3
$\begingroup$

I am a beginner of Algebraic topology course. I just come across the definition of Homotopy

Homotopy of 2 maps:

$f,g:S\to T$ are 2 continuous maps is said to called homotopic if there exist continuous map $H:S\times [0,1]\to T$ such that $H(s,0)=f(s)$ and $H(s,1)=g(s)$.

Homotopy of 2 spaces :

Two topological spaces $X,Y$ are said to homotopic if there is continous map $f:S\to T$ and $g:T\to S$ such that $f\circ g:T\to T$ is homotopic to Identity on T and $g\circ f:S\to S$ is homotopic to Identity on S.

I know that to define second definition we used the first one.Also intuitively for the first defination, if we consider graphs of 2 function then one continuously deformed to another

Is this continuous deformation happen in 2nd definition .But how to interpret that from definition only?

This question arises when I am reading and try to relate both definition

Please Help me

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I wouldn't say that $X$ and $Y$ are homotopic in your situation. I'd say they were homotopy equivalent. $\endgroup$ – Lord Shark the Unknown Jul 10 at 6:32
  • $\begingroup$ Dear Sir , Is it not possible to continuously deform to get another space? I know that 2 spaces can be completely different but up to some isomorphism can we do? $\endgroup$ – MathLover Jul 10 at 6:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If I am not wrong then you are probably trying to understand the "big-picture" behind "continuous deformation of two topological spaces" and "continuous deformation of two continuous maps". $\endgroup$ – user 170039 Jul 10 at 6:42
  • $\begingroup$ @user170039 Yes Sir . Can you please help me $\endgroup$ – MathLover Jul 10 at 6:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Unfortunately I am not an expert in this area. But I am sure other people can help you. Just wait a bit. Also I would advise you not to refer others as "Sir" as there are several people in this site who doesn't like to be called as such. $\endgroup$ – user 170039 Jul 10 at 6:49
4
$\begingroup$

You have mentioned graphs of functions: indeed it is quite clear that if $f\sim g$ then the graph of $f$ $\subset S\times T$ is homotopy equivalent to the one of $g$, however the converse is far from true, as any two graphs are homotopy equivalent. In fact, any two graphs are homeomorphic : let $f:S\to T$ be any continuous map and $\Gamma_f = \{(s,t)\in S\times T, s\in S, f(s) =t\}$. Then we have a map $i:S\to \Gamma_f, s\mapsto (s,f(s))$ and a map $\Gamma_f \to S, (s,t)\mapsto s$ which are both clearly continuous, and inverse to one another.

I'm not sure this answers your question, but there's a way to redefine "homotopic maps" in terms of "homotopy equivalence of spaces" if you assume that this second notion is known.

Then we have the following : given a space $S$, a cylinder for $S$ is a space $S_{\wedge I}$ together with maps $in_0, in_1 : S\to S_{\wedge I}$ and a homotopy equivalence $p:S_{\wedge I}\to S$ such that $p\circ in_0 = id_S, p\circ in_1 = id_S$.

Then, two maps $f,g: S\to T$ are homotopy equivalent if and only if there is a cylinder for $S$, $(S_{\wedge I},in_0,in_1,p)$ and a map $H:S_{\wedge I}\to T$ such that $H \circ in_0 = f, H\circ in_1 = g$.

It's quite easy to prove : in one direction, if they're homotopic in the usual definition, then you may take $S_{\wedge I} = S\times I$ where $I=[0,1]$, $in_i (s)= (s,i)$ and $p(s,t) = s$ and then the usual homotopy $H$ works as an $H$.

Conversely, if $f,g$ are homotopic in this definition, then as $p$ is a homotopy equivalence, we get from $p\circ in_0 = p\circ in_1$ that $in_0\sim in_1$ so $H\circ in_0\sim H\circ in_1$ so $f\sim g$ : $f$ and $g$ are homotopic in the usual definition.

$\endgroup$

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.