Whitehead for maps - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-06-19T23:55:34Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/2672http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/2672/whitehead-for-mapsWhitehead for mapsDavid Speyer2009-10-26T20:32:08Z2009-10-27T04:44:21Z
<p>I made the following claim over at the <a href="http://sbseminar.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/concrete-categories/" rel="nofollow">Secret Blogging Seminar</a>, and now I'm not sure it's true:</p>
<p>Let f: X --> Y and g: X --> Y be two maps betwen finite CW complexes. If f and g induce the same map on pi_k, for all k, then f and g are homotopic.</p>
<p>Was I telling the truth?</p>
<p>EDIT: Since I didn't say anything about basepoints, I probably should have said that f and g induce the same map </p>
<p>[S^k, X] --> [S^k, Y].</p>
<p>This will also deal better with the situation where X and Y are disconnected. I'd be interested in knowing a result like this either with pointed maps or nonpointed maps. (Although, of course, if you work with pointed maps you have to take X and Y connected, because [S^k, _] can't see anything beyond the number of components in that case.)</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2672/whitehead-for-maps/2678#2678Answer by Eric Wofsey for Whitehead for mapsEric Wofsey2009-10-26T20:51:48Z2009-10-26T20:51:48Z<p>This is not true. Consider, for example, a degree 1 map from a torus S^1 \times S^1 to S^2 (concretely, realize the torus as a square with identifications, and then collapse the boundary of the square to a point). This map is trivial on all homotopy groups (since for any n>0, \pi_n is 0 for either the domain or the codomain), but it is not homotopically trivial because it is nonzero on H_2.</p>
<p>If you want to demand that the spaces be simply connected, you can get a counterexample by considering cohomology operations: the cup square, for example, gives a map from K(Z,n) to K(Z,2n) which is nontrivial, but for the same reason as the previous example it must be 0 on homotopy groups. This example is not finite-dimensional, but it's probably possible to find one that is--I just don't know how because I don't know how to show a map is trivial on homotopy groups if the spaces have infinitely many nontrivial homotopy groups whose values are unknown, which is the case for most finite-dimensional examples.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2672/whitehead-for-maps/2680#2680Answer by Ilya Nikokoshev for Whitehead for mapsIlya Nikokoshev2009-10-26T21:12:13Z2009-10-27T00:34:11Z<p>I think the proper Whitehead for maps says that if the cone of the map has trivial homotopy groups, then the map is a homotopy equivalence.</p>
<p><strong>Edit</strong>: see also the discussion of Whitehead theorem in the comments.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2672/whitehead-for-maps/2707#2707Answer by Tyler Lawson for Whitehead for mapsTyler Lawson2009-10-26T23:06:38Z2009-10-26T23:06:38Z<p>Another interesting counterexample is given by so-called "phantom maps", which induce the zero map on all homotopy groups but are not nullhomotopic. Given an infinite CW-complex X which is a union ∪X<sub>n</sub> of finite subcomplexes, Milnor described homotopy classes of maps out to Y where the phantom maps are given by a "lim<sup>1</sup>"-term.</p>
<p>For example, I believe that using this Brayton Gray used this to construct a map from <b>CP</b><sup>infinity</sup> to S<sup>3</sup> that is nullhomotopic on <b>CP</b><sup>n</sup> for all n.</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/2672/whitehead-for-maps/2767#2767Answer by Josh Shadlen for Whitehead for mapsJosh Shadlen2009-10-27T04:44:21Z2009-10-27T04:44:21Z<p>For finite spectra, your question is precisely Freyd's generating hypothesis, which is open.</p>