Showing the Fundamental Group of S^1 is isomorphic to the integers

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the fundamental group of the circle, specifically showing that \(\pi_{1}(S^{1})\) is isomorphic to the integers. Participants explore the construction of a homotopy between loops defined by \(f_{n}\) and \(f_{m}\) to demonstrate the relation \([f_{n}][f_{m}]=[f_{m+n}]\). The scope includes technical reasoning and mathematical exploration.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant defines loops \(f_{n} = e^{2\pi ins}\) and seeks to establish a homotopy between \(f_{n} * f_{m}\) and \(f_{m+n}\).
  • Another participant suggests separating cases based on the value of \(s\) and highlights the need for the homotopy to reflect the correct speeds of the loops.
  • Concerns are raised about the continuity of the homotopy at \(s=1/2\) and the requirement for it to be a based homotopy.
  • One participant proposes a specific form for the homotopy but encounters issues when checking the conditions at \(s=1/2\) and \(s=1\).
  • Another participant identifies three main issues with the proposed homotopy, including a missing coefficient and the need for continuity at the transition point.
  • A later reply introduces a function \(\alpha(t)\) to address the continuity issue at \(s=1/2\) and suggests it could help in constructing a valid homotopy.
  • Finally, a participant reports success in defining \(\alpha(t)\) and achieving a well-defined homotopy, although they still face a challenge at \(s=1\).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the construction of the homotopy and its properties. While there is some agreement on the need for adjustments, no consensus is reached on the final form of the homotopy or the resolution of all issues.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their homotopy constructions, particularly regarding continuity and the definition of speeds at critical points. The discussion highlights the complexity of ensuring a valid homotopy of loops.

trmukerji14
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am reading J.P. May's book on "A Concise Course in Algebraic Topology" and have approached the calculation where \pi_{1}(S^{1})\congZ

He defines a loop f_{n} by e^{2\pi ins}

I want to show that [f_{n}][f_{m}]=[f_{m+n}]

I understand this as trying to find a homotopy between f_{n}*f_{m} and f_{m+n}

I have some attempts some attempts which have been unsuccessful are

H(s,t)= f_{n+mt}*f_{m(1-t)}
H(s,t)={e^{2\pi in2st}e^{2\pi im2s(1-t)} for s in [0,1/2]
{e^{2\pi im(2s-1)t}e^{2\pi in(2s-1)(1-t)} for s in [1/2,1]

Any help would be very much appreciated on my part.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your idea seems correct. To separate into cases depending on whether s is smaller or larger than 1/2 is a good idea in this problem (as you have done).

However try to think about what you are doing. f_{m+n} loops with a speed of (m+n) for the whole interval [0,1]. f_n * f_m instead first loops with speed 2m for [0,1/2], and then loops with speed 2n for [1/2,1].

Let us first focus on what our homotopy should be for s \in [0, 1/2]. In this case we start with a speed of 2m and would like to end up with a speed of m+n. In other words for the part s\in[0,1/2] we would like to have
e^{2\pi i 2 m s}
when t = 0 and
e^{2\pi i (m+n) s}
when t = 1. In your case when we plug in t=0 we get
e^{2\pi i m 2s}
as we wanted, but when we plug in t=1 we get
e^{2\pi i n 2 s}
but we wanted
e^{2 \pi i (m+n) s}
Can you figure out how to correct this? The same problem happens when s \in [1/2,1], so you must also correct your homotopy here.

If you think you have done this, then all that remains is to check that this is a homotopy between the correct loops and that your two expressions agree on the intersection s = 1/2.

As a side remark the homotopy you constructed instead shows
[f_n][f_m] = [f_m][f_n]
which will follow from what you want to prove eventually, but it is also interesting if you couldn't figure out how to prove the general result.
 
Thank you for the help.

So far what I have is for s in [0, 1/2]

H(s,t)= e^{2\pi i(m+n)st}e^{2\pi im2s(1-t))}

and for s in [1/2, 1], I have:

H(s,t)= e^{2\pi i(m+n)st}e^{2\pi in(2s-1)(1-t))}

This satisfies our conditions for a homotopy for t=0 and for t=1.

Unfortunately, when we consider s it fails miserably. For a basepoint of 1. We have that H(0,t)=1 and that is good but when we try to plug in s=1/2 or s=1 we do not get what we want.

So I'm scratching my head at the moment trying to fix this.

As for the side remark, I understand that if we show this equivalence we can define a homomorphism from the integers to the fundamental group of the circle which will give us the abelian property. But I don't think I showed the abelian property with the homotopy I had since that one fails also when s=1.

Thanks for the help again.
 
There are basically still 3 issues with your homotopy:
1) You forgot an extra coefficient of 2 in front of n in your H for s >= 1/2.
2) It doesn't line up on s=1/2, i.e. the two expressions you gave are different when s=1/2
3) It isn't a homotopy of loops (i.e. not a based homotopy).
1 is easily fixable and I assume you can easily do this. If you solve 2, then 3 should be solved automatically since your speeds gives you whole revolutions (this is obviously not a rigorous argument and you will need to check, but intuition never hurts).

Fixing 1 for you I assume you wrote down:
H(s,t) = \begin{cases} e^{2\pi i (m+n) st}e^{2\pi i m 2 s (1-t)} &amp; \textrm{for }s \in [0,1/2] \\<br /> e^{2\pi i(m+n)st}e^{2\pi i n 2 (2s-1)(1-t)} &amp; \textrm{for }s \in [1/2,1]<br /> \end{cases}
Let us focus on fixing the fact that this is not well-defined for s=1/2. Ideally we would like some continuous function \alpha : [0,1] \to \mathbb{R} such that
H(s,t) = \begin{cases} e^{2\pi i (m+n) st}e^{2\pi i m 2 s (1-t)} &amp; \textrm{for }s \in [0,1/2] \\<br /> e^{2\pi i(m+n)st}e^{2\pi i n 2 (2s-1)(1-t)}e^{2\pi i \alpha(t)} &amp; \textrm{for }s \in [1/2,1]<br /> \end{cases}
would work as a homotopy. Note that this does not change the "speeds" we work with, but just where around the circle the second case takes over when s reaches 1/2, so as long as \alpha is well-chosen this should let us fix the problem at s=1/2. Clearly for this to work you must have (up to addition by an integer)
(m+n)\frac{1}{2}t + 2m\frac{1}{2}(1-t) = (m+n)\frac{1}{2} t + 2(1-t) + \alpha(t)
This should give you an expression for \alpha which will let you fix your homotopy, and then you should get a well-defined homotopy of loops.
 
I got it! This is awesome.

I got \alpha(t)=m(1-t) which gave the well defined homotopy

H(s,t) = \begin{cases} e^{2\pi i (m+n) st}e^{2\pi i m 2 s (1-t)} &amp; \textrm{for }s \in [0,1/2] \\<br /> e^{2\pi i(m+n)st}e^{2\pi i n 2 (2s-1)(1-t)}e^{2\pi i m(1-t)} &amp; \textrm{for }s \in [1/2,1]<br /> \end{cases}

This almost worked except when s=1, we did not get our desired result of 1. So if we use this:

H(s,t) = \begin{cases} e^{2\pi i (m+n) st}e^{2\pi i m 2 s (1-t)} &amp; \textrm{for }s \in [0,1/2] \\<br /> e^{2\pi i(m+n)st}e^{2\pi i n (2s-1)(1-t)}e^{2\pi i \alpha(t)} &amp; \textrm{for }s \in [1/2,1]<br /> \end{cases}

We have our homotopy of loops.

Thanks again for the help.I was really stuck out there.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
3K