MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

It is probably a trivial question. But I don't see the answer.

Is there any Hurewicz fibration $\mathbb{R}^n\to \mathbb{S}^n$ ?

Is there any fibration $X\to \mathbb{S}^n$, when $X\subset \mathbb{R}^n $?

I appreciate any help. Thank you very much!

share|cite|improve this question
Well, certainly there is when $n=1$... – Daniel Litt Sep 23 '11 at 7:38
My approach would be similar to Dylan's: If such a fibration existed for $n>1$, the fibre would be a closed subset $F\subset \mathbb{R}^n$ with the weak homotopy type of $\Omega S^n$, and would therefore have nonzero (co)homology in arbitrarily high degrees. In some sense you have an infinite dimensional space embedded in a finite dimensional Euclidean space, which feels wrong. I can't right now see how to rule it out though. – Mark Grant Sep 23 '11 at 9:18
Along this line, it's worth mentioning that Barratt-Milnor constructed examples (higher analogues of the Hawaiian earrings) that embed in $\mathbb{R}^n$ but have cohomology in arbitrarily high degrees. User BS discussed them here:… – Tyler Lawson Sep 23 '11 at 12:39
However, $\Omega S^n$ has the homotopy type of a CW complex, and therefore (iirc?) its singular homology is the same as its \check{C}ech homology! – some guy on the street Sep 23 '11 at 14:36
A small note, the answer to the first question is clearly no for $n=2$ by the classification of non-compact $2$-manifolds + Mark's comment. I imagine there's a reasonable proof the answer is always no for $n>1$ but off the top of my head I'm not seeing it. – Ryan Budney Sep 23 '11 at 21:51
up vote 11 down vote accepted

Edit: The following simplifies the original answer (which unnecessarily used singular cohomology).

If $f:\Bbb R^n\to S^n$ is a fibration, then as Mark noted, a fiber $F$ of $f$ is weak homotopy equivalent to $\Omega S^n$ (using the 5-lemma, see Prop. 4.66 in Hatcher). I claim that $F$ is in fact homotopy equivalent to $\Omega S^n$.

Indeed, $F$ is homotopy equivalent to the corresponding homotopy fiber of $f$ (Prop. 4.65 in Hatcher). The homotopy fiber consists of pairs $(x,p)$ where $x\in\Bbb R^n$ and $p$ is a path in $S^n$ connecting $f(x)$ and the basepoint. It is homotopy equivalent to the space $X$ of maps $[0,1]\to MC(f)$ (the mapping cylinder) sending $0$ into $\Bbb R^n$ and $1$ into the basepoint of $S^n$. Milnor showed that $X$ and $\Omega S^n$ are homotopy equivalent to CW-complexes. Hence, being weak homotopy equivalent to each other, by Whitehead's theorem they are homotopy equivalent to each other.

Now $F$ is finite-dimensional, so its Cech cohomology is eventually zero. Cech cohomology is a homotopy invariant, so we get that the cohomology of $\Omega S^n$ is eventually zero, contradicting Mark's comment. (It does not matter which cohomology of $\Omega S^n$, they are all isomorphic since $\Omega S^n$ is homotopically a CW-complex.)

share|cite|improve this answer
Hi Sergey, when you say that $F$ is finite-dimensional, are you talking about its covering dimension (I see no reason why $F$ should be something nice like a manifold or complex)? Do closed subsets of $\mathbb{R}^n$ necessarily have covering dimension less than or equal to $n$? – Mark Grant Sep 24 '11 at 7:55
Mark, yes, $F$ is of covering dimension $\le n$, that is, every open cover of $F$ can be refined by a cover whose nerve is of dimension $\le n$. Indeed, by the definition of subspace topology, every open cover of $F$ is the intersection with $F$ of an open cover of an open neighborhood of $F$; hence also of an open cover $C$ of $\Bbb R^n$. This $C$ has a refinement $D$ with a nerve $N$ of dimension $\le n$ since $\Bbb R^n$ is $n$-dimensional (see nice pictures at Finally, the nerve of $D$ intersected with $F$ is a subcomplex of $N$. – Sergey Melikhov Sep 24 '11 at 16:14
I should add that perhaps some confusion arises from Tyler Lawson's remark that the Barratt-Milnor examples of a subset of $\Bbb R^3$ "have cohomology in arbitrarily high degrees". This is true only of singular cohomology, which is not a geometrically interesting cohomology theory, in particular because it is not Brown representable (see – Sergey Melikhov Sep 24 '11 at 16:49
Assume that $ p: E\to B $ is a fibration and $ E $ is contractible. We have that the homotopy fiber is homotopy equivalent to the fiber. But the homotopy fiber is the pullback of $ p: E\to B $ along $ v_0: PB\to B $. Since $ v_ 0 $ is a fibration, the homotopy fiber is, indeed, the homotopy pullback. Hence, the pullback of $ \ast\to B $ along $ v_0 $ is homotopy equivalent to the homotopy fiber (since $ E $ is contractible). This new pullback is $ \Omega B $. So, in general, if $ p: E\to B $ is a fibration with contractible total space, the fiber is homotopy equivalent to $ \Omega B $. – Fernando Feb 25 '13 at 17:19
This makes it much simpler, thanks! – Sergey Melikhov Mar 1 '13 at 0:40

I think there's a pretty simple answer, patching together everything that's been said in the comments.

By Mark's answer, the fibers have $H_{n-1}$ isomorphic to $\mathbb Z$. And if $n>1$ these fibers are connected. Alexander duality tells you the Cech cohomology of the fiber in dimension $n-1$ is isomorphic to the reduced $0$-dimensional homology of the complement of the fiber in $\mathbb R^n$. And some guy on the street's comment tells you that Cech cohomology is regular cohomology.

So this is saying that the fibers separate $\mathbb R^n$, but since the base is $S^n$ with $n \geq 2$, that's impossible.

share|cite|improve this answer
Ryan, I'm not getting this. Mark has a weak homotopy equivalence. Cech cohomology is not an invariant of weak equivalence. – Sergey Melikhov Sep 24 '11 at 0:43
Since $\Omega S^n$ is a CW-space and so is the fiber, then the weak equivalence is an actual equivalence. – Dylan Wilson Sep 24 '11 at 0:50
Dylan, the fiber is not a CW complex: the original fibration is not assumed PL or smooth. – Sergey Melikhov Sep 24 '11 at 1:05
@Sergey: as you've pointed out in your answer, the weak equivalence can be made into a homotopy equivalence. Sorry I abandoned the question -- my calculus class had an exam and I had to run out of the room. Your answer is the more complete so I'd like to suggest Fernando accept yours. – Ryan Budney Sep 24 '11 at 3:48
Ryan, thanks. I'm still a bit puzzled by your comment on the $n=2$ case, can you do this case without using Milnor's theorem on functional spaces? In this connection the following example is worth mentioning. The pseudo-arc is a compact subset of $\Bbb R^2$ which does not have any nontrivial paths in it. So it is weakly equivalent to a discrete set of cardinality continuum (which I guess can be seen as CW-complex), but is not homotopy equivalent to any CW-complex. – Sergey Melikhov Sep 24 '11 at 17:32

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.