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

In Bredon's Topology and Geometry it‘s postulated that for a $k$-fold covering projection $p\colon X \to Y$, $\deg(p)=k$, where $\deg(p)=k$ The example given is of $X$ the $3$-dimensional sphere $S^3$ and $Y$ the Lens space $L(k,m)$, both of which have $H_3 = \mathbb Z$.

So I'd like to know where this comes from. In the case of $X=Y=S^1$ it‘s clear, but what about the general case?

Thanks for putting my question into TEX, I have to find it out myself, so it's going to take some time to edit. Here the short answer: For a continuous function $f\colon M \to N$ with $M$ and $N$ compact oriented $n$-dimensional manifolds, and its induced homological homomorphism $f_\#$ following is true

$f_\#([M])=\pm deg(f)[N]$, $[M]$ and $[N]$ the generators of the n-th homological groups $H_n(M)= H_n(N) = \mathbb Z$.

share|cite|improve this question
What definition of degree are you working with? – Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Aug 28 '12 at 18:54
up vote 4 down vote accepted

I think this is easiest to see in dimension $2$, so go ahead and assume $M$ and $N$ are compact oriented surfaces, and let $f\colon M\to N$ be a covering map of degree $k$. One way to visualize what's happening is as follows.

First, triangulate $N$, and do it in such a way that all the triangles are small. Let $\mathcal{T}$ denote the set of all the triangles in this triangulation. Now, because all the triangles $T\in \mathcal{T}$ are small, when you look at $f^{-1}(T)$, it should consist of $k$ disjoint triangles. In this way, you get a triangulation $\mathcal{S} := f^{-1}(\mathcal{T})$ of $M$.

The generator $[M]$ of $H_n(M)$ is represented by the $n$-chain $\sum_{S\in \mathcal{S}} S$. Thus the image of $[M]$ under $f_\sharp$ is $\sum_{S\in \mathcal{S}} f_\sharp S$. Since each $S\in \mathcal{S}$ maps to a triangle in $\mathcal{T}$, and moreover, every triangle in $\mathcal{T}$ has exactly $k$ triangles $S\in \mathcal{S}$ mapping onto it, it follows that $$f_\sharp[M]= \pm\sum_{T\in \mathcal{T}} kT = \pm k\sum_{T\in \mathcal{T}}T = \pm k[N].$$ The sign $\pm$ depends on whether or not $f$ is orientation preserving or reversing.

Of course, dimension 2 really doesn't matter here. It's just easier to visualize triangles. Hope this helps.

share|cite|improve this answer
Are higher-dimensional (compact, oriented) manifolds triangulable? – Jesse Madnick Aug 29 '12 at 3:20
@JesseMadnick: they are if they are smooth. If not, $E_8$ is a counterexample. – user641 Aug 29 '12 at 8:40
This helps for this $3$-dimensional case, thanks. – x x Aug 29 '12 at 12:26

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.