Skip to main content

Timeline for Connected sum of surfaces

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

12 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Feb 9, 2012 at 0:22 answer added William timeline score: 0
Feb 7, 2012 at 10:49 comment added Baptiste Calmès @Agol: Thanks for pointing this reference. I was not aware of it.
Feb 7, 2012 at 9:33 history edited Baptiste Calmès CC BY-SA 3.0
added 10 characters in body
Feb 7, 2012 at 9:33 comment added Baptiste Calmès @algori: yes, you are perfectly right. I've made the correction.
Feb 7, 2012 at 3:55 comment added Ian Agol This follows from the classification of non-compact surfaces by Richards: ams.org/journals/tran/1963-106-02/S0002-9947-1963-0143186-0/…
Feb 7, 2012 at 0:19 answer added Johannes Ebert timeline score: 10
Feb 6, 2012 at 23:34 comment added algori Baptiste -- a small remark: did you in fact mean connected sum of connected surfaces?
Feb 6, 2012 at 23:30 comment added algori Tom -- I don't know about surfaces (I suspect this is true but am not sure) but this is false for knot complements in $S^3$.
Feb 6, 2012 at 22:38 comment added Tom Goodwillie True or false: every orientable surface has an orientation-reversing homeomorphism?
Feb 6, 2012 at 21:08 comment added Baptiste Calmès Maybe I should have said that I take the word "surface" in the topological sense, i.e. a topological space that is separated and locally homeomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^2$. Thus, by non compact, I simply mean a surface in the above sense, that is not compact as a topological space. There is a well-known classification theorem for compact surfaces (they have a finite number of connected components and these are all connected sums of (a sphere and) tori and projective spaces).
Feb 6, 2012 at 19:54 comment added Igor Rivin What do you mean by "non-compact"? Finite type with punctures, or something more general?
Feb 6, 2012 at 19:11 history asked Baptiste Calmès CC BY-SA 3.0