(1) We say a CW-complex is finite if its cell decompositions are finite. Why is this well defined? I.e., why can't a CW-complex admits a decomposition into a finite number of cells and another decomposition into an infinite number of cells?(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

(2) We say a CW-complex X has dimension n if n is the dimension of the cell of X of highest dimension. Why is this well defined? I.e., why can't a CW-complex admits a cell decomposition where the highest dimensional cell has dimension n and another cell decomposition where the highest dimensional cell has dimension m? I'm guessing this can be shown using Brouwer's invariance of domain, but I've been having technical problems implementing this idea..

(3) Given a CW-complex X, a subcomplex of X can be defined as a subspace A of X which is the reunion of closed cells of X. Why is a subcomplex necessarily closed in X?

Thanks for any help.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Three things I don't get about CW-complexes

Loading...

Similar Threads - Three things don't | Date |
---|---|

B What would things look like if PI = 3. | Feb 19, 2017 |

Rotate a three-sphere so every point moves in R^4? | Apr 4, 2015 |

Definition of a three form | Aug 6, 2014 |

Restricted three body problem | Apr 12, 2014 |

Fitting the 'tightest' rectangle to a set of three dimensional points | Apr 11, 2013 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**