Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Jump to content
WikipediaThe Free Encyclopedia
Search

Triangulation (topology)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Representation of mathematical space

A triangulated torus
Another triangulation of the torus
A triangulated dolphin shape

In mathematics,triangulation describes the replacement oftopological spaces withsimplicial complexes by the choice of an appropriatehomeomorphism. A space that admits such a homeomorphism is called atriangulable space. Triangulations can also be used to define apiecewise linear structure for a space, if one exists. Triangulation has various applications both in and outside of mathematics, for instance in algebraic topology, in complex analysis, and in modeling.

Motivation

[edit]

On the one hand, it is sometimes useful to forget about superfluous information of topological spaces: The replacement of the original spaces with simplicial complexes may help to recognize crucial properties and to gain a better understanding of the considered object.

On the other hand, simplicial complexes are objects of combinatorial character and therefore one can assign them quantities arising from their combinatorial pattern, for instance, theEuler characteristic. Triangulation allows now to assign such quantities to topological spaces.

Investigations concerning the existence and uniqueness of triangulations established a new branch in topology, namely piecewise linear topology (or PL topology). Its main purpose is to study the topological properties of simplicial complexes and their generalizations,cell-complexes.

Simplicial complexes

[edit]
Main articles:Abstract simplicial complex andGeometric simplicial complex

Abstract simplicial complexes

[edit]

An abstract simplicial complex above a setV{\displaystyle V} is a systemTP(V){\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}\subset {\mathcal {P}}(V)} of non-empty subsets such that:

The elements ofT{\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}} are calledsimplices, the elements ofV{\displaystyle V} are calledvertices. A simplex withn+1{\displaystyle n+1} vertices hasdimensionn{\displaystyle n} by definition. The dimension of an abstract simplicial complex is defined asdim(T)=sup{dim(F):FT}N{\displaystyle {\text{dim}}({\mathcal {T}})={\text{sup}}\;\{{\text{dim}}(F):F\in {\mathcal {T}}\}\in \mathbb {N} \cup \infty }.[1]

Abstract simplicial complexes can be realized as geometrical objects by associating each abstract simplex with a geometric simplex, defined below.

Geometric simplices in dimension 1, 2 and 3

Geometric simplices

[edit]

Letp0,...pn{\displaystyle p_{0},...p_{n}} ben+1{\displaystyle n+1} affinely independent points inRn{\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{n}}; i.e. the vectors(p1p0),(p2p0),(pnp0){\displaystyle (p_{1}-p_{0}),(p_{2}-p_{0}),\dots (p_{n}-p_{0})} arelinearly independent. The setΔ={i=0ntipi|eachti[0,1]andi=0nti=1}{\textstyle \Delta =\{\sum _{i=0}^{n}t_{i}p_{i}\,|\,{\text{each}}\,t_{i}\in [0,1]\,{\text{and}}\,\sum _{i=0}^{n}t_{i}=1\}} is said to be thesimplex spanned byp0,...pn{\displaystyle p_{0},...p_{n}}. It hasdimensionn{\displaystyle n} by definition. The pointsp0,...pn{\displaystyle p_{0},...p_{n}} are called the vertices ofΔ{\displaystyle \Delta }, the simplices spanned byn{\displaystyle n} of then+1{\displaystyle n+1} vertices are called faces, and the boundaryΔ{\displaystyle \partial \Delta } is defined to be the union of the faces.

Then{\displaystyle n}-dimensional standard-simplex is the simplex spanned by theunit vectorse0,...en{\displaystyle e_{0},...e_{n}}[2]

Geometric simplicial complexes

[edit]

A geometric simplicial complexSP(Rn){\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}\subseteq {\mathcal {P}}(\mathbb {R} ^{n})} is a collection of geometric simplices such that

The union of all the simplices inS{\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} gives the set of points ofS{\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}}, denoted|S|=SSS.{\textstyle |{\mathcal {S}}|=\bigcup _{S\in {\mathcal {S}}}S.} This set|S|{\displaystyle |{\mathcal {S}}|} is endowed with a topology by choosing theclosed sets to be{A|S|AΔ{\displaystyle \{A\subseteq |{\mathcal {S}}|\;\mid \;A\cap \Delta }is closed for allΔS}{\displaystyle \Delta \in {\mathcal {S}}\}}. Note that, in general, this topology is not the same as the subspace topology that|S|{\displaystyle |{\mathcal {S}}|} inherits fromRn{\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{n}}. The topologies do coincide in the case that each point in the complex lies only in finitely many simplices.[2]

Each geometric complex can be associated with an abstract complex by choosing as a ground setV{\displaystyle V} the set of vertices that appear in any simplex ofS{\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} and as system of subsets the subsets ofV{\displaystyle V} which correspond to vertex sets of simplices inS{\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}}.

A natural question is if vice versa, any abstract simplicial complex corresponds to a geometric complex. In general, the geometric construction as mentioned here is not flexible enough: consider for instance an abstract simplicial complex of infinite dimension. However, the following more abstract construction provides a topological space for any kind of abstract simplicial complex:

LetT{\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}} be an abstract simplicial complex above a setV{\displaystyle V}. Choose a union of simplices(ΔF)FT{\displaystyle (\Delta _{F})_{F\in {\mathcal {T}}}}, but each inRN{\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{N}} of dimension sufficiently large, such that the geometric simplexΔF{\displaystyle \Delta _{F}} is of dimensionn{\displaystyle n} if the abstract geometric simplexF{\displaystyle F} has dimensionn{\displaystyle n}. IfEF{\displaystyle E\subset F},ΔERN{\displaystyle \Delta _{E}\subset \mathbb {R} ^{N}}can be identified with a face ofΔFRM{\displaystyle \Delta _{F}\subset \mathbb {R} ^{M}} and the resulting topological space is thegluingΔEiΔF.{\displaystyle \Delta _{E}\cup _{i}\Delta _{F}.} Effectuating the gluing for each inclusion, one ends up with the desired topological space. This space is actually unique up to homeomorphism for each choice ofT,{\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}},} so it makes sense to talk aboutthe geometric realization|T|{\displaystyle |{\mathcal {T}}|} ofT.{\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}.}

A 2-dimensional geometric simplicial complex with vertex V, link(V), and star(V) are highlighted in red and pink.

As in the previous construction, by the topology induced by gluing, the closed sets in this space are the subsets that are closed in thesubspace topology of every simplexΔF{\displaystyle \Delta _{F}} in the complex.

The simplicial complexTn{\displaystyle {\mathcal {T_{n}}}} which consists of all simplicesT{\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}} of dimensionn{\displaystyle \leq n} is called then{\displaystyle n}-th skeleton ofT{\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}}.

A naturalneighbourhood of a vertexvV{\displaystyle v\in V} in a simplicial complexS{\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} is considered to be given by thestarstar(v)={LSvL}{\displaystyle \operatorname {star} (v)=\{L\in {\mathcal {S}}\;\mid \;v\in L\}} of a simplex, whose boundary is the linklink(v){\displaystyle \operatorname {link} (v)}.

Simplicial maps

[edit]

The maps considered in this category are simplicial maps: LetK{\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}},L{\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}} be abstract simplicial complexes above setsVK{\displaystyle V_{K}},VL{\displaystyle V_{L}}. A simplicial map is a functionf:VKVL{\displaystyle f:V_{K}\rightarrow V_{L}} which maps each simplex inK{\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}} onto a simplex inL{\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}}. By affine-linear extension on the simplices,f{\displaystyle f} induces a map between the geometric realizations of the complexes.[2]

Examples

[edit]

Definition

[edit]

A triangulation of a topological spaceX{\displaystyle X} is ahomeomorphismt:|T|X{\displaystyle t:|{\mathcal {T}}|\rightarrow X} whereT{\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}} is a simplicial complex. Topological spaces do not necessarily admit a triangulation and if they do, it is not necessarily unique.

Examples

[edit]

Invariants

[edit]

Triangulations of spaces allow assigning combinatorial invariants rising from their dedicated simplicial complexes to spaces. These are characteristics that equal for complexes that are isomorphic via a simplicial map and thus have the same combinatorial pattern.

This data might be useful to classify topological spaces up to homeomorphism but only given that the characteristics are also topological invariants, meaning, they do not depend on the chosen triangulation. For the data listed here, this is the case.[4] For details and the link tosingular homology, see topological invariance.

Homology

[edit]

Via triangulation, one can assign achain complex to topological spaces that arise from its simplicial complex and compute itssimplicial homology.Compact spaces always admit finite triangulations and therefore their homology groups arefinitely generated and only finitely many of them do not vanish. Other data asBetti-numbers orEuler characteristic can be derived from homology.

Betti-numbers and Euler-characteristics

[edit]

Let|S|{\displaystyle |{\mathcal {S}}|} be a finite simplicial complex. Then{\displaystyle n}-th Betti-numberbn(S){\displaystyle b_{n}({\mathcal {S}})} is defined to be therank of then{\displaystyle n}-th simplicial homology group of the spaces. These numbers encode geometric properties of the spaces: The Betti-numberb0(S){\displaystyle b_{0}({\mathcal {S}})} for instance represents the number ofconnected components. For a triangulated, closedorientablesurfacesF{\displaystyle F},b1(F)=2g{\displaystyle b_{1}(F)=2g} holds whereg{\displaystyle g} denotes thegenus of the surface: Therefore its first Betti-number represents the doubled number ofhandles of the surface.[5]

With the comments above, for compact spaces all Betti-numbers are finite and almost all are zero. Therefore, one can form their alternating sum

k=0(1)kbk(S){\displaystyle \sum _{k=0}^{\infty }(-1)^{k}b_{k}({\mathcal {S}})}

which is called theEuler characteristic of the complex, a catchy topological invariant.

Topological invariance

[edit]

To use these invariants for the classification of topological spaces up to homeomorphism one needs invariance of the characteristics regarding homeomorphism.

A famous approach to the question was at the beginning of the 20th century the attempt to show that any two triangulations of the same topological space admit a commonsubdivision. This assumption is known asHauptvermutung ( German: Main assumption). Let|L|RN{\displaystyle |{\mathcal {L}}|\subset \mathbb {R} ^{N}} be a simplicial complex. A complex|L|RN{\displaystyle |{\mathcal {L'}}|\subset \mathbb {R} ^{N}} is said to be a subdivision ofL{\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}} iff:

Those conditions ensure that subdivisions does not change the simplicial complex as a set or as a topological space. A mapf:KL{\displaystyle f:{\mathcal {K}}\rightarrow {\mathcal {L}}} between simplicial complexes is said to be piecewise linear if there is a refinementK{\displaystyle {\mathcal {K'}}} ofK{\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}} such thatf{\displaystyle f} is piecewise linear on each simplex ofK{\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}}. Two complexes that correspond to another via piecewise linear bijection are said to be combinatorial isomorphic. In particular, two complexes that have a common refinement are combinatorially equivalent. Homology groups are invariant to combinatorial equivalence and therefore the Hauptvermutung would give the topological invariance of simplicial homology groups. In 1918, Alexander introduced the concept of singular homology. Henceforth, most of the invariants arising from triangulation were replaced by invariants arising from singular homology. For those new invariants, it can be shown that they were invariant regarding homeomorphism and even regardinghomotopy equivalence.[6] Furthermore it was shown that singular and simplicial homology groups coincide.[6] This workaround has shown the invariance of the data to homeomorphism. Hauptvermutung lost in importance but it was initial for a new branch in topology: Thepiecewise linear topology (short PL-topology).[7]

Hauptvermutung

[edit]

The Hauptvermutung (German for main conjecture) states that two triangulations always admit a common subdivision. Originally, its purpose was to prove invariance of combinatorial invariants regarding homeomorphisms. The assumption that such subdivisions exist in general is intuitive, as subdivision are easy to construct for simple spaces, for instance for low dimensional manifolds. Indeed the assumption was proven for manifolds of dimension3{\displaystyle \leq 3} and for differentiable manifolds but it was disproved in general:[8] An important tool to show that triangulations do not admit a common subdivision, that is, their underlying complexes are not combinatorially isomorphic is the combinatorial invariant of Reidemeister torsion.

Reidemeister torsion

[edit]

To disprove the Hauptvermutung it is helpful to use combinatorial invariants which are not topological invariants. A famous example is Reidemeister torsion. It can be assigned to a tuple(K,L){\displaystyle (K,L)} of CW-complexes: IfL={\displaystyle L=\emptyset } this characteristic will be a topological invariant but ifL{\displaystyle L\neq \emptyset } in general not. An approach to Hauptvermutung was to find homeomorphic spaces with different values of Reidemeister torsion. This invariant was used initially to classify lens-spaces and first counterexamples to the Hauptvermutung were built based on lens-spaces:[8]

Classification of lens spaces

[edit]

In its original formulation,lens spaces are 3-manifolds, constructed as quotient spaces of the 3-sphere: Letp,q{\displaystyle p,q} be natural numbers, such thatp,q{\displaystyle p,q} are coprime. The lens spaceL(p,q){\displaystyle L(p,q)} is defined to be the orbit space of thefree group action

Z/pZ×S3S3{\displaystyle \mathbb {Z} /p\mathbb {Z} \times S^{3}\to S^{3}}
(k,(z1,z2))(z1e2πik/p,z2e2πikq/p){\displaystyle (k,(z_{1},z_{2}))\mapsto (z_{1}\cdot e^{2\pi ik/p},z_{2}\cdot e^{2\pi ikq/p})}.

For different tuples(p,q){\displaystyle (p,q)}, lens spaces will be homotopy equivalent but not homeomorphic. Therefore they can't be distinguished with the help of classical invariants as the fundamental group but by the use of Reidemeister torsion.

Two lens spacesL(p,q1),L(p,q2){\displaystyle L(p,q_{1}),L(p,q_{2})} are homeomorphic, if and only ifq1±q2±1(modp){\displaystyle q_{1}\equiv \pm q_{2}^{\pm 1}{\pmod {p}}}.[9] This is the case if and only if two lens spaces aresimple homotopy equivalent. The fact can be used to construct counterexamples for the Hauptvermutung as follows. Suppose there are spacesL1,L2{\displaystyle L'_{1},L'_{2}} derived from non-homeomorphic lens spacesL(p,q1),L(p,q2){\displaystyle L(p,q_{1}),L(p,q_{2})} having different Reidemeister torsion. Suppose further that the modification intoL1,L2{\displaystyle L'_{1},L'_{2}} does not affect Reidemeister torsion but such that after modificationL1{\displaystyle L'_{1}} andL2{\displaystyle L'_{2}} are homeomorphic. The resulting spaces will disprove the Hauptvermutung.

Existence of triangulation

[edit]

Besides the question of concrete triangulations for computational issues, there are statements about spaces that are easier to prove given that they are simplicial complexes. Especially manifolds are of interest. Topological manifolds of dimension3{\displaystyle \leq 3} are always triangulable[10][11][1] but there are non-triangulable manifolds for dimensionn{\displaystyle n}, forn{\displaystyle n} arbitrary but greater than three.[12][13] Further, differentiable manifolds always admit triangulations.[3]

Piecewise linear structures

[edit]

Manifolds are an important class of spaces. It is natural to require them not only to be triangulable but moreover to admit a piecewise linear atlas, a PL-structure:

Let|X|{\displaystyle |X|} be a simplicial complex such that every point admits an open neighborhoodU{\displaystyle U} such that there is a triangulation ofU{\displaystyle U} and a piecewise linear homeomorphismf:URn{\displaystyle f:U\rightarrow \mathbb {R} ^{n}}. Then|X|{\displaystyle |X|} is said to be apiecewise linear (PL) manifold of dimensionn{\displaystyle n} and the triangulation together with the PL-atlas is said to be aPL-structure on|X|{\displaystyle |X|}.

An important lemma is the following:

LetX{\displaystyle X} be a topological space. Then the following statements are equivalent:

  1. X{\displaystyle X} is ann{\displaystyle n}-dimensional manifold and admits a PL-structure.
  2. There is a triangulation ofX{\displaystyle X} such that the link of each vertex is ann1{\displaystyle n-1} sphere.
  3. For each triangulation ofX{\displaystyle X} the link of each vertex is ann1{\displaystyle n-1} sphere.

The equivalence of the second and the third statement is because that the link of a vertex is independent of the chosen triangulation up to combinatorial isomorphism.[14] One can show that differentiable manifolds admit a PL-structure as well as manifolds of dimension3{\displaystyle \leq 3}.[15] Counterexamples for the triangulation conjecture are counterexamples for the conjecture of the existence of PL-structure of course.

Moreover, there are examples for triangulated spaces which do not admit a PL-structure. Consider ann2{\displaystyle n-2}-dimensional PL-homology-sphereX{\displaystyle X}. The double suspensionS2X{\displaystyle S^{2}X} is a topologicaln{\displaystyle n}-sphere. Choosing a triangulationt:|S|S2X{\displaystyle t:|{\mathcal {S}}|\rightarrow S^{2}X} obtained via the suspension operation on triangulations the resulting simplicial complex is not a PL-manifold, because there is a vertexv{\displaystyle v} such thatlink(v){\displaystyle link(v)} is not an1{\displaystyle n-1} sphere.[16]

A question arising with the definition is if PL-structures are always unique: Given two PL-structures for the same spaceY{\displaystyle Y}, is there a there a homeomorphismF:YY{\displaystyle F:Y\rightarrow Y} which is piecewise linear with respect to both PL-structures? The assumption is similar to the Hauptvermutung and indeed there are spaces which have different PL-structures which are not equivalent. Triangulation of PL-equivalent spaces can be transformed into one another via Pachner moves:

Pachner Moves

[edit]
One Pachner-move replaces two tetrahedra by three tetrahedra

Pachner moves are a way to manipulate triangulations: LetS{\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} be a simplicial complex. For two simplicesK,L,{\displaystyle K,L,} theJoinKL={(1t)k+tl|kK,lL,t[0,1]}{\textstyle K*L=\{(1-t)k+tl\;|\;k\in K,l\in L,t\in [0,1]\}} is the set of points that lie on straights between points inK{\displaystyle K} and inL{\displaystyle L}. ChooseSS{\displaystyle S\in {\mathcal {S}}} such thatlk(S)=K{\displaystyle lk(S)=\partial K} for anyK{\displaystyle K} lying not inS{\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}}. A new complexS{\displaystyle {\mathcal {S'}}}, can be obtained by replacingSK{\displaystyle S*\partial K} bySK{\displaystyle \partial S*K}. This replacement is called aPachner move. The theorem of Pachner states that whenever two triangulated manifolds are PL-equivalent, there is a series of Pachner moves transforming both into another.[17]

Cellular complexes

[edit]
The real projective plane as a simplicial complex and as CW-complex. As CW-complex it can be obtained by gluing firstD0{\displaystyle \mathbb {D} ^{0}} andD1{\displaystyle \mathbb {D} ^{1}} to get the 1-sphere and then attaching the discD2{\displaystyle \mathbb {D} ^{2}} by the mapg:S1S1,eixe2ix{\displaystyle g:\mathbb {S} ^{1}\rightarrow \mathbb {S} ^{1},e^{ix}\mapsto e^{2ix}}.

A similar but more flexible construction than simplicial complexes is the one ofcellular complexes (or CW-complexes). Its construction is as follows:

Ann{\displaystyle n}-cell is the closedn{\displaystyle n}-dimensional unit-ballBn=[0,1]n{\displaystyle B_{n}=[0,1]^{n}}, an openn{\displaystyle n}-cell is its innerBn=[0,1]nSn1{\displaystyle B_{n}=[0,1]^{n}\setminus \mathbb {S} ^{n-1}}. LetX{\displaystyle X} be a topological space, letf:Sn1X{\displaystyle f:\mathbb {S} ^{n-1}\rightarrow X} be a continuous map. The gluingXfBn{\displaystyle X\cup _{f}B_{n}} is said to beobtained by gluing on ann{\displaystyle n}-cell.

A cell complex is a unionX=n0Xn{\displaystyle X=\cup _{n\geq 0}X_{n}} of topological spaces such that

Each simplicial complex is a CW-complex, the inverse is not true. The construction of CW-complexes can be used to define cellular homology and one can show that cellular homology and simplicial homology coincide.[18] For computational issues, it is sometimes easier to assume spaces to be CW-complexes and determine their homology via cellular decomposition, an example is the projective planeP2{\displaystyle \mathbb {P} ^{2}}: Its construction as a CW-complex needs three cells, whereas its simplicial complex consists of 54 simplices.

Other applications

[edit]

Classification of manifolds

[edit]

By triangulating 1-dimensional manifolds, one can show that they are always homeomorphic to disjoint copies of the real line and the unit sphereS1{\displaystyle \mathbb {S} ^{1}}. Theclassification of closed surfaces, i.e. compact 2-manifolds, can also be proven by using triangulations. This is done by showing any such surface can be triangulated and then using the triangulation to construct a fundamental polygon for the surface.[19]

Maps on simplicial complexes

[edit]

Giving spaces simplicial structures can help to understand continuous maps defined on the spaces. The maps can often be assumed to be simplicial maps via the simplicial approximation theorem:

Simplicial approximation

[edit]

LetK{\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}},L{\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}} be abstract simplicial complexes above setsVK{\displaystyle V_{K}},VL{\displaystyle V_{L}}. A simplicial map is a functionf:VKVL{\displaystyle f:V_{K}\rightarrow V_{L}} which maps each simplex inK{\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}} onto a simplex inL{\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}}. By affin-linear extension on the simplices,f{\displaystyle f} induces a map between the geometric realizations of the complexes. Each point in a geometric complex lies in the inner of exactly one simplex, itssupport. Consider now acontinuous mapf:KL{\displaystyle f:{\mathcal {K}}\rightarrow {\mathcal {L}}}. A simplicial mapg:KL{\displaystyle g:{\mathcal {K}}\rightarrow {\mathcal {L}}} is said to be asimplicial approximation off{\displaystyle f} if and only if eachxK{\displaystyle x\in {\mathcal {K}}} is mapped byg{\displaystyle g} onto the support off(x){\displaystyle f(x)} inL{\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}}. If such an approximation exists, one can construct a homotopyH{\displaystyle H} transformingf{\displaystyle f} intog{\displaystyle g} by defining it on each simplex; there it always exists, because simplices are contractible.

The simplicial approximation theorem guarantees for every continuous functionf:VKVL{\displaystyle f:V_{K}\rightarrow V_{L}} the existence of a simplicial approximation at least after refinement ofK{\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}}, for instance by replacingK{\displaystyle {\mathcal {K}}} by its iterated barycentric subdivision.[2] The theorem plays an important role for certain statements in algebraic topology in order to reduce the behavior of continuous maps on those of simplicial maps, for instance inLefschetz's fixed-point theorem.

Lefschetz's fixed-point theorem

[edit]

TheLefschetz number is a useful tool to find out whether a continuous function admits fixed-points. This data is computed as follows: Suppose thatX{\displaystyle X} andY{\displaystyle Y} are topological spaces that admit finite triangulations. A continuous mapf:XY{\displaystyle f:X\rightarrow Y} induces homomorphismsfi:Hi(X,K)Hi(Y,K){\displaystyle f_{i}:H_{i}(X,K)\rightarrow H_{i}(Y,K)} between its simplicial homology groups with coefficients in a fieldK{\displaystyle K}. These are linear maps betweenK{\displaystyle K}-vector spaces, so their tracetri{\displaystyle \operatorname {tr} _{i}} can be determined and their alternating sum

LK(f)=i(1)itri(f)K{\displaystyle L_{K}(f)=\sum _{i}(-1)^{i}\operatorname {tr} _{i}(f)\in K}

is called theLefschetz number off{\displaystyle f}. Iff=id{\displaystyle f={\rm {id}}}, this number is the Euler characteristic ofK{\displaystyle K}. The fixpoint theorem states that wheneverLK(f)0{\displaystyle L_{K}(f)\neq 0},f{\displaystyle f} has a fixed-point. In the proof this is first shown only for simplicial maps and then generalized for any continuous functions via the approximation theorem. Brouwer's fixpoint theorem treats the case wheref:DnDn{\displaystyle f:\mathbb {D} ^{n}\rightarrow \mathbb {D} ^{n}} is an endomorphism of the unit-ball. Fork1{\displaystyle k\geq 1} all its homology groupsHk(Dn){\displaystyle H_{k}(\mathbb {D} ^{n})} vanishes, andf0{\displaystyle f_{0}} is always the identity, soLK(f)=tr0(f)=10{\displaystyle L_{K}(f)=\operatorname {tr} _{0}(f)=1\neq 0}, sof{\displaystyle f} has a fixpoint.[20]

Formula of Riemann-Hurwitz

[edit]
Main article:Riemann-Hurwitz formula

The Riemann-Hurwitz formula allows to determine the genus of a compact, connectedRiemann surfaceX{\displaystyle X} without using explicit triangulation. The proof needs the existence of triangulations for surfaces in an abstract sense: LetF:XY{\displaystyle F:X\rightarrow Y} be a non-constant holomorphic function on a surface with known genus. The relation between the genusg{\displaystyle g} of the surfacesX{\displaystyle X} andY{\displaystyle Y} is

2g(X)2=deg(F)(2g(Y)2)+xX(ord(F)1){\displaystyle 2g(X)-2=\deg(F)(2g(Y)-2)+\sum _{x\in X}(\operatorname {ord} (F)-1)}

wheredeg(F){\displaystyle \deg(F)} denotes the degree of the map. The sum is well defined as it counts only the ramifying points of the function.

The background of this formula is that holomorphic functions on Riemann surfaces are ramified coverings. The formula can be found by examining the image of the simplicial structure near to ramifiying points.[21]

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^abJohn M. Lee (2000), Springer Verlag (ed.),Introduction to Topological manifolds, New York/Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, p. 92,ISBN 0-387-98759-2
  2. ^abcdeJames R. Munkres (1984),Elements of algebraic topology, vol. 1984, Menlo Park, California: Addison Wesley, p. 83,ISBN 0-201-04586-9
  3. ^abJ. H. C. Whitehead (1940), "On C1-Complexes",Annals of Mathematics, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 809–824,doi:10.2307/1968861,ISSN 0003-486X,JSTOR 1968861
  4. ^J. W. Alexander (1926), "Combinatorial Analysis Situs",Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 301–329,doi:10.1090/S0002-9947-1926-1501346-5,ISSN 0002-9947,JSTOR 1989117
  5. ^R. Stöcker, H. Zieschang (1994),Algebraische Topologie (in German) (2. überarbeitete ed.), Stuttgart: B.G.Teubner, p. 270,ISBN 3-519-12226-X
  6. ^abAllen Hatcher (2006),Algebraic Topologie, Cambridge/New York/Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, p. 110,ISBN 0-521-79160--X
  7. ^A.A.Ranicki,"One the Hauptvermutung"(PDF),The Hauptvermutung Book
  8. ^abJohn Milnor (1961), "Two Complexes Which are Homeomorphic But Combinatorially Distinct",The Annals of Mathematics, vol. 74, no. 3, p. 575,doi:10.2307/1970299,ISSN 0003-486X,JSTOR 1970299
  9. ^Marshall M. Cohen (1973), "A Course in Simple-Homotopy Theory",Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 10,doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-9372-6,ISBN 978-0-387-90055-1,ISSN 0072-5285
  10. ^Edwin Moise (1977),Geometric Topology in Dimensions 2 and 3, New York: Springer Verlag
  11. ^Rado, Tibor,"Über den Begriff der Riemannschen Fläche"(PDF) (in German)
  12. ^R. C. Kirby, L. C. Siebenmann (December 31, 1977), "Annex B. On The Triangulation of Manifolds and the Hauptvermutung",Foundational Essays on Topological Manifolds, Smoothings, and Triangulations. (AM-88), Princeton University Press, pp. 299–306
  13. ^"Chapter IV; Casson's Invariant for Oriented Homology 3-spheres",Casson's Invariant for Oriented Homology Three-Spheres, Princeton University Press, pp. 63–79, December 31, 1990
  14. ^Toenniessen, Fridtjof (2017),Topologie(PDF) (in German),doi:10.1007/978-3-662-54964-3,ISBN 978-3-662-54963-6, retrieved2022-04-20
  15. ^Edwin E. Moise (1952), "Affine Structures in 3-Manifolds: V. The Triangulation Theorem and Hauptvermutung",The Annals of Mathematics, vol. 56, no. 1, p. 96,doi:10.2307/1969769,ISSN 0003-486X,JSTOR 1969769
  16. ^Robert D. Edwards (October 18, 2006), "Suspensions of homology spheres",arXiv:math/0610573,arXiv:math/0610573,Bibcode:2006math.....10573E
  17. ^W B R Lickorish (November 20, 1999), "Simplicial moves on complexes and manifolds",Proceedings of the Kirbyfest, Geometry & Topology Monographs, Mathematical Sciences Publishers, pp. 299–320,arXiv:math/9911256,doi:10.2140/gtm.1999.2.299,S2CID 9765634
  18. ^Toenniessen, Fridtjof (2017),Topologie(PDF) (in German), p. 315,doi:10.1007/978-3-662-54964-3,ISBN 978-3-662-54963-6, retrieved2022-04-20
  19. ^Seifert, H. (2003),Lehrbuch der Topologie (in German), AMS Chelsea Pub.,ISBN 0-8218-3595-5
  20. ^Bredon, Glen E. (1993),Topology and Geometry, Berlin/ Heidelberg/ New York: Springer Verlag, pp. 254ff,ISBN 3-540-97926-3
  21. ^Otto Forster (1977), "Kompakte Riemannsche Flächen",Heidelberger Taschenbücher (in German), Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 88–154,ISBN 978-3-540-08034-3

See also

[edit]

Literature

[edit]
  • Allen Hatcher:Algebraic Topology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York/Melbourne 2006, ISBN 0-521-79160-X
  • James R. Munkres: . Band 1984. Addison Wesley, Menlo Park, California 1984, ISBN 0-201-04586-9
  • Marshall M. Cohen:A course in Simple-Homotopy Theory . In:Graduate Texts in Mathematics. 1973,ISSN 0072-5285,doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-9372-6.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Triangulation_(topology)&oldid=1277079222"
Categories:
Hidden categories:

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp