10
$\begingroup$

A definition of wedge sum can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_sum

My professor has claimed that wedge sums of path connected spaces X and Y are well-defined up to homotopy equivalence, independently of choice of base points x0 and y0. Base point here means the points that are identified under the equivalence relation forming the wedge product out of the disjoint union topology of X and Y.

Recall homotopy equivalence of X and Y means that there is f:X->Y and g:Y->X continuous with gf and fg homotopic to the identity.

With these definitions, please prove my professor's claim, which I have failed to do for a week. (It is left as an exercise in his lecture.)

Thanks.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
14
  • $\begingroup$ 1. Mathoverflow isn't for homework. 2. This is a fun homework assignment and you should think about it more. $\endgroup$
    – Autumn Kent
    Commented Jul 3, 2010 at 20:57
  • $\begingroup$ This is not homework. It is an exercise left by my professor, which was not assigned for homework. If you don't believe me, you can look at exercise 2.35 in his set of lecture notes: math.caltech.edu/~ma109a/109anotes.pdf You may notice the class is over. I want this fact proven for research I'm doing this summer. $\endgroup$
    – Jeff
    Commented Jul 3, 2010 at 20:59
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ One week's worth of effort, as well as the failure to find anything useful on wikipedia, google-book's preview, and in Caltech's own library says otherwise. Also, none of my peers who have taken Math 109a can handle it either. I have asked, trust me. Do you have a hint? I first tried elementary things like inclusion maps and projections (remember the wedge product is a quotient space.) I then thought about examples (I can do well-behaved cases in R^n) and I thought about showing a homotopy with a dumb-bell like object where the wedged point becomes a line. $\endgroup$
    – Jeff
    Commented Jul 3, 2010 at 21:08
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I mean, what's the question? True: If $X$, $Y$, and $Z$ are based spaces and $X$ and $Y$ are homotopy equivalent in the based sense then $X\vee Z$ and $Y\vee Z$ are homotopy equivalent in the same sense. False: If $X$, $Y$, and $Z$ are path connected spaces and $X$ and $Y$ are homotopy equivalent then $X\vee Z$ and $Y\vee Z$ are homotopy equivalent no matter what base points you use to stick things together. $\endgroup$
    – Tom Goodwillie
    Commented Jul 3, 2010 at 21:30
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Tom, I think he's not varying the homeomorphism type of the two factors, only the placement of the basepoint. $\endgroup$
    – Autumn Kent
    Commented Jul 3, 2010 at 21:35

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
20
$\begingroup$

A counterexample is shown on the cover of the paperback edition of the classic textbook Homology Theory by Hilton and Wylie. This can be viewed on the amazon webpage for the book. The example consists of the wedge of two copies of a cone, the cone on the sequence 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, ... together with its limit point 0. With one choice of basepoints the wedge is not contractible, but with other choices it is.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Hi, I am assuming you mean that the special point at which one can attach these two cones to get a noncontractible space is the limit point, 0. But it seems to me that any which way you attach these two spaces, you will get a contractible space. I believe this to be true because both cones are themselves contractible, and so I can contract one first, and then the other. It is because these cones are a subset of R^2 that I can contract one first, and then the other. For instance, this process works to contract the space shown on the cover of the book you suggested. Thanks for your response $\endgroup$
    – Jeff
    Commented Jul 3, 2010 at 23:06
  • $\begingroup$ I see that this works, thanks a lot for all your help! $\endgroup$
    – Jeff
    Commented Jul 4, 2010 at 1:39
  • $\begingroup$ Link to amazon webpage for Hilton and Wylie is here: amazon.com/Homology-Theory-Introduction-Algebraic-Topology/dp/… $\endgroup$
    – Russ Woodroofe
    Commented Aug 12, 2014 at 12:02

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .