Is Being Path-Connected the Key to Understanding Simply Connected Regions?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Aldnoahz
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concept of simply connected regions in the context of multivariable calculus, specifically exploring why certain regions, like the xy-plane with the positive x-axis removed, are considered simply connected, while others, such as the xy-plane with the entire x-axis removed, are not. Participants examine the definitions and properties related to connectedness and path-connectedness.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the definitions of simply connected regions, questioning why the xy-plane with the positive x-axis removed is simply connected while the plane with the entire x-axis removed is not.
  • Another participant suggests that a simply connected space must be both connected and able to reduce any loop to a point, arguing that the plane with the x-axis removed is not connected.
  • A similar point is reiterated by another participant, emphasizing that the lack of connection in the plane with the x-axis removed leads to it not being simply connected.
  • One participant introduces a formulation from complex analysis, stating that an open subset is simply connected if both it and its complement in the Riemann sphere are connected.
  • Another participant reiterates that the separation of the plane into two parts results in it not being simply connected, highlighting the importance of understanding path-connectedness as a requirement for simple connectedness.
  • Further discussion points out that the term 'connected' in 'simply connected' does not imply that connectedness is inherently understood, noting the distinction between local connectedness and connectedness.
  • Some participants agree that the confusion surrounding the term 'simply connected' is common and that the original poster had, in fact, answered their own question.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definitions of simply connected and connected spaces, but there is some disagreement regarding the clarity of these concepts and the implications of path-connectedness. The discussion remains somewhat unresolved as participants express differing levels of understanding and interpretation of the terms involved.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the additional requirement of path-connectedness for a space to be simply connected, which may not be clear to all participants. The discussion also touches on the potential confusion arising from the terminology used in mathematical texts.

Aldnoahz
Messages
37
Reaction score
1
Hi. I am studying Multivariable Calculus and found simply connected regions difficult to understand. Why is an xy plane with the positive x-axis removed a simply connected region while an xy plane with the entire x-axis removed is not simply connected?

In the latter case, as x-axis is not defined, we shouldn't even be able to draw any curve crossing axis... So this leaves me with two separated planes in which everywhere is defined and differentiable. Then why is it still not simply connected?

How about the former case?
I am confused.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think (without looking it up to check) it's because a simply connected space is defined as one that is both connected and has the property of being able to reduce any loop to a point. The plane with the x-axis removed is not connected and hence not simply connected.

If it weren't for the 'and' the plane with an axis removed would not be simply connected.
 
andrewkirk said:
I think (without looking it up to check) it's because a simply connected space is defined as one that is both connected and has the property of being able to reduce any loop to a point. The plane with the x-axis removed is not connected and hence not simply connected.

If it weren't for the 'and' the plane with an axis removed would not be simply connected.

Technically I think a simply connected space is required to be path connected.
 
Aldnoahz said:
In the latter case, as x-axis is not defined, we shouldn't even be able to draw any curve crossing axis... So this leaves me with two separated planes in which everywhere is defined and differentiable. Then why is it still not simply connected?
You answered it yourself. It is in two separate parts that are not connected. So it is not simply connected.
 
FactChecker said:
You answered it yourself. It is in two separate parts that are not connected. So it is not simply connected.
That is only clear when one knows that being path-connected is an additional requirement for a space to be simply connected, as per the above discussion. Forgetting that additional criterion is very understandable since nearly all the emphasis on simple connectedness (at least in my texts) is on the ability to contract a loop.

It's also worth noting that the presence of the word 'connected' in 'simply connected' does not provide an etymological clue that connectedness is also required, as the term 'locally connected' demonstrates. Neither of local connectedness nor connectedness entails the other.
 
andrewkirk said:
That is only clear when one knows that being path-connected is an additional requirement for a space to be simply connected, as per the above discussion. Forgetting that additional criterion is very understandable since nearly all the emphasis on simple connectedness (at least in my texts) is on the ability to contract a loop.

It's also worth noting that the presence of the word 'connected' in 'simply connected' does not provide an etymological clue that connectedness is also required, as the term 'locally connected' demonstrates. Neither of local connectedness nor connectedness entails the other.
I agree. There may easily be some confusion about the term. I just meant to say that it is much simpler than the OP was expecting. He had, in fact, answered the question in his own question.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
1K