3
$\begingroup$

A theorem of Edmonds (see Theorem 3.1. of "Deformation of Maps to Branched Coverings in Dimension Two") says that

Theorem 1: A degree-one map between closed orientable surfaces is homotopic to a pinch map (quotient map obtained from identifying a connected compact bordered sub-surface with one boundary component to a point).

By Theorem 1, we have Theorem 2 below.

Theorem 2: A degree-one map between closed orientable surfaces, when it induces an injective map between the fundamental groups, is homotopic to a homeomorphism.

Edmonds' proof of Theorem 1 is based on the induction of the genus. Also, there is a proof of Theorem 2 without using induction; for example, see the first proof of Theorem 8.9. of "A Primer on Mapping Class Groups."

Question: Is there any proof of Theorem 1 without using induction on the genus?

I am looking for a reference that has a proof of Theorem 1 in the flavor of the proof of Theorem 8.9. like as given in "A Primer on Mapping Class Groups. My Question can be a little vague or weird. Sorry for this.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I thought up and wrote down a simpler proof of the Edmonds theorem which goes in one step (without induction) and which is more natural (in my opinion), it is slightly similar to the Farb-Margalit's proof of the Dehn-Nielsen theorem arxiv.org/abs/2308.07813 I will be grateful for any remarks! $\endgroup$ Aug 16, 2023 at 5:25

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

The first proof of 8.9 in the Primer uses the genus (to prove that all pants decompositions of $S$ have the same number of curves). Proving that the genus of a surface is well-defined is, at some point, an induction.

It is possible (in my mind at least) that the second proof of Theorem 8.9, based on harmonic maps, gives a proof which more carefully hides the use of induction. (I mean, at some point there will be a proof that diffeomorphisms preserve dimension, which will rely on the pigeonhole principle, which is more-or-less an induction.)


There is an area of foundations called reverse mathematics. I have not heard of an analysis of low-dimensional topology (or more specifically the mapping class group) from this viewpoint. Perhaps a first step would be to formalise some of the most important tools (the Alexander trick, the Dehn-Nielsen-Baer theorem) in Lean (for example).

I imagine that this would be a huge undertaking. But I am very old, and have none of the courage of youth.

$\endgroup$

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.