Notes:CW-Complex

From Maths
Revision as of 01:00, 23 January 2017 by Alec (Talk | contribs) (Sphere example: Saving work)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Overview

I get CW-Complexes in terms of what they are but no so much in terms of a formal definition. This page details my research.

Munkres: Elements of Algebraic Topology

A CW-Complex is a topological space, (X,J), and a collection of (pairwise) disjoint open cells, {eα}αI, with X=αIeα, such that:

  1. (X,J) is a Hausdorff space
  2. For each open m-cell, eα, there exists a continuous map, fα:¯BmX such that:
    1. fα maps Bm[Note 1] homeomorphically onto eα and
    2. fα((¯Bm)) "into"[Note 2] a finite union of open cells, each of dimension (strictly) less than m
  3. A set AP(X) is closed in (X,J) if and only if αI[A¯eα is closed in ¯eα]

Hatcher: Algebraic Topology - Appendix

A CW-Complex is constructed as follows:

  1. Start with X0, the 0-cells of X
  2. Inductively, form the n-skeleton, Xn, from Xn1 by attaching n-cells, enα via maps, φα:Sn1Xn1.
    • This means that Xn is the quotient space of Xn1αDnα under the identifications:
      • xφα(x) for xDnα
    the cell enα is the homeomorphic image of DnαDnα under the quotient map
  3. X=nNXn with the weak topology.
    • A set AP(X) is open if and only if nN[AXn is open in Xn]

Algebraic Topology: An Intuitive Approach

We build an "attaching space" called a (finite) cell complex inductively from the following recipe:

  • Ingredients:
  • Construction:
    • X0:=k0i=1ˉe0i
    • Set X(1):=k1i=1ˉe1i
    • Define X(1):=k1i=1ˉe1i (where we consider each ˉe1i as a subspace of R
      • We could consider X(1) as a subset of k1i=1R for boundary purposes.
    • We must now construct an attaching map: h1:X(1)X0 to attach X(1) to X0
    • Define: X1:=X0h1X(1):=X0X(1)xh1(x)
    • Set X(2):=k2i=1ˉe2i
    • Specify an attaching map, h2:X(2)X1
    • And so on until we obtain Xn, then let X:=Xn - this final product is an n-dimensional cell complex.
      • For each q{0,,n} we call Xq a q-skeleton of X.
      • For a cell complex X we get 3 maps:
        1. For each q-cell, eqj we have the canonical inclusion map: iq,j:ˉeqjX(q)
        2. The canonical quotient map: π:X(q)Xq Caveat:what on earth.... - oh okay, might be canonical injection followed by projection of the quotient
        3. The inclusion map i:XqX
      • The composition of these maps: ϕqj:=iπiq,j:ˉeqjX
        • Called the characteristic map of the eqj cell.
          • The restriction of the characteristic map to the boundary, ˉeqj should agree with the restriction of the attaching map hq:X(q)Xq1 to \partial\bar{e}^q_j

Klein bottle example

\xymatrix{ v \bullet \ar@{<-}@<.65ex>[d]_a \ar@{<-}[rr]^b & & \bullet v \ar@{<-}@<-.65ex>[d]^a \ar[dll]_c \\ v \bullet \ar[rr]_b & & \bullet v}

With 2-cells A and B:

  • A "oriented/boundary" (-a)+(-c)+b and
  • B "oriented/boundary" c+b+a
A CW-complex for the Klein bottle

I will almost certainly loose my paper notes.

  • X^0:\eq\{(v,v)\}
  • X^{(1)}:\eq\coprod_{i\in\{a,b,c\} }\overline{\mathbb{B}^1}\eq\bigcup_{j\in\{a,b,c\} }\big\{(j,p)\ \vert\ p\in \overline{\mathbb{B}^1}\big\} \eq\{\underbrace{(a,-1),\ldots,(a,1)}_{a},\underbrace{(b,-1),\ldots,(b,1)}_{b},\underbrace{(c,-1),\ldots,(c,1)}_c\}

At this point X^0 "looks like" a point and X^{(1)} "looks like" 3 separate straight lines.


Now we need an attaching map:

  • h_1:\partial X^{(1)}\rightarrow X^0

The boundary is with X^{(1)} considered as a subset of \coprod_{i\in\{a,b,c\} }\mathbb{R} , so in this case:

  • \partial X^{(1)}\eq\{(a,-1),(a,1),(b,-1),(b,1),(c,-1),(c,1)\}

Of course h_1 maps every point in the boundary to (v,v) - the only vertex there is.


Note that h_1 is continuous, as h_1^{-1}(\emptyset)\eq\emptyset and h_1^{-1}(\{(v,v)\})\eq\partial X^{(1)} (we consider the codomain with the subspace topology, X^0 really can only have the trivial topology as a topology.


Now we can form an adjunction space:

  • X^1:\eq\frac{X^0\coprod X^{(1)} }{\langle x\sim h_1(x)\rangle}\eq X^0 \cup_{h_1} X^{(1)}
    • It is easy to see that X^0\coprod X^{(1)} "looks like" 3 lines of length 2 that are disconnected and a point, also disconnected.
    • We then identify the end points of those 3 lines with the point v
      • Caveat:I think there are a few ways to do this ultimately the space "looks like" a point with 3 loops coming off it. Like a clover shape. But how do we preserve orientation? Does it matter? What do the different directions of each loop (and as the image of which of the 3 lines) correspond to?

2-cells

This is slightly trickier. Note: it doesn't matter if we consider a \overline{\mathbb{B}^2} as a "disk" or a "square", as these are homeomorphic.

  • X^{(2)}:\eq A\coprod B which is the set that contains (i,(x,y)) given i\eq A or i\eq B and (x,y)\in\overline{\mathbb{B}^2} .

The attaching map:

  • h_2:\partial X^{(2)}\rightarrow X^1 - where we consider \partial X^{(2)} as a subset of \mathbb{R}^2\coprod\mathbb{R}^2, meaning:
    • \partial X^{(2)}\eq\left\{(i,(x,y))\ \vert\ i\in\{A,B\}\wedge (x,y)\in\mathbb{S}^1\right\} - \mathbb{S}^1 is a circle centred at the origin of radius 1.

Sphere example

\xymatrix{ w \bullet \ar[rr]^a \ar[d]_a & & \bullet v \ar[dll]_c \ar[d]^b \\ v\bullet \ar[rr]_b & & \bullet u}

With 2 2-cells, A and B:

  • The "boundary" of A is a +(-a) +(-a)
  • The "boundary" of B is c + b + (-b)
A CW-Complex for the sphere
  • X^0:\eq\coprod_{i\in \{u,v,w\} }i\eq\{(u,u),(v,v),(w,w)\}
  • X^{(1)}:\eq\coprod_{i\in\{a,b,c\} }i\eq\bigcup_{i\in\{a,b,c\} }\left\{(i,p)\ \vert\ p\in\overline{\mathbb{B}^1}\right\}

Now we need an attaching map, h_1:\partial X^{(1)}\rightarrow X^0 that is continuous, where the boundary is considered with X^{(1)}\subseteq\coprod_{i\in\{a,b,c\} }\mathbb{R}

  • \partial X^{(1)}\eq\{(a,-1),(a,1),(b,-1),(b,1),(c,-1),(c,1)\}

From the diagram we define:

  • h_1:(a,-1)\mapsto (w,w)
  • h_1:(a,1)\mapsto (v,v)
  • h_1:(b,-1)\mapsto (v,v)
  • h_1:(b,1)\mapsto (u,u)
  • h_1:(c,-1)\mapsto (v,v)
  • h_1:(c,1)\mapsto (v,v)

Considering \partial X^{(1)}\subseteq X^{(1)} as a subspace and X^0 with the discrete topology things look continuous.... I mean the pre-image of \{(v,v)\} say has a few "components" but yeah there's an open set in X^{(1)} which intersected with \partial X^{(1)} is that set surely. Check this later but looking good.

\xymatrix{ u & v \ar[l]_b \ar@(dl,dr)[]_c & w \ar[l]_a }
Something that looks like (homeomorphic) to X^1
  • Define X^1:\eq X^0\cup_{h_1} X^{(1)}:\eq\frac{X^0\coprod X^{(1)} }{\langle x\sim h_1(x) \rangle}

Notes

I drew some pictures of the triangles, A and B joined up as needed and they do indeed attach to this 1-skeleton, to form something homeomorphic to the sphere. So looking good so far!

Notes

  1. Jump up \mathbb{B}^m\eq\text{Int}\left(\overline{\mathbb{B}^m}\right)
  2. Jump up Into means nothing special, all functions map the domain into the co-domain, it is a common first-year mistake to look at the association of "onto" with "surjection" and associate into with "injection" - I mention this here to record Munkres' exact phrasing

References