Take the 2-minute tour ×
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.

I'm doing stuck with the first half of exercise 12 on page 19 in Hatcher:

Exercise:

Show that a homotopy equivalence $f : X \rightarrow Y$ induces a bijection between the set of path-components of $X$ and the set of path-components of $Y$. and that $f$ restricts to a homotopy equivalence from each path-component of $X$ to the corresponding path-component of $Y$

By the definition of homotopy equivalence, there exists $g$ such that $gf \simeq id_X$ and $fg \simeq id_Y$. So $g$ is a two-sided inverse of $f$, therefore $f$ is a bijection.

I'm stuck now because I don't know what there is to prove to show that "$f$ restricts to a homotopy equivalence from each path-component of $X$ to the corresponding path-component of $Y$".

Is there anything to prove? If $f$ is a homotopy equivalence, is it not obvious that any restriction is also a homotopy equivalence? Many thanks for helping me, I really appreciate it.

Edit:

So here is an attempt of proof that $f^\ast:\pi_0(X) \rightarrow \pi_0(Y)$ is a bijection:

Define $f^\ast$ as $f^\ast (A) := B$ where $B$ is the path-(connected)-component that contains $f(A)$ and $A \in \pi_0 (X)$.

Claim: $f^\ast$ is bijective

Proof:

(i) injective:

Let $f(A) = f(B)$ where $A, B \in \pi_0(X)$.

Then $f(A) \cup f(B)$ is a path-(connected)-component.

Then $f(A \cup B)$ is also a path-component.

By the definition of homotopy equivalence, there exists $g$ (continuous) such that $gf \simeq id_X$ and $fg \simeq id_Y$. So $g(f(A \cup B)) = A \cup B$ is path-connected.

$\implies A = B$.

In the proof above I used the following claim:

Claim: $A$ path-connected, $f$ continuous $\implies f(A)$ path-connected.

Proof: Assume $f(A)$ not path-connected, then $f(A)$ not connected, then $g(f(A))=A$ not connected $\implies$ contradiction.

(ii) surjective:

Let $B \in \pi_0(Y)$. Then for $A := g(B)$, $f(A) = B$.

Can you tell me if my proof is correct? I really appreciate your help!

share|improve this question
1  
You're using $g(f(A)) = A$ twice. Why is that? Also, the implication $f(A)$ not path-connected so $f(A)$ not connected is false (connectedness doesn't imply path-connectedness). To see that the image of a path-connected space under a continuous function is path-connected, pick two points $x,y \in f(A)$ There are points $a,b \in A$ such that $f(a) = x$ and $f(b) = y$. Since $A$ is path-connected, there is a path $\gamma:[0,1] \to A$ connecting $a$ and $b$. But then $f \circ \gamma$ will be a path connecting $x = f(a)$ and $y = f(b)$. –  t.b. Mar 22 '11 at 9:44
    
@Theo: many thanks, you're truly helpful. I just noticed your edit of your answer. I haven't read it but it looks as if you solved the exercise for me. I guess I was being too slow... : / I'll do the exercise again after reading your answer. Many thanks again! –  Matt N. Mar 22 '11 at 11:03
    
@Theo: that I hadn't accepted your (first) answer didn't mean I wasn't going to! I left this question "unaccepted" because I personally wasn't done with this exercise, not because I wasn't satisfied with your answer. –  Matt N. Mar 22 '11 at 11:07
1  
Don't worry you asked the question, so it's up to you to decide if an answer is acceptable or not. The whole thing turned out to be a bit long-winded, but I tried to formulate it in such a way that you see what you have to do in other situations (for instance the corresponding fact about $\pi_{n}(X)$):1. Prove that a continuous map $f:X \to Y$ yields a homomorphism $f_{\ast}: \pi_{n}(X) \to \pi_n(Y)$. 2. Prove that $(\operatorname{id}_{X})_\ast: \pi_{n}(X) \to \pi_{n}(Y)$ and $f_{\ast}g_{\ast} = (fg)_\ast$. 3. Prove $f \simeq f'$ implies $f_{\ast} = f'_\ast$. The rest is formal manipulation. –  t.b. Mar 22 '11 at 11:19
    
I meant $(\operatorname{id}_X)_\ast = \operatorname{id}_{\pi_{n}(X)}$ but I ran out of characters. –  t.b. Mar 22 '11 at 11:21

2 Answers 2

up vote 9 down vote accepted

Be careful: A homotopy equivalence is by no means a bijection in general: Let $X = \mathbb{R}$ and $Y = \{\ast\}$. Also, a homotopy equivalence need not restrict to a homotopy equivalence of subspaces. For instance, the orthogonal projection of $\mathbb{R}^2$ onto the $x$ axis is a homotopy equivalence. However, it maps the unit circle to the interval $[-1,1]$ and these two spaces certainly aren't homotopy equivalent (but this isn't completely obvious). Even simpler, take the subspace $([-1,1] \times \{0\}) \cup ([-1,1] \times \{1\})$ of $\mathbb{R}^2$ and its image $[-1,1]$ under the projection: you'll get a contradiction to your exercise.

The expressions $gf \simeq \operatorname{id}_{X}$ and $fg \simeq \operatorname{id}_{Y}$ mean that $gf$ and $fg$ are homotopic to the respective identities. (btw: it is more customary to use $\simeq$ \simeq instead of $\cong$ for "homotopic")

A continuous map sends path components into path components (because it sends paths to paths). The path component of a point $x$ is sent into the path component of its image $f(x)$ and the path component of $f(x)$ is sent into the path component of $gf(x)$. But as $gf \simeq \operatorname{id}_{X}$, a homotopy $H: X \times [0,1] \to X$ such that $H(\cdot,0) = gf$ and $H(\cdot,1) = \operatorname{id}_{X}$ gives us the path $\gamma(t) = H(x,t)$ connecting $gf(x)$ with $x$, so the path component of $gf(x)$ is the same as the path component of $x$. I let you finish up the argument yourself.


Added in response to the edited question.

Let $[x]$ be the path component of $x$. Let me write $f_{\ast}: \pi_{0}(X) \to \pi_{0}(Y)$ instead of $f^\ast$. By definition $f_{\ast}[x] = [f(x)]$ (check that this is well-defined!). In my last paragraph above I argued that $[gf(x)] = [x]$ so $g_\ast f_\ast [x] = [x]$ (check that $(gf)_\ast = g_\ast f_\ast$!). In other words $g_\ast f_\ast = (\operatorname{id}_{X})_{\ast} = \operatorname{id}_{\pi_{0}(X)}$ (check that $(\operatorname{id}_X)_\ast = \operatorname{id}_{\pi_{0}(X)}$!). In particular, $f_{\ast}$ is injective and $g_\ast$ is surjective. By symmetry we have $f_\ast g_\ast = \operatorname{id}_{\pi_{0}(Y)}$, so $f_{\ast}$ and $g_\ast$ are mutually inverse bijections.


A bit later

Maybe it's better to start from scratch.

Define an equivalence relation on $X$ by $x \sim x'$ if and only if there is a path connecting $x$ and $x'$. The equivalence classes of $\sim$ are precisely the path components of $X$. In other words, $\pi_{0}(X) = X/\!\!\sim$. Write $[x]$ for the $\sim$-equivalence class of $x$ (so $[x]$ is the path component of $x$).


Fact 1: A continuous map $f: X \to Y$ sends path components into path components. In other words, if $x \sim x$ then $f(x) \sim f(x')$.

Indeed, if $\gamma: [0,1] \to X$ is a path with $\gamma(0) = x$ and $\gamma(1) = x'$ then $f \circ \gamma: [0,1] \to Y$ is a path and $f(\gamma(0)) = f(x)$ and $f(\gamma(1)) = f(x')$, so $f(x) \sim f(x')$.


Again in other words Fact 1 tells us that $f$ yields a map $f_{\ast}: \pi_{0}(X) \to \pi_{0}(Y)$. Explicitly, \[ f_{\ast}([x]) = [f(x)]. \] This is well-defined because for $x \sim x'$ we have $f(x) \sim f(x')$, so $[f(x)] = [f(x')]$.

From this description we see that $(\operatorname{id}_{X})_{\ast}([x]) = [\operatorname{id}_{X}(x)] = [x] = \operatorname{id}_{\pi_{0}(X)}([x])$, so $(\operatorname{id}_{X})_{\ast} = \operatorname{id}_{\pi_{0}(X)}$. Also $(gf)_{\ast}([x]) = [gf(x)] = g_{\ast}([f(x)]) = g_{\ast}f_{\ast}([x])$, so $(gf)_{\ast} = g_{\ast}f_{\ast}$.

Since the two identities I've just proven are so important, let me state them again for emphasis:

Fact 2: For the identity $\operatorname{id}_{X}: X \to X$ and any two maps $f:X \to Y$ and $g: Y \to Z$ we have $$\displaystyle (\operatorname{id}_{X})_{\ast} = \operatorname{id}_{\pi_{0}(X)}: \pi_{0}(X) \to \pi_{0}(X) \qquad\text{and}\qquad (gf)_{\ast} = g_\ast f_\ast : \pi_{0}(X) \to \pi_{0}(Z) $$


Fact 3: If $f, f': X \to Y$ are homotopic, $f \simeq f'$, then $f_{\ast} = f'_{\ast}: \pi_{0}(X) \to \pi_{0}(Y)$.

Indeed, pick a homotopy $H: X \times [0,1] \to Y$ such that $f = H(\cdot,0)$ and $f' = H(\cdot,1)$. Since $t \mapsto H(x,t)$ is a path connecting $f(x)$ to $f'(x)$ we see that $f(x) \sim f'(x)$, so $f_{\ast}[x] = [f(x)] = [f'(x)] = f'_\ast[x]$.


Now we are finally in shape to solve the exercise. Let $f: X \to Y$ and $g: Y \to X$ be such that $gf \simeq \operatorname{id}_{X}$ and $fg \simeq \operatorname{id}_{Y}$. Then combining facts 2 and 3 we have that $$\displaystyle (\operatorname{id}_{X})_\ast = g_{\ast} f_{\ast} \qquad \text{and}\qquad (\operatorname{id}_{Y})_\ast = f_{\ast} g_{\ast} $$ and as $(\operatorname{id}_X)_\ast = \operatorname{id}_{\pi_{0}(X)}$ we see that $f_{\ast}$ and $g_{\ast}$ are mutually inverse bijections.

share|improve this answer
    
It is interesting to see how much easier something can be using good notation (yours instead of mine). –  Matt N. Mar 23 '11 at 16:34
    
@Matt: Thanks, I guess that is a major lesson to be learned. It's definitely a matter of experience and taste to choose good and self-evident notation. Many things just prove themselves that way. And of course the notation is not mine, it's completely standard. –  t.b. Mar 24 '11 at 10:32

If $D$ is a path component of $X$, then $f$ restricts to a map $D \to Y$ which lands in some path component $E$ of $Y$. If you want to claim that $f$ automatically restricts to a homotopy equivalence from $D$ to $E$, you have to show first that $g(E) \subseteq D$ and second that the induced homotopy $H$ between $gf$ and $\text{id}_D$ never has image outside of $D$ (and the corresponding statement for $E$). This is stronger than what you're being asked to prove; all you need to show is that $f$ and $g$ induce inverse maps on path components.

share|improve this answer
    
but isn't $g = f^{-1}$ and therefore $g(E)=f^{-1}(E)= f^{-1}(f(D)) = D$? –  Matt N. Mar 10 '11 at 11:08
2  
@Matt: you don't seem to have understood the definition of homotopy equivalence. $g$ is not an inverse of $f$; it is only an inverse up to homotopy. In particular, you claim that $f$ is a bijection; this is false in general. –  Qiaochu Yuan Mar 10 '11 at 11:11
    
You are right : ( I have to let things sink in I think, it's all too new. –  Matt N. Mar 10 '11 at 12:11

Your Answer

 
discard

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.