Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

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

It is one of the problems in Hatcher's book.

I need to find the homology group of $H_n (X,A)$ when $A$ is a finite set of points and $X$ is $S^2$ or $T^2$.

I figured out that for $n>1$, I could use the long exact sequence and make $H_n (X,A)$ isomorphic to $H_n (X)$.

However, I am stuck with $H_1 (X,A)$ and $H_0 (X,A)$.

Can anyone give me an idea how I can find these?

share|cite|improve this question
For $H_0 (X,A)$ (in both cases, $S^2$ and $T^2$) use that $H_n(X,A) \cong \tilde{H_n}(X/A)$ (Hatcher, page 124). You know that $X/A$ is path-connected so you get $H_n (X/A) = \mathbb Z$ and hence $H_n(X,A) = 0$. – Rudy the Reindeer Apr 9 '12 at 17:12
thanks! that gives me half of the answer! :-) – Emily Apr 10 '12 at 15:27
Welcome : ) Glad I could help. – Rudy the Reindeer Apr 10 '12 at 15:54
@RudytheReindeer Can I ask how we prove that the pair (X,A) is a good pair? It seems weird because A is not connected ... – sifsa May 6 at 15:27
up vote 8 down vote accepted

Suppose $A=\{x_1,\dots,x_k\}$. Then $H_0(A)=\mathbb{Z}^k$ and $H_i(A)=0$ for $i>0$.

Whether $X=S^2$ or $T^2$ we have $H_0(X)\cong\mathbb{Z}$, and like Matt N said in his comment in either case $H_0(X,A)\cong\tilde{H}_0(X/A)=0$.

If $X=S^2$ then $H_1(X)=0$ so the l.e.s. has a portion like $$0\rightarrow H_1(X,A)\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^k\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}\rightarrow 0 $$ and so $H_1(S^2,A)\cong\mathbb{Z}^{k-1}$.

If $X=T^2$ then $H_1(X)=\mathbb{Z}^2$, so we have $$ 0\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}^2\rightarrow H_1(X,A)\stackrel{\partial}{\rightarrow} \mathbb{Z}^k\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}\rightarrow 0$$ Then $\ker\partial\cong\mathbb{Z}^2$ and its image is $\cong\mathbb{Z}^{k-1}$. I believe this is enough to conclude $H_1(T^2,A)\cong \mathbb{Z}^{k+1}$

share|cite|improve this answer
thank you for a generous explanation! :-) But I am still confused about that last sentence. I guess you have used the splitness of the exact sequence. However, how do we know that the sequence splits? If we have a short exact sequence then, $\mathbb Z$ being free abelian would be enough, but can we extend this idea to the long exact sequence as above? – Emily Apr 10 '12 at 15:55
My reasoning is like this: $H_1(X,A)$ is a finitely generated abelian group, so which one is it? We know it has no torsion, since the image and kernel of $\partial$ are both free, so it is completely determined by the rank. But then the rank has to be $(k-1)+2$ – you Apr 10 '12 at 17:15
(hopefully that reasoning is valid...) – you Apr 10 '12 at 17:25
That explains to me! But can't we say that im(round) is enough for $H_1 (X,A)$ being free? I am asking this to make sure I am understanding right. – Emily Apr 10 '12 at 17:45
Well, we know that the image of $\partial$ is in a free abelian group, so if $H_1(X,A)$ has torsion it will be in the kernel of this homomorphism. But exactness tells us that $\ker\partial\cong\mathbb{Z}^2$, which has no torsion. – you Apr 10 '12 at 22:35

This uses Proposition 2.22 in Hatcher(and you must prove $(X,A)$ is a good pair).

Without saying too much, although I guess "you" did, I solved this by finding a homotopy equivalence between the space $S^2/A$ or $T^2/A$ and a CW complex. In the former case, you can see the homotopy between $S^2/A$ and a CW complex given by $k+1$ 0-cells(where $A$ is a collection of $k$ points), $2k$ 1-cells, and 2 2-cells. Graphically we arrange the first $k$ 0-cells into a lovely regular $k$-gon, with an outlier $x$ in the back. We use the first $k$ 1-cells to add edges to our $k$-gon, and the second $k$ connecting the vertices of the $k$-gon to the outlier. Then the two cells are each attached with their boundaries glued to the $k$-gon. By contracting the 1-cells attached to $x$, we see this is homotopic to $S^2/A$, but this has a CW complex structure, so it is easier to compute.

share|cite|improve this answer
This is an interesting point of view! It became geometrically clear, thank you! :-) – Emily Apr 10 '12 at 16:09
Glad you enjoyed it! – John Stalfos Apr 10 '12 at 16:39

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.