Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm working through Hatcher book and done $\pi_1(\mathbb{R}^2 - \mathbb{Q}^2)$ is uncountable. It's easy to see that it's true as you can imagine only non trivial maps contract in the space.

But, was wondering has anyone worked out $\pi_2(\mathbb{R}^2 - \mathbb{Q}^2)$. $\pi_2(\mathbb{R}^3 - \mathbb{Q}^3)$ I imagine this isn't that hard, shouldn't it be uncountable aswell.

Just doing a project on higher homotopy theory, but fundamental group stuff seems hard already. Like $\pi_2$ is that just a sphere doing a weird thing and looping back on itself. I know the definition but can't really see it. Plus the calculation aren't that easy.

share|cite|improve this question
$\pi_2(\mathbb R^3\setminus\mathbb Q^3)$ is certainly uncountable. $\pi_2(\mathbb R^2\setminus\mathbb Q^2)$ is most likely trivial, but I don't see a quick argument. – Grumpy Parsnip Feb 16 '12 at 18:42
I find the standard definition of $\pi_2$ fairly unenlightening. The definition that to me works much better is that it is the group of homotopies between null-homotopic paths from a basepoint to itself, up to homotopy. In other words, it's the fundamental group of the loop space ( – Qiaochu Yuan Feb 16 '12 at 18:52
These things can be counter-intuitive. The hawaiian earring space is a retract of $\mathbb R^2\setminus\mathbb Q^2$, and if you look at the 2D version of the hawaiian earring space, $X$, Barratt and Milnor showed that $H_3(X)\neq 0$. The plane is usually exempt from this sort of exotic behavior, so I'll bet $\pi_2=0$ in that case, but I also think the proof may be quite difficult. – Grumpy Parsnip Feb 16 '12 at 19:26
@QiaochuYuan I will have to look at that in more details. I can see $\pi_1$ and $\pi_2$ seems like a natural generalization. – simplicity Feb 16 '12 at 19:38
@Qiaochu, I find it almost incredible that that definition (which is of course very very nice technically) can be considered more enlightening that the definition of $\pi_2$ as homotopy classes of maps from a sphere! – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Feb 17 '12 at 2:51

I asked my colleague Jurek Dydak about this, and he pointed out the following paper

Topology and its Applications Volume 120, Issues 1–2, 15 May 2002, Pages 23–45 One-dimensional sets and planar sets are aspherical J. W. Cannon , G. R. Conner, and Andreas Zastrow

which shows that every subset of the plane has trivial $\pi_k, k\geq 2$. So in particular $\pi_2(\mathbb R^2\setminus \mathbb Q^2)=0$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Amazing result! – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Feb 17 '12 at 2:48

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.