points along the homotopy. By optimizing the Willmore functional numerically, researchers have generated eversions with fewer intermediate instabilities than earlier geometric models, such as those based on explicit rulings or corrugations, while quantifying the global minimax energy cost at approximately 16π for the full process.^[47]

References

[1]
Sphere Eversion -- from Wolfram MathWorld
Sphere Eversion. Smale (1958) proved that it is mathematically possible to turn a sphere inside-out without introducing a sharp crease at any point.
[2]
[PDF] Sphere Eversions - a journey into differential topology - UNCW
Sphere eversion is a continuous deformation allowing a surface to pass through itself without puncturing, ripping, creasing, or pinching.
[3]
The Classification of Immersions of Spheres in Euclidean Spaces
The paper classifies immersions of spheres in Euclidean spaces using regular homotopy, relating it to Stiefel manifolds and a 1-1 correspondence.
[4]
Introduction to the h-Principle - American Mathematical Society
Smale, The classification of immersions of spheres in Euclidean spaces, Ann. of. Math. (2) 69 (1959), 327–344, DOI 10.2307/1970186. MR105117. [Sp98]. D. Spring ...
[5]
Turning a Surface Inside Out | Scientific American
Normally a sphere can be turned inside out only if it has been torn. In differential topology one assumes that the surface can be pushed through itself.
[6]
What is the 'non-intuitive' part in sphere eversion (turning inside out)?
Aug 29, 2012 · The problem of sphere eversion is to construct a homotopy between the inside and outside of a sphere in a three dimensional space.Eversion of the 6-sphere in 7-space - MathOverflowgt.geometric topology - Classifiying sphere eversions - MathOverflowMore results from mathoverflow.net<|control11|><|separator|>
[7]
(PDF) Sphere Eversions: from Smale through “The Optiverse”
This paper describes AVN, the custom software program we wrote to explore the computed eversion. Various special features allowed us to use AVN also to produce ...
[8]
[PDF] The Jordan Curve Theorem, Formally and Informally
Dec 2, 2007 · INTRODUCTION. The Jordan curve theorem states that every simple closed pla- nar curve separates the plane into a bounded interior region and ...
[9]
[PDF] sphere eversion
Sphere eversion is the problem of turning a sphere inside-out by bending, stretching, shrinking, and pulling it through itself, without tearing or gluing.
[10]
http://simonrs.com/eulercircle/difftop/om-eversion.pdf
[11]
[PDF] Formalizing sphere eversion using Lean's mathematical library
Jun 21, 2023 · To precisely state this, we use the following definition: f is an immersion ⇐⇒ f is locally an embedding ⇐⇒ the total derivative of f is ...
[12]
[PDF] Fronts of Whitney umbrella – a differential geometric approach via ...
Jan 9, 2012 · H. Whitney [28] has found Whitney umbrella (also known as the cross-cap) as singularities which are not avoidable by small perturbation.
[13]
https://conservancy.umn.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/89cd7864-646c-44a0-b32d-c2feebe3ac3c/content
[14]
Boy's Surface
Boy's Surface is an immersion of the real projective plane, RP 2 , in R 3. It was constructed by Werner Boy, working under David Hilbert, in 1901.
[15]
[PDF] Felix Kkin and His "Erlanger Programm"
The E.P. should not be judged as a research paper; it was a semitechnical presentation to the Erlangen philosophical faculty of ideas about geometry that Klein ...
[16]
[PDF] Papers on Topology - School of Mathematics
Jul 31, 2009 · ... Poincaré before topology. In the introduction to his first major topology paper, the Analysis situs, Poincaré. (1895) announced his goal of ...
[17]
[PDF] On regular closed curves in the plane - Numdam
The lemma is contained in Theorem 2 of H.WHITNEY,. Differentiable manifolds [Annals of Math. 37 (1936)]. (ive replaee I by the unit circle M and use (b) of ...
[18]
Möbius Strips Before Möbius: Topological Hints in Ancient ...
Abstract. August Möbius discovered his eponymous strip—also found almost contemporaneously by Johann Listing—in 1858, so a pre-1858 Möbius band would ...
[19]
[PDF] The Work of Stephen Smale in Differential Topology
One way to construct an eversion is to first regularly homotop the identity map of the sphere into the composition of the double covering of the projec-.
[20]
https://webhomes.maths.ed.ac.uk/~v1ranick/surgery/eversion.pdf
[21]
A Classification of Immersions of the Two-Sphere - jstor
A CLASSIFICATION OF IMMERSIONS OF THE. TWO-SPHERE. BY. STEPHEN SMALE. An immersion of one C' differentiable manifold in another is a regular map (a C' map whose ...
[22]
[PDF] Turning a surface inside out
A striking example is Stephen. Smale's theorem concerning regular maps of the sphere, published in 1959. The field in which Smale was then working-differential ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[23]
Arnold shapiro's eversion of the sphere
Francis, GK, Morin, B. Arnold shapiro's eversion of the sphere. The Mathematical Intelligencer 2, 200–203 (1980).
[24]
Regular homotopy and total curvature II: sphere immersions into 3
Mar 23, 2006 · We show that the infimum over all sphere eversions of the maximum of the total curvature during an eversion is at most 8 and we establish a non- ...
[25]
Computing Sphere Eversions - SpringerLink
Kusner, and J. M. Sullivan, Minimizing the squared mean curvature ... Computing Sphere Eversions. In: Hege, HC., Polthier, K. (eds) Mathematical ...
[26]
Every Sphere Eversion has a Quadruple Point - Brown Math
Every Sphere Eversion has a Quadruple Point by Thomas F. Banchoff. Let i:S^2 -> R^3 be the inclusion of the sphere, and let X:R^3 -> R^3 be the reflection ...
[27]
Generic Immersions of the Two-Sphere to R 3 and Their Skeletons
Jan 31, 2003 · Max and T. Banchoff, “Every sphere eversion has a quadruple point,” in: Contributions to Analysis and Geometry, John Hopkins Univ. Press ...
[28]
Sphere eversion from the viewpoint of generic homotopy
Jun 1, 2017 · In this paper, we construct a sphere eversion by lifting a “simple” generic homotopy of S 2 to R 2 to a generic regular homotopy of S 2 to R 3 .
[29]
Eversion of the 6-sphere in 7-space - MathOverflow
Dec 1, 2012 · That is, the only spheres which admit eversion are S0, S2, and S6. My question is: does anyone know of an explicit eversion of S6 in ...What is the 'non-intuitive' part in sphere eversion (turning inside out)?Is the intermediate point of a 2-sphere eversion a "double" Boy's ...More results from mathoverflow.netMissing: symmetric stages
[30]
Boy's Surface - American Mathematical Society
Boy's surface is an immersion of the real projec- tive plane in 3-dimensional space found by Werner. Boy in 1901 (he discovered it on assignment from.
[31]
[PDF] REGULAR HOMOTOPY CLASSES OF IMMERSED SURFACES
An immersed sur@e in Iw” of type M2 is defined as an equivalence class of immersions f: M2 + R”, where two immersions f, g: M2 + W” are considered as equivalent ...
[32]
[PDF] Torus Immersions and Transformations - UC Berkeley EECS
Jul 20, 2011 · All possible immersions of a torus in 3D Euclidean space can be grouped into four regular homotopy classes. All.Missing: impossibility | Show results with:impossibility
[33]
Surface Eversions: Generalizing from Sphere and Torus Eversions
May 11, 2012 · One may also use the torus eversion shown in the link to evert all surfaces of genus g>0 in a simpler fashion. For the 2-sphere, I like the ...
[34]
(PDF) Visualizing a sphere eversion - ResearchGate
Aug 9, 2025 · ... Jordan curve theorem; (iii) getting acquainted with the ecological and environmental implications of the topological concept of adjacency ...
[35]
Topological Stages in the Eversion
8 and 9, the first two events create the two double-curves. When these twist around to intersect each other, two pairs of triple points are created. At the ...Missing: sequences static visualizations<|control11|><|separator|>
[36]
The Minimax Sphere Eversion - SpringerLink
We consider an eversion of a sphere driven by a gradient flow for elastic bending energy. We start with a halfway model which is an unstable Willmore sphere ...
[37]
[PDF] Computer Animation of the Sphere Eversion
Smale proved that there was a regular homotopy be- tween any two immersions of the sphere. The ordinary round sphere and an inside-out round sphere are special.
[38]
The Regal Ghost: Visualizing the Eversion of the Sphere
You can turn the surface of a sphere inside out without puncturing or tearing it, if you think of the surface as being made of an elastic material that can pass ...
[39]
Sphere Eversion - ricky reusser
Jun 29, 2020 · In this post, we play a topological game called eversion. Our objective is simple: turn a sphere inside out without cutting or creasing it.
[40]
[PDF] Visualizing a Sphere Eversion - Optimal Geometry
Abstract—The mathematical process of everting a sphere (turning it inside-out allowing self-intersections) is a grand challenge for.<|control11|><|separator|>
[41]
Formalising the $h$-principle and sphere eversion - arXiv
Oct 14, 2022 · This paper is the first part of the sphere eversion project, aiming to formalise the global version of the h-principle for open and ample first order ...
[42]
Sphere eversion project - Lean community
This project is a formalization of the proof of existence of sphere eversions using the Lean theorem prover, mainly developed at Microsoft Research.
[43]
Formalization of the existence of sphere eversions - GitHub
This project formalizes the proof of a theorem implying the existence of sphere eversions. It was carried out by Patrick Massot, Floris van Doorn and Oliver ...Missing: Smale | Show results with:Smale
[44]
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367063953_Formalising_the_h-Principle_and_Sphere_Eversion
[45]
[PDF] The Minimax Sphere Eversion - Ken Brakke
The Minimax Sphere Eversion is a sphere turned inside out using a gradient flow and Surface Evolver, driven by an optimization procedure.
[46]
Willmore Minmax Surfaces and the Cost of the Sphere Eversion - arXiv
Dec 30, 2015 · Abstract:We develop a general Minmax procedure in Euclidian spaces for constructing Willmore surfaces of non zero indices.Missing: Brakke | Show results with:Brakke