6
$\begingroup$

I want to calculate the fundamental group of the space $(S^1 \times [0,1])/$~ where $(z,0)$ ~ $(e^{2\pi i/n}z, 0)$ and $(z,1)$ ~ $(e^{2\pi i/m}z, 1)$. My idea is to find a pushout and then use the van - Kampen - theorem.

We get a pushout from the inclusions $S^1 \times \{1/2\} \hookrightarrow (S^1 \times [1/2, 1])/$~ and $S^1 \times \{1/2\} \hookrightarrow (S^1 \times [0, 1/2])/$~ and since $(S^1 \times [1/2, 1])/$~ and $(S^1 \times [0, 1/2])/$~ are homotopy-equivalent to $S^1$, van - Kampen suggests that the sought-after fundamental group is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}$, specifically $\langle a, b| a=b \rangle$, which is obviously wrong.

So where are my mistakes? I think the induced inclusions are wrong, but how do I see the correct ones?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Could you clarify the equivalence relation please? This way it appears you're gluing the two boundaries to a point. Do $n$ and $m$ vary? If so it still seems to me the whole boundaries are glued to just one point. Which would make your space the sphere. $\endgroup$ – Mr.P Aug 15 '15 at 12:59
  • $\begingroup$ Ah I forgot something, pardon, I'll edit. $\endgroup$ – Cosmare Aug 15 '15 at 13:09
  • $\begingroup$ Am I correct in assuming the equivalence is in fact $(z,0)~(ze^{\frac{2k\pi i}{n}},0)$ for $k\in\mathbb{Z}$? Which would add $n$ loops not equivalent to the trivial loop? $\endgroup$ – Mr.P Aug 15 '15 at 14:56
  • $\begingroup$ No, you just identify points that are $(360/n)°$ apart. $\endgroup$ – Cosmare Aug 15 '15 at 15:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your approach is correct, @Cosmare, but the conclusion you draw seems to be wrong. The Van-Kampen theorem says that applying $\pi_1$ to the pushout you describe yields a pushout in Groups. As you noted correctly, the top and bottom half of $X$ deformations retract onto $S^1$. Hence, $\pi_1(X)$ has two generators $a,b$. Note that the inclusions induce multiplication with $m$ and $n$ on $\pi_1$, since the middle circles becomes $m$-times (resp. $n$-times) the top (resp. bottom) circle with regard to the deformation retraction onto $S^1$. Hence, $$\pi_1(X)\cong \langle a, b| a^m=b^n \rangle$$ $\endgroup$ – iwriteonbananas Aug 17 '15 at 14:33
2
$\begingroup$

Your approach is fine, but you need to be careful in calculating the maps on fundamental groups that are induced by $\iota_1: {\mathbb S}^1\times \{1/2\}\to ({\mathbb S}^1\times [1/2,1])/_\sim\simeq{\mathbb S}^1$ and $\iota_2: {\mathbb S}^1\times \{1/2\}\to ({\mathbb S}^1\times [0,1/2])/_\sim\simeq{\mathbb S}^1$ (for the concrete description of the homotopy equivalences involved here, see below):

If you push the loop around ${\mathbb S}^1\times \{1/2\}$ to ${\mathbb S}^1\times \{1\}$ and follow it along ${\mathbb S}^1\times\{1\}\to ({\mathbb S}^1\times\{1\})/_\sim\cong{\mathbb S}^1$, you get the $m$-fold of the loop around ${\mathbb S}^1$. Hence, $$\pi_1(\iota_1): {\mathbb Z}\cong\pi_1({\mathbb S}^1\times\{1/2\})\to\pi_1(({\mathbb S}^1\times [1/2,1])/_\sim)\cong{\mathbb Z}$$ is the multiplication by $m$. Similarly, $\pi_1(\iota_2)$ is the multiplication by $n$.

Can you finish the computation on your own now?

Addendum The above builds on the homotopy equivalence $({\mathbb S}^1\times [1/2,1])/_\sim\xrightarrow{\simeq}{\mathbb S}^1$ given by the deformation retraction $({\mathbb S}^1\times [1/2,1])_\sim\to ({\mathbb S}^1\times\{1\})/_\sim, \overline{(x,t)}\mapsto\overline{(x,1)}$, composed with the homeomorphism $({\mathbb S}^1\times\{1\})/_\sim\cong {\mathbb S}^1, (z,1)\mapsto z^m$. In particular, it sends the single fold loop around ${\mathbb S}^1\times\{1/2\}$ to the $m$-fold loop around ${\mathbb S}^1$. For $({\mathbb S}^1\times[0,1/2])/_\sim\xrightarrow{\simeq}{\mathbb S}^1$ it's analogous.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ My problem is why I need to care about $S^1 \times \{1\}$ at all, because the inclusion is from $S^1 \times \{1/2\}$, how do you end up in $S^1 \times \{1\}$ all of sudden? I guess I don't understand the inclusion maps? $\endgroup$ – Cosmare Aug 15 '15 at 13:42
  • $\begingroup$ @Cosmare: I added some details - is it clearer now? $\endgroup$ – Hanno Aug 15 '15 at 16:25
  • $\begingroup$ I think I don't really understand how we know which maps we have to use to apply van Kampen, you end up with an homotopy equivalence, I just see an inclusion into the middle of the quotient space and that's it. Yet I know that it can't be right since it has to be more complex because the space involved is more complex. $\endgroup$ – Cosmare Aug 15 '15 at 17:16
  • $\begingroup$ I understood the part I mentioned now, thank you very much, but could you please explain why the map $(z,1) \mapsto z^m$ is a homeomorphism? $\endgroup$ – Cosmare Aug 16 '15 at 11:51
  • $\begingroup$ @Cosmare: You have $z_0^m = z_1^m$ if and only if $z_1 = z_0 \zeta_m^i$ for some $i$, i.e. if and only if $z_0$ and $z_1$ are equivalent with respect to the relation $\sim$. $\endgroup$ – Hanno Aug 16 '15 at 11:53

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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