The generalization of Brouwer's fixed point theorem? - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-05-24T22:23:37Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/59796http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/59796/the-generalization-of-brouwers-fixed-point-theoremThe generalization of Brouwer's fixed point theorem?Alex Gavrilov2011-03-28T04:05:56Z2011-03-30T07:18:20Z
<p>Let <code>$X$</code> be a contractible compact [edit: locally connected] topological space
(Hausdorff and second countable). Let <code>$f\colon X\to X$</code>
be a continuous map. Then (I suppose) <code>$f$</code> has a fixed
point. Personally, I cannot think of a better generalization
of Brouwer's fixed point theorem, but is it true?</p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/59796/the-generalization-of-brouwers-fixed-point-theorem/59797#59797Answer by Daniel Litt for The generalization of Brouwer's fixed point theorem?Daniel Litt2011-03-28T04:34:34Z2011-03-30T07:18:20Z<p>No. I believe the first counterexample is from:</p>
<p>Kinoshita, S. On Some Contractible Continua without Fixed Point Property. Fund. Math. 40 (1953), 96-98</p>
<p>which I unfortunately can't find online. Kinoshita's example is described on page 127 in this excellent <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/2317258" rel="nofollow">article by Bing</a>, however.</p>
<p>EDIT: The question has been revised to add the local connectivity condition; as stated, I think the question is open. If "contractible" is replaced with "acyclic" there are counterexamples dating back to Borsuk, referenced e.g. <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBkQFjAA&url=http%253A%252F%252Fmatwbn.icm.edu.pl%252Fksiazki%252Ffm%252Ffm107%252Ffm10711.pdf&ei=VteSTYmMDInmsQPd_PW9Cw&usg=AFQjCNH6ceZLPpJxw5lVy0sc-p_8DdudaQ&sig2=Zr9Sn7SIVPRC1dpyhggXAA" rel="nofollow">here</a>; Borsuk's paper, which I can't find online, is:</p>
<p>K. Borsuk, Sur un continua acyclique qui se laisse transformer topologiquement en lui-meme sans points invariants, Fund. Math. 24 (1935), pp. 51-58.</p>
<p>This suggests that if the OP's conjecture is true, it is unlikely to be open to homological attacks. </p>