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.

Let $X = \{(x,y) \in \mathbb{R}^2 : 0 \le y \le 1 ,x=0 \text{ or }1/n \text{ for some } n \in \mathbb{N} \} \cup ([0,1] \times \{0\} ) $

I want to show $X$ cannot be triangulated. I have that given a finite simplicial complex $K$ , for any $x \in K $ and any open set $U$ containing $x$ there exists open connected $V$ such that: $$ x \in V \subset U $$

I can see, by taking $x = (0,1)$ and applying the above statement (no connected $V$ ), no finite simplicial complex triangulates $X$ .

Is this enough? In the definition of triangulable we do not require $K$ to be finite.

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

The finiteness is not necessary. Every simplicial complex (and more generally, every CW complex) is locally connected (more generally, it is locally contractible).

You can find a proof in Allen Hatcher's Algebraic Topology, in the Appendix, which deals with the topology of CW complexes. Each simplicial complex is a CW complex since a $\triangle^n$ is homeomorphic to the $n$-ball $D^n$

share|improve this answer
    
I suppose this follows from being locally finite? do you know somewhere where i can find a proof of this statement? –  JC784 Feb 24 at 15:33
    
@JC784: Local finiteness isn't necessary either. The local finiteness of a CW complex (meaning each point has a neighborhood intersecting only a finite number of cells) is equivalent to local compactness, and also to first-countability. But the local contractibility is always there. –  Stefan Hamcke Feb 24 at 16:40
    
are infinite simplicial complexes homeomorphic to some $ \mathbb{R} ^n $ ? –  JC784 Feb 24 at 20:11
1  
In general, no. Do you mean homeomorphic to a subset of $\Bbb R$? This isn't the case, either, as the infinite wedge of closed intervals ($[0,1]×\Bbb N/\{0\}×\Bbb N$) shows. That space is not first-countable, but every subset of $\Bbb R^n$ is. –  Stefan Hamcke Feb 24 at 20:28
    
sorry yes that's what i meant, thanks! –  JC784 Feb 25 at 14:02

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.