As an exercise, I'm trying to show that for an $(n-1)$-connected space $L$ with $\pi=\pi_n(L)$, the map $\iota_L:L\rightarrow K(\pi,n)$ associated to the fundamental class $\iota_L\in H^n(L;\pi)$ induces an isomorphism $\pi_n(L)\rightarrow \pi_n(K(\pi,n))$. After playing with this for a while, I've found that this feels so tautological that it has to be true, although that doesn't quite constitute a proof. I'm supposed to use only basic definitions / first principles. Presumably, these are:

  1. The universal coefficient theorem yields $H^n(L;\pi)\cong Hom(H_n(L),\pi)$. The Hurewicz homomorphism $h:\pi \rightarrow H_n(L)$ is an isomorphism, and its inverse $h^{-1}\in Hom(H_n(L),\pi)$ corresponds to $\iota_L\in H^n(L;\pi)$.

  2. We have a canonical bijection $H^n(L;\pi) \cong [L,K(\pi,n)]$. Any $[f]\in [L,K(\pi,n)]$ corresponds to $f^*\iota\in H^n(L;\pi)$, where $\iota\in H^n(K(\pi,n);\pi)$ is the fundamental class of $K(\pi,n)$ (which is associated to its identity map). This is actually a group isomorphism if we add maps on the right side by using the fact that $K(\pi,n)=\Omega K(\pi,n+1)$ (or at least $\simeq$, although what does $K(\pi,n)$ even mean really). I'd imagine that this is canonical too, but I don't know for sure.

  3. We have a map $[L,K(\pi,n)]\rightarrow Hom(\pi,\pi)$ given by $[f]\mapsto f_\#$. Presumably the idea is to show that the image of $\iota_L$ is an isomorphism, but I can't tell if I'm just complicating the question by phrasing it in these terms.

I think my problem is that I don't really understand the defining way Eilenberg-MacLane spaces work. I have an intuitive picture of the Hurewicz homomorphism, and so I guess I have an intuitive picture of its inverse: it takes a homology class in degree $n$ and realizes it as the image of a bunch of based $n$-spheres (which is made possible by the Hurewicz theorem). We can look at this more or less as a cochain in $C^n_{cell}(L;\pi)$, and this is the element $\iota_L\in H^n(L;\pi)$. But then I have no idea how to actually turn this into a map $\iota_L : L\rightarrow K(\pi,n)$, or whether I'm even supposed to.

Because I'd still like to work this out myself to whatever extent I can, a good hint (if one exists) is worth more to me than a straight-up answer. Of course, I'm happy with either. Thanks!

  • $\begingroup$ Try a relative version of the Hurewicz Theorem, (known as the Whitehead Theorem) - A map is an isomorphism on homology up to degree $n$ if and only if it is an isomorphism on homotopy up to degree $n$. $\endgroup$ Sep 16, 2010 at 7:27

1 Answer 1


Here is a solution, based on Jeffrey's comment:

Let $f:L\rightarrow K(\pi,n)$ be the map classifying $\iota$. We will show that the induced map $f_*:H_i(L)\rightarrow H_i(K(\pi,n))$ is isomorphic for $i \lt n+1$ and epimorphic for $i=n+1$. This will imply by Whitehead's theorem that the same is true for $f_\# :\pi_i(L)\rightarrow \pi_i(K(\pi,n))$ (assuming $n \gt 1$).

First, $f_*$ is automatically an isomorphism for $i \lt n$, since in that case by the Hurewicz theorem $H_i(L)$ and $H_i(K(\pi,n))$ are both trivial.

Next, in dimension $n$, we use the fact that $f^*:H^n(K(\pi,n);\pi)\rightarrow H^n(L;\pi)$ satisfies $f^*\iota_n = \iota$, where $\iota_n$ is the fundamental class of $K(\pi,n)$. By the universal coefficient and Hurewicz theorems, we may regard $H^n(K(\pi,n))=Hom(H_n(K(\pi,n)),\pi)$ and $H^n(L)=Hom(H_n(L),\pi)$, and the fundamental classes both correspond to isomorphisms (namely, the inverses of the respective Hurewicz homomorphisms). In general, if a group homomorphism $\varphi:B\rightarrow A$ induces $\varphi^\#:Hom(A,C)\rightarrow Hom(B,C)$ and $\varphi^\#$ takes an isomorphism $\psi_1:A\rightarrow C$ to an isomorphism $\psi_2:B \rightarrow C$, then $\varphi$ itself must be an isomorphism, because $\psi_2 = \varphi^\# (\psi_1)=\psi_1\varphi$ and so $\varphi = \psi_1^{-1}\psi_2$. Here, since $f^*:Hom(H_n(K(\pi,n)),\pi)\rightarrow Hom(H_n(L),\pi)$ is induced from $f_*:H_n(L)\rightarrow H_n(K(\pi,n))$ and takes an isomorphism to an isomorphism, then $f_*:H_n(L)\rightarrow H_n(K(\pi,n))$ itself is an isomorphism.

Lastly, by the Hurewicz theorem, since $K(\pi,n)$ is $n$-connected, the Hurewicz homomorphism $h:\pi_{n+1}(K(\pi,n))\rightarrow H_{n+1}(K(\pi,n))$ is an epimorphism, but $\pi_{n+1}(K(\pi,n))=0$ by definition so $H_{n+1}(K(\pi,n))=0$ as well. Hence $f_*: H_{n+1}(L)\rightarrow H_{n+1}(K(\pi,n))$ is automatically epimorphic.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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