DOCSLIB.ORG

Notes for Advanced Algebraic Topology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Notes for Advanced Algebraic Topology Harvard University Math 231br Notes for Advanced Algebraic Topology Reuben Stern Spring Semester 2017 Contents 0.1 Preliminaries .................................. 4 0.2 Administrative Stuff .............................. 4 1 January 23, 2017 5 1.1 Overview of Course............................... 5 2 January 25, 2017 6 2.1 Some facts about the Category Spaces .................... 6 2.2 Example: Locality and Sheafiness....................... 6 2.3 Example: Products of Spaces ......................... 7 2.4 Example: Gluings (or Quotient Spaces).................... 7 2.5 Example: Space of Functions.......................... 8 2.6 Pairs of Spaces ................................. 9 3 January 27, 2017 11 3.1 The Punchline from Last Class ........................ 11 3.2 Perpsectives on the Fundamental Group ................... 11 4 January 30, 2017 15 4.1 Higher Homotopy Groups ........................... 15 4.2 Exact Sequences of Spaces........................... 16 5 February 1, 2017 18 5.1 Finishing Things from Last Time ....................... 18 5.2 Dual Results: Exact Sequences ........................ 18 5.3 Relative Homotopy Groups........................... 19 6 February 3, 2017 21 6.1 The Action of the Fundamental Group.................... 21 7 February 6, 2017 22 7.1 Fibrations.................................... 22 8 February 8, 2017 23 8.1 Fiber Bundles and Examples.......................... 23 9 February 10, 2017 24 9.1 CW Complexes................................. 24 10 February 13, 2017 25 10.1 The Homotopy Theory of CW Complexes .................. 25 10.2 Homotopy Excision and Corollaries...................... 25 1 Math 231br CONTENTS 10.3 Introduction to Stable Homotopy....................... 25 11 February 15, 2017 26 11.1 Why Model Categories? ............................ 26 11.2 Definitions, Examples, and Basic Properties ................. 28 11.3 Homotopy Relations .............................. 31 12 February 17, 2017 33 12.1 The Homotopy Category of a Model Category................ 33 12.2 Brief Introduction to Derived Functors.................... 38 13 February 22, 2017 40 13.1 The Homotopy Theory of CW Complexes, II................. 40 13.2 Eilenberg-MacLane Spaces........................... 40 14 February 24, 2017 41 14.1 Brown Representability............................. 41 15 February 27, 2017 44 15.1 Spectra ..................................... 44 15.2 The Category of Spectra............................ 45 16 March 1, 2017 47 16.1 Co/homology Theories from Spectra ..................... 47 17 March 3, 2017 51 17.1 The Hurewicz Theorem............................. 51 17.2 Spectral Sequences ............................... 51 18 March 6, 2017 54 18.1 Obstruction Theory............................... 54 19 March 8, 2017 55 19.1 A Complicated Example............................ 55 20 March 10, 2017 56 20.1 Smash Products................................. 56 21 March 20, 2017 57 21.1 The Serre Spectral Sequence.......................... 57 22 March 22, 2017 58 22.1 More About the Serre Spectral Sequence................... 58 22.2 The Transgressive Differential Lemma..................... 58 22.3 Multiplicative Structure ............................ 58 Reuben Stern 2 Spring 2017 Math 231br CONTENTS 23 March 24, 2017 59 23.1 More Spectral Sequences............................ 59 23.2 Multiplicative Extensions............................ 59 ∗ 23.3 Computing H (K(Z/2, 1); F2) ......................... 59 24 March 27, 2017 60 24.1 G-bundles and Fiber Bundles ......................... 60 25 Properties of Chern Classes 64 26 The Steenrod Algebra and the Bar Spectral Sequence 65 27 April 10, 2017 66 27.1 The Steenrod Algebra, part II......................... 66 28 April 12, 2017 67 28.1 A Serre Spectral Sequence Trick........................ 67 28.2 Serre Classes .................................. 67 29 April 14, 2017 68 29.1 Serre’s Method ................................. 68 30 April 17, 2017 69 30.1 The Adams Spectral Sequence......................... 69 30.2 A Fun Computation .............................. 69 A Collected Homework Problems 71 A.1 Problem Set 1.................................. 71 A.2 Problem Set 2.................................. 72 A.3 Problem Set 3.................................. 73 A.4 Problem Set 4.................................. 73 A.5 Problem Set 5.................................. 77 B Notes from Switzer 79 References 80 Reuben Stern 3 Spring 2017 Math 231br 0.1 Preliminaries 0.1 Preliminaries These notes were taken during the Spring semester of 2017, in Harvard’s Math 231br, Advanced Algebraic Topology. The course was taught by Eric Peterson, and met Mon- day/Wednesday/Friday from 2 to 3 pm. Allow me to elucidate the process for taking these notes: I take notes by hand during lecture, which I transfer to LATEX at night. It is an unfortunate consequence of this method that these notes do not capture the unique lecturing style of the professor. Indeed, I take full responsibility for any errors in exposition or mathematics, but all credit for genuinely clever remarks, proofs, or exposition will be due to the professor (and not to the scribe). In an appendix at the end of this document, you will find the collected homework problems (with solutions). I make no promises regarding the correctness of these solutions; consider yourself warned. Please send any and all corrections to [email protected]. They will be most appreciated. A rough syllabus for the course is, in Eric’s own words, to “cover some initial segment of the book.” To explain, the course plans to discuss general homology and cohomology theories, bordism homology and cohomology, stable homotopy groups of spheres, and spectral sequences as computational tools for homotopy groups. 0.2 Administrative Stuff The grading of the course is as follows: weekly-ish problem sets constitute about one third, a midterm paper is another third, and a final paper will be the final third. Reuben Stern 4 Spring 2017 Math 231br January 23, 2017 1 January 23, 2017 Didn’t attend lecture. Went over course logistics and outlined the focus of the class. 1.1 Overview of Course The goal of this class is to give an introduction to homotopy theory (of spaces). This is four-part: 1. Decomposition of spaces (co/fiber sequences). 2. Invariants constructed from decompositions (H∗, π∗) and their properties (theorems of Whitehead and Hurewicz, etc.). 3. Representability theorems (Brown, Adams) and the stable category (HZ, KU and KO, S, HG, etc.) 4. Computation (characteristic classes, Bott periodicity, the Steenrod operations, the Adams and Serre spectral sequences, etc.) As an example of the kind of analysis we can perform with these tools at our disposal, start with your favorite simply connected space, like Sn≥2. Its homotopy groups are notoriously difficult and important to compute. Theorem 1.1. (Hurewicz) If X is (n − 1)-connected (that is, πkX = 0 for all k < n), ∼ then Hn(X; Z) = πnX. We also have a decomposition X[n + 1, ∞] X K(πnX, n) by a fiber sequence such that πnX k = n πkX n + 1 ≤ k πkK(πnX, n) = , πkX[n + 1, ∞] = . 0 otherwise 0 otherwise Then we can also plug the data of H∗X and H∗K(πnX, n) into a gadget known as the Serre spectral sequence to get H∗X[n + 1, ∞]. Reuben Stern 5 Spring 2017 Math 231br January 25, 2017 2 January 25, 2017 This is the first lecture I attended. I noticed that the class was 75% graduate students, and got a little frightened. Need not fear though, as Eric is a warm and inviting lecturer! 2.1 Some facts about the Category Spaces Eric: “I can’t make it through a lecture without saying ‘category’ at least five times.” The goal of this lecture is to give a couple of technical lemmas and some basic con- structions, so that we don’t have to mention them explicitly ever again. There will be four examples in this class: a sheaf condition on a decomposition of a topological space, product spaces, gluings (or quotient spaces), and the space Y X of functions X → Y . 2.2 Example: Locality and Sheafiness S Let X be a topological space and X = j Aj a decomposition of X into a collection of locally finite closed subsets. Then a continuous function f : X → T (for an arbitrary space T ) is the same data as continuous functions fj : Aj → T agreeing on the overlap. We picture this as follows: Make pic- Equivalently, we demand fi|Ai∩Aj = fj|Ai∩Aj . This condition is called locality or a sheaf condition on the collection {fi}. For intution on where the term “sheaf condition” ture of comes from, here is an aside on sheaves! overlap Aside 2.1. (Sheaves.) A sheaf is an assignment from subsets (usually taken to be open) of a space X to arbitrary sets, together with restriction maps: if B ⊆ A ⊆ X, we get a map resA,B : F (A) → F (B).(Example: take F (A) = {continuous functions A → T }.) We ask that these data satisfy: • The restriction maps commute nicely: if C ⊆ B ⊆ A ⊆ X, then resB,C ◦ resA,B = resA,C . • For a cover {Aj} of X, we think about the following diagram: res res Aj ,Ak∩Aj X,Aj Q Q F (X) j F (Aj) k,` F (Ak ∩ A`) res Aj ,Aj ∩A` The sheaf condition is then equivalent to the leftmost map equalizing the right hand side. And before we move on, an aside on equalizers! As Eric keeps pointing out, this class will be very category-heavy. Reuben Stern 6 Spring 2017 Math 231br 2.3 Example: Products of Spaces f Aside 2.2. (Equalizers.) An equalizer (of sets) E ⊆ S T is the maximal subset g of S on which f and g restrict to the same function. Lemma 2.3. Suppose that F −−→h S is some function such that f ◦ h = g ◦ h. Then there is a unique factorization of h as F h S i ∃! E To conclude our previous example, the assignment F (A) = {continuous functions f : A → T } forms a sheaf. 2.3 Example: Products of Spaces For any two spaces X and Y , there is a space X × Y with the following property: any map T → X × Y is the same data as pairs of maps f : T → X and g; T → Y . If we write Spaces for the category of spaces1, then we write Spaces(T,X × Y ) to mean the set of continuous functions T → X × Y .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • HE WANG Abstract. a Mini-Course on Rational Homotopy Theory
    RATIONAL HOMOTOPY THEORY HE WANG Abstract. A mini-course on rational homotopy theory. Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Elementary homotopy theory 3 3. Spectral sequences 8 4. Postnikov towers and rational homotopy theory 16 5. Commutative differential graded algebras 21 6. Minimal models 25 7. Fundamental groups 34 References 36 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 55P62 . 1 2 HE WANG 1. Introduction One of the goals of topology is to classify the topological spaces up to some equiva- lence relations, e.g., homeomorphic equivalence and homotopy equivalence (for algebraic topology). In algebraic topology, most of the time we will restrict to spaces which are homotopy equivalent to CW complexes. We have learned several algebraic invariants such as fundamental groups, homology groups, cohomology groups and cohomology rings. Using these algebraic invariants, we can seperate two non-homotopy equivalent spaces. Another powerful algebraic invariants are the higher homotopy groups. Whitehead the- orem shows that the functor of homotopy theory are power enough to determine when two CW complex are homotopy equivalent. A rational coefficient version of the homotopy theory has its own techniques and advan- tages: 1. fruitful algebraic structures. 2. easy to calculate. RATIONAL HOMOTOPY THEORY 3 2. Elementary homotopy theory 2.1. Higher homotopy groups. Let X be a connected CW-complex with a base point x0. Recall that the fundamental group π1(X; x0) = [(I;@I); (X; x0)] is the set of homotopy classes of maps from pair (I;@I) to (X; x0) with the product defined by composition of paths. Similarly, for each n ≥ 2, the higher homotopy group n n πn(X; x0) = [(I ;@I ); (X; x0)] n n is the set of homotopy classes of maps from pair (I ;@I ) to (X; x0) with the product defined by composition.
    [Show full text]
  • Directed Algebraic Topology and Applications
    Directed algebraic topology and applications Martin Raussen Department of Mathematical Sciences, Aalborg University, Denmark Discrete Structures in Algebra, Geometry, Topology and Computer Science 6ECM July 3, 2012 Martin Raussen Directed algebraic topology and applications Algebraic Topology Homotopy Homotopy: 1-parameter deformation Two continuous functions f , g : X ! Y from a topological space X to another, Y are called homotopic if one can be "continuously deformed" into the other. Such a deformation is called a homotopy H : X × I ! Y between the two functions. Two spaces X, Y are called homotopy equivalent if there are continous maps f : X ! Y and g : Y ! X that are homotopy inverse to each other, i.e., such that g ◦ f ' idX and f ◦ g ' idY . Martin Raussen Directed algebraic topology and applications Algebraic Topology Invariants Algebraic topology is the branch of mathematics which uses tools from abstract algebra to study topological spaces. The basic goal is to find algebraic invariants that classify topological spaces up to homeomorphism, though usually most classify (at best) up to homotopy equivalence. An outstanding use of homotopy is the definition of homotopy groups pn(X, ∗), n > 0 – important invariants in algebraic topology. Examples Spheres of different dimensions are not homotopy equivalent to each other. Euclidean spaces of different dimensions are not homeomorphic to each other. Martin Raussen Directed algebraic topology and applications Path spaces, loop spaces and homotopy groups Definition Path space P(X )(x0, x1): the space of all continuous paths p : I ! X starting at x0 and ending at x1 (CO-topology). Loop space W(X )(x0): the space of all all continuous loops 1 w : S ! X starting and ending at x0.
    [Show full text]
  • Math 601 Algebraic Topology Hw 4 Selected Solutions Sketch/Hint
    MATH 601 ALGEBRAIC TOPOLOGY HW 4 SELECTED SOLUTIONS SKETCH/HINT QINGYUN ZENG 1. The Seifert-van Kampen theorem 1.1. A refinement of the Seifert-van Kampen theorem. We are going to make a refinement of the theorem so that we don't have to worry about that openness problem. We first start with a definition. Definition 1.1 (Neighbourhood deformation retract). A subset A ⊆ X is a neighbourhood defor- mation retract if there is an open set A ⊂ U ⊂ X such that A is a strong deformation retract of U, i.e. there exists a retraction r : U ! A and r ' IdU relA. This is something that is true most of the time, in sufficiently sane spaces. Example 1.2. If Y is a subcomplex of a cell complex, then Y is a neighbourhood deformation retract. Theorem 1.3. Let X be a space, A; B ⊆ X closed subspaces. Suppose that A, B and A \ B are path connected, and A \ B is a neighbourhood deformation retract of A and B. Then for any x0 2 A \ B. π1(X; x0) = π1(A; x0) ∗ π1(B; x0): π1(A\B;x0) This is just like Seifert-van Kampen theorem, but usually easier to apply, since we no longer have to \fatten up" our A and B to make them open. If you know some sheaf theory, then what Seifert-van Kampen theorem really says is that the fundamental groupoid Π1(X) is a cosheaf on X. Here Π1(X) is a category with object pints in X and morphisms as homotopy classes of path in X, which can be regard as a global version of π1(X).
    [Show full text]
  • [DRAFT] a Peripatetic Course in Algebraic Topology
    [DRAFT] A Peripatetic Course in Algebraic Topology Julian Salazar [email protected]• http://slzr.me July 22, 2016 Abstract These notes are based on lectures in algebraic topology taught by Peter May and Henry Chan at the 2016 University of Chicago Math REU. They are loosely chrono- logical, having been reorganized for my benefit and significantly annotated by my personal exposition, plus solutions to in-class/HW exercises, plus content from read- ings (from May’s Finite Book), books (e.g. May’s Concise Course, Munkres’ Elements of Algebraic Topology, and Hatcher’s Algebraic Topology), Wikipedia, etc. I Foundations + Weeks 1 to 33 1 Topological notions3 1.1 Topological spaces.................................3 1.2 Separation properties...............................4 1.3 Continuity and operations on spaces......................4 2 Algebraic notions5 2.1 Rings and modules................................6 2.2 Tensor products..................................7 3 Categorical notions 11 3.1 Categories..................................... 11 3.2 Functors...................................... 13 3.3 Natural transformations............................. 15 3.4 [DRAFT] Universal properties.......................... 17 3.5 Adjoint functors.................................. 20 1 4 The fundamental group 21 4.1 Connectedness and paths............................. 21 4.2 Homotopy and homotopy equivalence..................... 22 4.3 The fundamental group.............................. 24 4.4 Applications.................................... 26
    [Show full text]
  • The Fundamental Group and Seifert-Van Kampen's
    THE FUNDAMENTAL GROUP AND SEIFERT-VAN KAMPEN'S THEOREM KATHERINE GALLAGHER Abstract. The fundamental group is an essential tool for studying a topo- logical space since it provides us with information about the basic shape of the space. In this paper, we will introduce the notion of free products and free groups in order to understand Seifert-van Kampen's Theorem, which will prove to be a useful tool in computing fundamental groups. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Background Definitions and Facts 2 3. Free Groups and Free Products 4 4. Seifert-van Kampen Theorem 6 Acknowledgments 12 References 12 1. Introduction One of the fundamental questions in topology is whether two topological spaces are homeomorphic or not. To show that two topological spaces are homeomorphic, one must construct a continuous function from one space to the other having a continuous inverse. To show that two topological spaces are not homeomorphic, one must show there does not exist a continuous function with a continuous inverse. Both of these tasks can be quite difficult as the recently proved Poincar´econjecture suggests. The conjecture is about the existence of a homeomorphism between two spaces, and it took over 100 years to prove. Since the task of showing whether or not two spaces are homeomorphic can be difficult, mathematicians have developed other ways to solve this problem. One way to solve this problem is to find a topological property that holds for one space but not the other, e.g. the first space is metrizable but the second is not. Since many spaces are similar in many ways but not homeomorphic, mathematicians use a weaker notion of equivalence between spaces { that of homotopy equivalence.
    [Show full text]
  • Algebraic Topology
    Algebraic Topology Vanessa Robins Department of Applied Mathematics Research School of Physics and Engineering The Australian National University Canberra ACT 0200, Australia. email: [email protected] September 11, 2013 Abstract This manuscript will be published as Chapter 5 in Wiley's textbook Mathe- matical Tools for Physicists, 2nd edition, edited by Michael Grinfeld from the University of Strathclyde. The chapter provides an introduction to the basic concepts of Algebraic Topology with an emphasis on motivation from applications in the physical sciences. It finishes with a brief review of computational work in algebraic topology, including persistent homology. arXiv:1304.7846v2 [math-ph] 10 Sep 2013 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Homotopy Theory 4 2.1 Homotopy of paths . 4 2.2 The fundamental group . 5 2.3 Homotopy of spaces . 7 2.4 Examples . 7 2.5 Covering spaces . 9 2.6 Extensions and applications . 9 3 Homology 11 3.1 Simplicial complexes . 12 3.2 Simplicial homology groups . 12 3.3 Basic properties of homology groups . 14 3.4 Homological algebra . 16 3.5 Other homology theories . 18 4 Cohomology 18 4.1 De Rham cohomology . 20 5 Morse theory 21 5.1 Basic results . 21 5.2 Extensions and applications . 23 5.3 Forman's discrete Morse theory . 24 6 Computational topology 25 6.1 The fundamental group of a simplicial complex . 26 6.2 Smith normal form for homology . 27 6.3 Persistent homology . 28 6.4 Cell complexes from data . 29 2 1 Introduction Topology is the study of those aspects of shape and structure that do not de- pend on precise knowledge of an object's geometry.
    [Show full text]
  • [Math.AT] 2 May 2002
    WEAK EQUIVALENCES OF SIMPLICIAL PRESHEAVES DANIEL DUGGER AND DANIEL C. ISAKSEN Abstract. Weak equivalences of simplicial presheaves are usually defined in terms of sheaves of homotopy groups. We give another characterization us- ing relative-homotopy-liftings, and develop the tools necessary to prove that this agrees with the usual definition. From our lifting criteria we are able to prove some foundational (but new) results about the local homotopy theory of simplicial presheaves. 1. Introduction In developing the homotopy theory of simplicial sheaves or presheaves, the usual way to define weak equivalences is to require that a map induce isomorphisms on all sheaves of homotopy groups. This is a natural generalization of the situation for topological spaces, but the ‘sheaves of homotopy groups’ machinery (see Def- inition 6.6) can feel like a bit of a mouthful. The purpose of this paper is to unravel this definition, giving a fairly concrete characterization in terms of lift- ing properties—the kind of thing which feels more familiar and comfortable to the ingenuous homotopy theorist. The original idea came to us via a passing remark of Jeff Smith’s: He pointed out that a map of spaces X → Y induces an isomorphism on homotopy groups if and only if every diagram n−1 / (1.1) S 6/ X xx{ xx xx {x n { n / D D 6/ Y xx{ xx xx {x Dn+1 −1 arXiv:math/0205025v1 [math.AT] 2 May 2002 admits liftings as shown (for every n ≥ 0, where by convention we set S = ∅). Here the maps Sn−1 ֒→ Dn are both the boundary inclusion, whereas the two maps Dn ֒→ Dn+1 in the diagram are the two inclusions of the surface hemispheres of Dn+1.
    [Show full text]
  • Picard Groupoids and $\Gamma $-Categories
    PICARD GROUPOIDS AND Γ-CATEGORIES AMIT SHARMA Abstract. In this paper we construct a symmetric monoidal closed model category of coherently commutative Picard groupoids. We construct another model category structure on the category of (small) permutative categories whose fibrant objects are (permutative) Picard groupoids. The main result is that the Segal’s nerve functor induces a Quillen equivalence between the two aforementioned model categories. Our main result implies the classical result that Picard groupoids model stable homotopy one-types. Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. The Setup 4 2.1. Review of Permutative categories 4 2.2. Review of Γ- categories 6 2.3. The model category structure of groupoids on Cat 7 3. Two model category structures on Perm 12 3.1. ThemodelcategorystructureofPermutativegroupoids 12 3.2. ThemodelcategoryofPicardgroupoids 15 4. The model category of coherently commutatve monoidal groupoids 20 4.1. The model category of coherently commutative monoidal groupoids 24 5. Coherently commutative Picard groupoids 27 6. The Quillen equivalences 30 7. Stable homotopy one-types 36 Appendix A. Some constructions on categories 40 AppendixB. Monoidalmodelcategories 42 Appendix C. Localization in model categories 43 Appendix D. Tranfer model structure on locally presentable categories 46 References 47 arXiv:2002.05811v2 [math.CT] 12 Mar 2020 Date: Dec. 14, 2019. 1 2 A. SHARMA 1. Introduction Picard groupoids are interesting objects both in topology and algebra. A major reason for interest in topology is because they classify stable homotopy 1-types which is a classical result appearing in various parts of the literature [JO12][Pat12][GK11]. The category of Picard groupoids is the archetype exam- ple of a 2-Abelian category, see [Dup08].
    [Show full text]
  • New Ideas in Algebraic Topology (K-Theory and Its Applications)
    NEW IDEAS IN ALGEBRAIC TOPOLOGY (K-THEORY AND ITS APPLICATIONS) S.P. NOVIKOV Contents Introduction 1 Chapter I. CLASSICAL CONCEPTS AND RESULTS 2 § 1. The concept of a fibre bundle 2 § 2. A general description of fibre bundles 4 § 3. Operations on fibre bundles 5 Chapter II. CHARACTERISTIC CLASSES AND COBORDISMS 5 § 4. The cohomological invariants of a fibre bundle. The characteristic classes of Stiefel–Whitney, Pontryagin and Chern 5 § 5. The characteristic numbers of Pontryagin, Chern and Stiefel. Cobordisms 7 § 6. The Hirzebruch genera. Theorems of Riemann–Roch type 8 § 7. Bott periodicity 9 § 8. Thom complexes 10 § 9. Notes on the invariance of the classes 10 Chapter III. GENERALIZED COHOMOLOGIES. THE K-FUNCTOR AND THE THEORY OF BORDISMS. MICROBUNDLES. 11 § 10. Generalized cohomologies. Examples. 11 Chapter IV. SOME APPLICATIONS OF THE K- AND J-FUNCTORS AND BORDISM THEORIES 16 § 11. Strict application of K-theory 16 § 12. Simultaneous applications of the K- and J-functors. Cohomology operation in K-theory 17 § 13. Bordism theory 19 APPENDIX 21 The Hirzebruch formula and coverings 21 Some pointers to the literature 22 References 22 Introduction In recent years there has been a widespread development in topology of the so-called generalized homology theories. Of these perhaps the most striking are K-theory and the bordism and cobordism theories. The term homology theory is used here, because these objects, often very different in their geometric meaning, Russian Math. Surveys. Volume 20, Number 3, May–June 1965. Translated by I.R. Porteous. 1 2 S.P. NOVIKOV share many of the properties of ordinary homology and cohomology, the analogy being extremely useful in solving concrete problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Zuoqin Wang Time: March 25, 2021 the QUOTIENT TOPOLOGY 1. The
    Topology (H) Lecture 6 Lecturer: Zuoqin Wang Time: March 25, 2021 THE QUOTIENT TOPOLOGY 1. The quotient topology { The quotient topology. Last time we introduced several abstract methods to construct topologies on ab- stract spaces (which is widely used in point-set topology and analysis). Today we will introduce another way to construct topological spaces: the quotient topology. In fact the quotient topology is not a brand new method to construct topology. It is merely a simple special case of the co-induced topology that we introduced last time. However, since it is very concrete and \visible", it is widely used in geometry and algebraic topology. Here is the definition: Definition 1.1 (The quotient topology). (1) Let (X; TX ) be a topological space, Y be a set, and p : X ! Y be a surjective map. The co-induced topology on Y induced by the map p is called the quotient topology on Y . In other words, −1 a set V ⊂ Y is open if and only if p (V ) is open in (X; TX ). (2) A continuous surjective map p :(X; TX ) ! (Y; TY ) is called a quotient map, and Y is called the quotient space of X if TY coincides with the quotient topology on Y induced by p. (3) Given a quotient map p, we call p−1(y) the fiber of p over the point y 2 Y . Note: by definition, the composition of two quotient maps is again a quotient map. Here is a typical way to construct quotient maps/quotient topology: Start with a topological space (X; TX ), and define an equivalent relation ∼ on X.
    [Show full text]
  • 256B Algebraic Geometry
    256B Algebraic Geometry David Nadler Notes by Qiaochu Yuan Spring 2013 1 Vector bundles on the projective line This semester we will be focusing on coherent sheaves on smooth projective complex varieties. The organizing framework for this class will be a 2-dimensional topological field theory called the B-model. Topics will include 1. Vector bundles and coherent sheaves 2. Cohomology, derived categories, and derived functors (in the differential graded setting) 3. Grothendieck-Serre duality 4. Reconstruction theorems (Bondal-Orlov, Tannaka, Gabriel) 5. Hochschild homology, Chern classes, Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch For now we'll introduce enough background to talk about vector bundles on P1. We'll regard varieties as subsets of PN for some N. Projective will mean that we look at closed subsets (with respect to the Zariski topology). The reason is that if p : X ! pt is the unique map from such a subset X to a point, then we can (derived) push forward a bounded complex of coherent sheaves M on X to a bounded complex of coherent sheaves on a point Rp∗(M). Smooth will mean the following. If x 2 X is a point, then locally x is cut out by 2 a maximal ideal mx of functions vanishing on x. Smooth means that dim mx=mx = dim X. (In general it may be bigger.) Intuitively it means that locally at x the variety X looks like a manifold, and one way to make this precise is that the completion of the local ring at x is isomorphic to a power series ring C[[x1; :::xn]]; this is the ring where Taylor series expansions live.
    [Show full text]
  • Fibrations II - the Fundamental Lifting Property
    Fibrations II - The Fundamental Lifting Property Tyrone Cutler July 13, 2020 Contents 1 The Fundamental Lifting Property 1 2 Spaces Over B 3 2.1 Homotopy in T op=B ............................... 7 3 The Homotopy Theorem 8 3.1 Implications . 12 4 Transport 14 4.1 Implications . 16 5 Proof of the Fundamental Lifting Property Completed. 19 6 The Mutal Characterisation of Cofibrations and Fibrations 20 6.1 Implications . 22 1 The Fundamental Lifting Property This section is devoted to stating Theorem 1.1 and beginning its proof. We prove only the first of its two statements here. This part of the theorem will then be used in the sequel, and the proof of the second statement will follow from the results obtained in the next section. We will be careful to avoid circular reasoning. The utility of the theorem will soon become obvious as we repeatedly use its statement to produce maps having very specific properties. However, the true power of the theorem is not unveiled until x 5, where we show how it leads to a mutual characterisation of cofibrations and fibrations in terms of an orthogonality relation. Theorem 1.1 Let j : A,! X be a closed cofibration and p : E ! B a fibration. Assume given the solid part of the following strictly commutative diagram f A / E |> j h | p (1.1) | | X g / B: 1 Then the dotted filler can be completed so as to make the whole diagram commute if either of the following two conditions are met • j is a homotopy equivalence. • p is a homotopy equivalence.
    [Show full text]