I confused at one step of getting exact sequence of reduced homology groups for a good pair (ref. Algebraic topology by Hatcher).

Theorem 2.13 (p.114). Let $X$ be a space and $A$ a closed subspace which is a deformation retract of an open neighborhood in $X$. Then there is an exact sequence of reduced homology groups: $$\cdots \tilde{H}_n(A)\rightarrow \tilde{H}_n(X)\rightarrow \tilde{H}_n(X/A)\rightarrow\cdots\rightarrow \tilde{H}_0(X/A)\rightarrow 0.$$


1. For $n\geq 1$, $\tilde{H}_n(Y)\cong H_n(Y)$ and for $Y\neq \phi$, and $n=0$, $H_0(Y)\cong \tilde{H}_0(Y)\oplus \mathbb{Z}$. (see para after defining reduced homology groups on p.110

2. For any pair $(X,A)$ the relative homology groups fit in exact sequence (end of p.115) $$\cdots H_n(A)\rightarrow H_n(X)\rightarrow H_n(X,A)\rightarrow\cdots\rightarrow H_0(X,A)\rightarrow 0.$$

3. As a consequence of excision theorem (prop.2.22, p.124), $$H_n(X,A)\cong \tilde{H}_n(X/A) \mbox{ for all } n.$$

4. Replacing relative homology groups by reduced homology of quotients in (2) we get exact sequence $$ \cdots \tilde{H}_n(A)\rightarrow \tilde{H}_n(X)\rightarrow \tilde{H}_n(X/A)\rightarrow\cdots\rightarrow H_0(A)\rightarrow H_0(X)\rightarrow \tilde{H}_0(X/A)\rightarrow 0.$$ Question. We have not replaced $H_0(A)$ and $H_0(X)$ by reduced homology groups, and we can not replace them directly from (1); how to proceed for this? Am I missing anything here?


It is possible to proceed as you have done, manually replacing $H_0(A)$ and $H_0(X)$ with their reduced versions and then explicitly working out that you can still get a long exact sequence. However, there's a much better way to do this: just work with the reduced chain complexes to begin with. In other words, there is a short exact sequence of chain complexes $$0\to \tilde{C}_*(A)\to \tilde{C}_*(X)\to C_*(X,A)\to 0$$ which in nonnegative degrees is just the usual short exact sequence $0\to C_n(A)\to C_n(X)\to C_n(X,A)\to 0$ but in degree $-1$ is $0\to\mathbb{Z}\to\mathbb{Z}\to 0\to 0$ where the map $\mathbb{Z}\to\mathbb{Z}$ is the identity. This then gives a long exact sequence on homology $$\dots\to\tilde{H}_n(A)\to\tilde{H}_n(X)\to H_n(X,A)\to\tilde{H}_{n-1}(A)\to\cdots$$ and then proceed with steps 3 and 4 of your argument as before.

Hatcher discusses this on page 118, though he seems to never explicitly mention that this is used in the proof of Theorem 2.13.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So is $H_1(X) \rightarrow H_1(X,A)$ Always a surjection if A is path connected? Because if it is, $\tilde{H}_0(A)$ will be zero, but $H_1(X,A)=\tilde{H}_1(X,A)$. So if we have a L.E.S of a homology pair, we can always change it to the reduced homology and still have a L.E.S.? $\endgroup$ Apr 17 '19 at 17:37
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that's correct. $\endgroup$ Apr 17 '19 at 18:07

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.