1
$\begingroup$

In the paper

GEOMETRY OF TRUNCATED SYMMETRIC PRODUCTS AND REAL ROOTS OF REAL POLYNOMIALS, JACOB MOSTOVOY, Bull. London Math. Soc. (1998) 30 (2): 159-165,

Theorem 2. (b): $TP^n(\mathbb{R}P^1)$ is homeomorphic to $\mathbb{R}P^n$.

By page 161 line 2-line 3 of the above paper, the unordered configuration space of $k$ points on $\mathbb{R}P^1$, $C_k(\mathbb{R}P^1)=TP^k(\mathbb{R}P^1)\setminus TP^{k-2}(\mathbb{R}P^1)$.

My question: can we write $C_k(\mathbb{R}P^1)=TP^k(\mathbb{R}P^1)\setminus TP^{k-2}(\mathbb{R}P^1)=\mathbb{R}P^k\setminus \mathbb{R}P^{k-2}$?

(1). I note that $\mathbb{R}P^k\setminus \mathbb{R}P^{k-2}$ has only 3 cells of dimensions $k-2$, $k-1$, $k$.

On the other hand, by the paper

On the homology of configuration spaces, CF Bödigheimer, F Cohen, L Taylor, Topology, 1989,

(2). I obtain that $H^1(C_k(\mathbb{R}P^1);\mathbb{Z}/2)$ is non-trivial.

Question. (1), (2) are not compatible. Where is my mistake?

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

(1) and (2) are perfectly compatible, to the extent which (1) makes sense. $\mathbb{R}P^k$ is naturally a CW complex with one cell in each dimension, and $\mathbb{R}P^{k-2}$ is a subcomplex. Assuming that the inclusions are in the standard way, the difference $\mathbb{R}P^k \setminus \mathbb{R}P^{k-2}$ is not a union of open cells (of dimensions $k-1$ and $k$, but is not a CW complex. (Every CW complex must have at least one 0-cell, for instance.) Think about the case $S^{k-2} \subset S^k$ as an easier-to-visualize example: the difference $S^k \setminus S^{k-2}$ is homotopy equivalent to a circle, regardless of how large $k$ gets.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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