 
 
 
 
 
   
In order to tie up the first two sections we need to have a notion analogous to lines in a general Riemannian manifold--this is provided by geodesics or energy minimising paths.
To a stationary observer placed on the manifold it would appear that a
body travelling along an energy minimising path is subject to no
acceleration. The translation of this into differential geometric terms
is 
DX(t)(X(t)) = 0 where X(t) is the tangent vector at time t.
By the theory of second order ordinary differential equations there is
a unique geodesic starting at a point p with initial velocity
 for any choice of p and
 for any choice of p and  .
.
A result of Whitehead shows that for any point p there is a small region M surrounding it so that there is a unique geodesic in M joining any pair of points in M. The notion of between-ness is defined by saying that B lies between A and C in M if B lies on the (unique) geodesic joining A and C. Extending the geodesic within M beyond B and before A gives us the ``line'' joining A and B. We then easily check that Veblen's axioms of local geometry other than those involving planes are satisfied. In particular we have trouble verifying the Pasch axiom--numbered 7 in the list of Veblen's axioms given in section 1.
Let us therefore make the additional assumption that these axioms dealing with planes are satisfied; we will show that this imposes a restriction on the curvature of the Riemannian manifold M, which is satisfied if and only if M is a convex region in one of the ``classical'' geometries--Euclidean, Hyperbolic or Projective.
According to the results of section 1 we can choose coordinates on M in such a way that the geodesics are mapped into lines. In terms of these coordinates we see that a geodesic must be an accelerated path:
 (X(t)) = DX(t)(X(t)) -
(X(t)) = DX(t)(X(t)) -  (X(t))(X(t)) = -
(X(t))(X(t)) = -  (X(t))(X(t))
(X(t))(X(t))
 (
( )(
)( ) =
) =  .
 .  
 depending on
 depending on  .
In addition we have the torsion-free condition and the linearity of
.
In addition we have the torsion-free condition and the linearity of
 in each variable. It follows that
 in each variable. It follows that 
 = <
 = <  , X > is a
linear functional associated with some vector field
, X > is a
linear functional associated with some vector field  
 (
( )(
)( ) =
) =  ( <
( <  (p),
(p), >  .
 >  .  + <
 + <  (p),
(p), >  .
 >  .  )
)

 ), X > < Y, Y > - <
), X > < Y, Y > - <  , X > 2 < Y, Y >
, X > 2 < Y, Y >
 (X, Y) =
(X, Y) =  
Now we have 
 (X, Y)(p) =
(X, Y)(p) =  (p) depends only on the point p.
Thus we have
(p) depends only on the point p.
Thus we have
 . ( < X, W > < Y, Z > - < X, Z > < Y, W > )
 . ( < X, W > < Y, Z > - < X, Z > < Y, W > )
 . ( < Y, Z > X - < X, Z > Y)
 . ( < Y, Z > X - < X, Z > Y)

 .  < U, U > V - DV
 .  < U, U > V - DV .  < U, U > W
 .  < U, U > W
 0, so that we obtain 
DW
 0, so that we obtain 
DW = 0. Since W is arbitrary this just
means that
 = 0. Since W is arbitrary this just
means that  is the constant function. Now, by applying the
result of Cartan and Hadamard mentioned in the previous section we see
that our local Riemannian space M has to be contained in one of the
``classical'' geometries--Euclidean, Hyperbolic or Projective.
 is the constant function. Now, by applying the
result of Cartan and Hadamard mentioned in the previous section we see
that our local Riemannian space M has to be contained in one of the
``classical'' geometries--Euclidean, Hyperbolic or Projective.
 
 
 
 
