This paper introduces simplified, unified proofs for key resolution theorems in topology, using innovative techniques to convert cohomology problems into homology problems and providing a general method for constructing necessary maps.
Contribution
It offers new, streamlined proofs for resolution theorems, enhancing understanding and applicability in algebraic topology.
Findings
01
Simplified proofs for cell-like, $ ext{Z}/p$, and $ ext{Q}$-resolution theorems.
02
A general topological method for constructing resolution maps.
03
Conversion of cohomology problems into homology problems.
Abstract
We present new, unified proofs for the cell-like, Z/p-, and Q-resolution theorems. Our arguments employ extensions that are much simpler then those used by our predecessors. The techniques allow us to solve problems involving cohomology groups by converting them into problems about homology groups. We provide a coordinated general topological method for constructing the maps needed to witness the resolution theorems simultaneously.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Full text
Alternate Proofs for the n-dimensional Resolution Theorems
We present new, unified proofs for the cell-like-, Z/p-,
and Q-resolution theorems. Our arguments employ extensions that are much
simpler than those used by our predecessors. The techniques allow us to solve problems
involving cohomology groups by converting them into problems about homology groups.
We provide a coordinated general topological method for constructing the maps needed to
witness the resolution theorems simultaneously.
For each abelian group G and compact metrizable space X, dimGX will denote
the cohomological dimension of X modulo G. One can find definitions of and facts about the theory
of cohomological dimension in [Dr] and [Ku]. However, the material in Section 6
will be sufficient for our needs. Throughout this paper, map means continuous function, and
N starts with 1.
We are going to provide alternate, simpler, and unified proofs of the cell-like-, Z/p-, and Q-resolution
theorems in dimension n ([Ed], [Wa], [Dr], [Le]):
Theorem 1.1**.**
Let n∈N and X be a nonempty metrizable compactum
with dimZX≤n. Then there exists a metrizable compactum Z with dimZ≤n
and a surjective111It should be remarked that cell-like sets are never empty–see
Definition 2.1 and the remark just before it;
so the term surjective here is redundant. cell-like map π:Z→X.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let n∈N, p∈N≥2, and X be a nonempty metrizable compactum
with dimZ/pX≤n. Then there exists a metrizable compactum Z with dimZ≤n
and a surjective Z/p-acyclic map π:Z→X.
Theorem 1.3**.**
Let n∈N≥2 and X be a nonempty metrizable compactum
with dimQX≤n. Then there exists a metrizable compactum Z with dimZ≤n
and a surjective Q-acyclic map π:Z→X.
All terms with which the reader is not familiar will be defined in Section 2.
Theorem 1.1 was stated in [Ed] and proved in [Wa]. Theorems
1.2 and 1.3 along with proofs can be found in
[Dr] and [Le] respectively. All three of the resolution theorems are true in case n=0.
This holds because for any abelian group G and nonempty metrizable compactum X,
dimGX=0 if and only if dimX=0, and all singleton spaces are both cell-like and
G-acyclic (see Section 2). So one may take Z=X and π=idX.
Theorem 1.1 with n=1 is true for a similar reason because, as stated in [Wa],
dimZX=1 if and only if dimX=1. Theorem 1.3 fails to be true
for n=1 as remarked in [Le].
One feature of all three of the previous proofs of the resolution theorems
is that they rely on a version of a result due to R. Edwards (see Theorem 4.2 of [Wa])
even if somewhat hidden inside the arguments.
Because of this dependence, in each case the proofs employed relatively complicated
“extensions,” e.g., Edwards-Walsh resolutions as in [Wa] and [Dr] (see also [KY]),
and even more intricate ones in [Le]. The extensions were associated with triangulated compact polyhedra
that appeared in an inverse sequence representing the target space X.
Our main results yield unified proofs of Theorems 1.1,
1.2, and 1.3 that do not rely on forms of Edwards’ result. As a consequence,
although we will use extensions (Sections 4, 5, 7, and 8),
these will be quite mild in comparison with those that were employed by our predecessors.
Furthermore, we are going to organize the previously disparate techniques
by providing a series of results that involve inverse sequences of compact
polyhedra (Section 2), the application
of basic notions of algebraic topology that connect homology with cohomology
(Sections 2 and 3), the theory of triangulated finite
polyhedra (Sections 4 and 5),
the connection between the theory of cohomological dimension and
Eilenberg-MacLane CW-complexes (Section 6),
and point-set topology (Sections 9, 10, and 11).
All spaces that require a metric will be embedded in the Hilbert cube I∞
and their metrics will be induced from a fixed metric
ρ on I∞ (Section 9). Section 12 contains the
final steps of our proof of the resolution theorems.
2. Acyclicity
In this section we will provide the needed definitions of
“acyclicity” including the concept of being “cell-like.”
We will also have lemmas showing how to detect these properties
in the settings that will occur later. The term continuum will refer
to a compact, connected Hausdorff space. The notion of a space having the shape of a point
can be found on page 45 of [MS]. It can be seen from the remarks in the
first paragraph of page 45 of [MS] that
whenever a space has the shape of a point, it cannot be empty and must be connected.
Definition 2.1**.**
A compact Hausdorff space is said to be
cell-like if it has the shape of a point.
It follows from this that each cell-like space must be a nonempty continuum.
In the original definition of the term cell-like, which was introduced by C. Lacher
(consult [Ru]), it was required that such a space be metrizable. The current loosening
of the requirement of metrizability is for convenience since this is essential for
understanding the main result, the cell-like resolution theorem for compact Hausdorff spaces, in
[MR]; it has no impact on the work herein. Other equivalent definitions of cell-likenes can be found, for example, in [Dr].
Definition 2.2**.**
Let G be an abelian group and X a continuum. One
says that X is G-acyclic if for all k∈N,
Hˇk(X;G)=0.
Note that if one wants to include k=0 in Definition 2.2, then Čech cohomology should be reduced.
All singleton spaces are cell-like and are G-acyclic for any abelian group G.
Definition 2.3**.**
Let π:Z→X be a
map and G an abelian group. It is said that π is:
(1)
cell-like* if each of its fibers is cell-like;*
2. (2)
G-acyclic if each of its fibers is G-acyclic.
Some authors require that in (1) of the preceding, the map π be proper. Since all the
spaces to which we apply Definition 2.3 will be compact and metrizable,
then the maps we produce will be proper anyway. So we will lose nothing by deleting
the properness requirement. The maps π that we shall design to satisfy
the resolution theorems will be surjective by construction.
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let X=(Xj,gjj+1)
be an inverse sequence of nonempty metrizable compacta and
X=limX. Then X is cell-like if for each
j∈N, there exists i>j such that gji:Xi→Xj is
null homotopic.∎
Let G be an abelian group. There are several ways to demonstrate
that a given metrizable continuum X is G-acyclic. The continuity
of Čech cohomology shows that:
Lemma 2.5**.**
For any abelian group G and
inverse sequence D=(Dj,gjj+1) of nonempty
compact polyhedra with D=limD,
[TABLE]
where for each j,
Hk(gjj+1;G):Hk(Dj;G)→Hk(Dj+1;G) is the
homomorphism induced by gjj+1:Dj+1→Dj.∎
Lemma 2.6**.**
Let D=(Dj,gjj+1)
be an inverse sequence of nonempty compact polyhedra,
D=limD, k∈N, and G an abelian group. Then
Hˇk(D;G)=0 if for each j, there exists i>j such
that Hk(gji;G):Hk(Dj;G)→Hk(Di;G) is the trivial
homomorphism. ∎
When we apply Lemma 2.6, there will be given
n∈N, and we will face three cases. The first, that k>n,
will be taken care of because it will be true in
the situations we cover that dimD≤n, so Hˇk(D;G)=0 automatically. The second will be
that 1≤k<n, and will be covered in Lemma
2.7. The case that k=n will be managed using
Lemma 2.9. We note that for all
1≤k≤n, we are going to make an appeal only to homology
groups. We lay the groundwork for this now.
Lemma 2.7**.**
Let D=(Dj,gjj+1)
be an inverse sequence of nonempty compact polyhedra,
D=limD, and k∈N. Suppose that for all j∈N,
(1)
there exists i>j
such that Hk(gji;Z):Hk(Di;Z)→Hk(Dj;Z) is the trivial homomorphism, and
2. (2)
Hk−1(Dj;Z)* is free-abelian.*
Then for any abelian group G, Hˇk(D;G)=0.
Proof.
Fix an abelian group G.
Let j∈N, and choose i>j as in (1) of
the hypothesis. Using (2) and an application of Theorem 52.3(b),
page 318 of [Mu], one has that for each s∈{i,j}
[TABLE]
This and the short exact
sequence of Theorem 53.1 of [Mu] (page 320, universal
coefficient theorem for cohomology) yield that the natural
Kronecker homomorphisms (see page 276 of [Mu])
κs:Hk(Ds;G)→Hom(Hk(Ds;Z),G),
s∈{i,j} are isomorphisms.
Let
[TABLE]
be the homomorphism induced by
Hk(gji;Z):Hk(Di;Z)→Hk(Dj;Z). Then we have
a commutative diagram of homomorphisms,
[TABLE]
Let u∈Hk(Dj;G). We claim that Hk(gji;G)(u)=0.
Since κi is an isomorphism, then the preceding is true
if and only if κi∘Hk(gji;G)(u)=0. By the
diagram, this is true if and only if λ∘κj(u)=0. But κj is also an isomorphism, so we only have to
show that λ is the trivial homomorphism. Let
f∈Hom(Hk(Dj;Z),G). Then f:Hk(Dj;Z)→G is
a homomorphism, and λ(f)=f∘Hk(gji;Z). The
second function in this composition is a trivial homomorphism
and hence λ(f) is the trivial element of
Hom(Hk(Di;Z),G). Apply Lemma 2.6 to complete this proof.
∎
Corollary 2.8**.**
Let D=(Dj,gjj+1)
be an inverse sequence of nonempty compact polyhedra,
D=limD, and k∈N. Suppose that for all j∈N,
(1)
there exists i>j
such that Hk(gji;Z):Hk(Di;Z)→Hk(Dj;Z) is
the trivial homomorphism, and
2. (2)
there exist infinitely
many i such that Hk−1(Di;Z) is free-abelian.
Then for any abelian group G, Hˇk(D;G)=0.
Lemma 2.9**.**
Let D=(Dj,gjj+1)
be an inverse sequence of nonempty compact polyhedra,
D=limD and n∈N.
Suppose that for all j∈N,
(1)
there exists i>j
such that Hn(gji;Z/p):Hn(Di;Z/p)→Hn(Dj;Z/p) is the
trivial homomorphism,
2. (2)
Hn−1(Dj;Z)* is free-abelian, and*
3. (3)
Hn(Dj;Z)* is free-abelian of finite rank.*
Then Hˇn(D;Z/p)=0.
Proof.
Let j∈N, and choose i>j as in (1) of the hypothesis.
Using (2) and an application of Theorem 54.4(c), page 328 of
[Mu], one sees that the torsion product of
Hn−1(Ds,Z) with Z/p equals [math] for s∈{i,j}. Hence
according to Theorem 55.1 of [Mu] (universal coefficient
theorem for homology), there are natural isomorphisms
λs:Hn(Ds;Z)⊗Z/p→Hn(Ds;Z/p), s∈{i,j}.
[TABLE]
Since Hn(gji;Z/p):Hn(Di;Z/p)→Hn(Dj;Z/p) is
the trivial homomorphism by (1), it follows that Hn(gji;Z)⊗idZ/p
from the diagram above is also the trivial homomorphism.
Let us see what this means for the homomorphism Hn(gji;Z):Hn(Di;Z)→Hn(Dj;Z). According to (3), the
groups Hn(Di;Z) and Hn(Dj;Z) are both (isomorphic to) finite direct sums of copies of Z,
say Hn(Di;Z)≅⊕1rZ and Hn(Dj;Z)≅⊕1mZ, for
r,m∈N. Let us take e1,…,er, and
e1,…,em to be generators of
Hn(Di;Z) and Hn(Dj;Z), respectively. Then, for each q∈{1,…,r}, we have
[TABLE]
and since Hn(gji;Z)⊗idZ/p is trivial, this implies
that each of αj is an integer divisible by p.
Now the commutative diagram of the proof of Lemma 2.7
is valid for G=Z/p, k=n, and the homomorphisms κs, s∈{i,j} are
isomorphisms just as there because that only relies on (2).
[TABLE]
Hence we may perform the steps analogous to those in the proof of Lemma
2.7, as follows.
Let u∈Hn(Dj;Z/p). We claim that Hn(gji;Z/p)(u)=0.
To show this, as in the proof of Lemma 2.7 we only need to show that
λ is the trivial homomorphism. Let
f∈Hom(Hn(Dj;Z),Z/p). Then f:Hn(Dj;Z)→Z/p is
a homomorphism, and λ(f)=f∘Hn(gji;Z). But the properties of
Hn(gji;Z) guarantee that, when followed by a homomorphism landing in Z/p,
this yields the trivial homomorphism. Hence λ(f) is the trivial element of
Hom(Hn(Di;Z),Z/p). Apply Lemma 2.6 to complete this proof.
∎
Corollary 2.10**.**
Let D=(Dj,gjj+1)
be an inverse sequence of nonempty compact polyhedra,
D=limD, and n∈N. Suppose
that for all j∈N,
(1)
there exists i>j
such that Hn(gji;Z/p):Hn(Di;Z/p)→Hn(Dj;Z/p) is the
trivial homomorphism, and there is an infinite subset J⊂N such that
for all j∈J,
2. (2)
Hn−1(Dj;Z)* is free-abelian, and*
3. (3)
Hn(Dj;Z)* is free-abelian of finite rank.*
Then Hˇn(D;Z/p)=0.
In [Na] (see also Theorem 30.1 of [IR]), it was proved that dim≤n is
preserved in the limit of an inverse sequence of metrizable spaces. Let us collect
this fact and some others that we need about limits of inverse sequences of metrizable compacta.
Theorem 2.11**.**
Let T=(Tj,gjj+1) be an inverse
sequence of metrizable compacta and Z=limT. Then,
(1)
Z* is a metrizable compactum,*
2. (2)
if for all j, Tj is connected, Z is connected,
3. (3)
if for all j, Tj=∅, Z=∅, and
4. (4)
if n≥0 and for all j, dimTj≤n, dimZ≤n.
3. Simplicial Complexes, Vertex Stars
For each finite simplicial complex S, we are going to write ∣S∣ to denote its
polyhedron with the weak topology which in this case is compact and metrizable.
We shall be employing subdivisions and simplicial approximations, so let us
note a couple of important facts that can be found in Chapter 3 of [Sp].
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let S be a finite simplicial complex. Then,
(1)
if R is a subdivision of S, then there is a simplicial
approximation φ:∣R∣→∣S∣ of id∣S∣, and
2. (2)
if P is a compact polyhedron and f:P→∣S∣ is a map, then there is a
triangulation T of P such that for every subdivision L of T, there is
a simplicial approximation g:∣L∣→∣S∣ of the map f.
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let S be a finite simplicial complex such that ∣S∣ is
contractible. Then for each k∈N, the inclusion ∣S(k)∣↪∣S(k+1)∣
is homotopic in ∣S(k+1)∣ to a constant map.
Proof.
Each contracting homotopy of ∣S(k)∣↪∣S∣ can be replaced by
a PL-homotopy H:∣S(k)∣×[0,1]→∣S(k+1)∣ where H0 equals the inclusion
∣S(k)∣↪∣S(k+1)∣ and H1 is a constant map.
∎
Next is an elementary fact from homology theory.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let S be a finite simplicial complex, k∈N,
and G an abelian group. Then the inclusion map ∣S(k+1)∣↪∣S∣
induces an isomorphism of Hk(∣S(k+1)∣;G) onto Hk(∣S∣;G).∎
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let T be a finite simplicial
complex and S a subcomplex of T such that ∣S∣ is contractible. Then for
each n∈N, 1≤k<n, and abelian group G, Hk(∣S(n)∣;G)=0.
Proof.
Since ∣S∣ is contractible, then Hk(∣S∣;G)=0. By Lemma 3.3,
k∈N implies that the inclusion ∣S(k+1)∣↪∣S∣ induces an isomorphism of
Hk(∣S(k+1)∣;G) onto Hk(∣S∣;G). This shows that Hk(∣S(k+1)∣;G)=0.
On the other hand, since 1≤k<n, Lemma 3.3 shows that the inclusion
∣S(k+1)∣↪∣S(n)∣
induces an isomorphism of Hk(∣S(k+1)∣;G) onto Hk(∣S(n)∣;G), so the latter equals [math].
∎
Let T be a finite simplicial complex and v∈T(0).
Then st(v,T) will denote the open star of v in T
and st(v,T) will denote the closed star
of v in T. Of course, st(v,T) is an open neighborhood of
v in the compact polyhedron ∣T∣, st(v,T) is
a closed subset of the compact polyhedron ∣T∣, and
st(v,T)⊂st(v,T). Moreover,
each of st(v,T) and st(v,T) is contractible,
and there is a unique subcomplex S of T such that ∣S∣=st(v,T). Lemma 3.4 leads to the next fact about closed stars.
Corollary 3.5**.**
Let T be a finite simplicial
complex, v∈T(0), and S the unique subcomplex of T that triangulates
st(v,T). Suppose that T0 is a subdivision of T. Then,
(1)
there is a unique subcomplex S0 of T0 with ∣S0∣=∣S∣, and
2. (2)
for each n∈N, 1≤k<n, and abelian group G,
Hk(∣S0(n)∣;G)=0.
As usual, when G is an abelian group, n≥0, and T is a simplicial
complex, then Zn(T;G) will denote the set of (simplicial)
G-cycles among the G-chains.222Some
orientation on T is assumed.
Definition 3.6**.**
Whenever σ is an
(n+1)-simplex of a simplicial complex T, then by
∂σ we shall mean the n-dimensional simplicial Z-cycle of
T(n), i.e., ∂σ∈Zn(T(n);Z).333Later we are going
to use ∂σ to denote the combinatorial boundary of
σ (its boundary as a manifold); the reader will have no difficulty distinguishing between
these two uses of the same notation. Subsequently, however, when we deal with
homomorphisms induced by maps, we shall also treat ∂σ as a singular Z-cycle.
Lemma 3.7**.**
Let E be a metrizable compactum, p∈N≥2, n∈N,
and g∈Hn(E;Z/p). Then for each r∈N having the property that p divides r, we have
r⋅g=0∈Hn(E;Z/p).∎
Definition 3.8**.**
Let T be a finite simplicial
complex, v a vertex of T, and n∈N. Denote by S the
subcomplex of T that triangulates st(v,T), by Ev,T the set of
(n+1)-simplexes of T having v as a vertex, and by
mv,T the cardinality of Ev,T.
Lemma 3.9**.**
Taking the notation from
Definition\refstarstruck2, one has that
the group Hn(∣S(n)∣;Z) is free abelian of rank mv,T.
Moreover, if G is an abelian group, mv,T≥1, and we
list Ev,T={σi∣1≤i≤mv,T},
then:
(1)
for each g∈G and 1≤i≤mv,T,
g⋅∂σi lies in Zn(∣S(n)∣;G),
2. (2)
for each z∈Zn(∣S(n)∣;G), there exists a set
{gi∣1≤i≤mv,T}⊂G such that
z=∑i=1mv,Tgi⋅∂σi,
3. (3)
if
p∈N≥2, h∈Zn(∣S(n)∣;Z/p), and r∈Z is
a multiple of p, then r⋅h is an n-dimensional
boundary Z/p-cycle, i.e., it is homologous to [math] in
Zn(∣S(n)∣;Z/p), and
4. (4)
if p∈N≥2, h∈Hn(∣S(n)∣;Z/p), and r∈N is a multiple of p, then
r⋅h=0. ∎
Lemma 3.10**.**
Let T and S be finite simplicial complexes, n∈N, and
f:∣T∣→∣S∣ a map. Suppose that σ is an (n+1)-simplex of T.
(1)
If ρ∈S(n) and f(∂σ)⊂ρ,
then f:∂σ→∣S∣ is homotopic to a constant map, so
for any abelian group G and g∈G, Zn(f;G)(g⋅∂σ) is homologous
to [math] in Zn(∣S∣;G).
2. (2)
Suppose there is an (n+1)-simplex ρ∈S such that f(∂σ)⊂∂ρ.
If p∈N≥2 and f:∂σ→∂ρ has degree
a multiple of p, then for any g∈Z/p, Zn(f;Z/p)(g⋅∂σ) is homologous
to [math] in Zn(∣S∣;Z/p).
If f:∂σ→∂ρ has degree [math], i.e., is null homotopic, then
for any abelian group G and g∈G, Zn(f;G)(g⋅∂σ) is homologous
to [math] in Zn(∣S∣;G). ∎
4. Fundamental Extensions
Definition 4.1 provides the blueprint for the technique we are going to
use to form the extensions that we shall need in our proof of the resolution theorems.
Definition 4.1**.**
Let n∈N and (K,Σn) be a pair such that K is a CW-complex
and Σn⊂K is an embedded copy of Sn. For each finite simplicial complex L
and each σ∈L with dimσ=n+1,
we attach K to ∣L∣ along ∂σ via a homeomorphism
hσ of Σn⊂K to ∂σ, and we denote the attached copy Kσ.
The CW-complex so obtained will be denoted FL,K,Σn,
that is,
[TABLE]
It is of course understood that for each such σ, Kσ∩∣L∣=∂σ
and that if τ∈L with dimτ=n+1, then Kσ∩Kτ=∂σ∩∂τ.
For each CW-complex K and n≥0,
K(n) will denote the n-skeleton of K.
Lemma 4.2**.**
For each (n,L,K,Σn) as in
Definition\refallstickons, it is true that FL,K,Σn(n+1)=∣L(n+1)∣∪⋃{Kσ(n+1)∣(σ∈L)∧(dimσ=n+1)}.∎
Definition 4.3**.**
For each (n,L,K,Σn) as in
Definition\refallstickons, denote,
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.4**.**
For each (n,L,K,Σn) as in
Definition\refallstickons,
[TABLE]
For each (n,L,K,Σn) as in Definition 4.1, there exists a retraction r:FL,K,Σn→∣L∣
such that r(Kσ∖∂σ)⊂intσ whenever
σ∈L and dimσ=n+1. Let us make this formal.
Definition 4.5**.**
For each (n,L,K,Σn) as in
Definition\refallstickons, fix a retraction rL,K,Σn:FL,K,Σn→∣L∣
such that rL,K,Σn(Kσ∖∂σ)⊂intσ whenever σ∈L and dimσ=n+1.
Lemma 4.6**.**
For each (n,L,K,Σn) as in
Definition\refallstickons, the map rL,K,Σn:FL,K,Σn→∣L∣
has the following properties:
(1)
rL,K,Σn(FL,K,Σn∗)⊂∣L(n+1)∣,
2. (2)
rL,K,Σn(x)=x* for all x∈∣L(n)∣,*
3. (3)
if σ∈L with dimσ=n+1, then rL,K,Σn(Kσ)⊂σ, and
rL,K,Σn(Kσ∖∂σ)⊂intσ, and
4. (4)
the restriction of rL,K,Σn to FL,K,Σn(n+1) is a retraction of FL,K,Σn(n+1) to
its subspace ∣L(n+1)∣.∎
Let n∈N and L be a finite simplicial complex. There exists a
subdivision S of L having the property that for each σ∈L
with dimσ=n+1, ∣N(∂σ,S)∣ is a regular neighborhood of ∂σ,
where of course N(∂σ,S) denotes the simplicial
neighborhood of ∂σ in S. For example, we may choose S to be
the second barycentric subdivision of L.
Lemma 4.7**.**
Let n∈N, L a finite simplicial complex,
and S a subdivision of L having the property that for each σ∈L
with dimσ=n+1, ∣N(∂σ,S)∣ is a regular neighborhood of ∂σ.
Then for each σ∈L with dimσ=n+1,
(1)
∂σ⊂∣N(∂σ,S)∣,
2. (2)
∂σ* is a strong deformation retract of ∣N(∂σ,S)∣, and*
3. (3)
∣N(∂σ,S)∣* is a compact ANR.∎*
Definition 4.8**.**
Let n∈N and L be a finite simplicial complex.
Let S be a subdivision of L having the property that for each σ∈L
with dimσ=n+1, ∣N(∂σ,S)∣ is a regular neighborhood of ∂σ.
We shall refer to such an S as an n-regular subdivision of L.
Definition 4.9**.**
Let (n,L,K,Σn) be as in
Definition\refallstickons. Suppose that S is an n-regular subdivision of L.
For each σ∈L with dimσ=n+1, let
[TABLE]
Taking into account Lemma 4.7(2,3) and Definition 4.9, one obtains the next fact.
Lemma 4.10**.**
Let (n,L,K,Σn) be as in Definition\refallstickons.
Suppose that S is an n-regular subdivision of L. Then for each σ∈L with dimσ=n+1,
(1)
Kσ,+* is an absolute neighborhood extensor for compact metrizable spaces,*
2. (2)
Kσ* is a strong deformation retract of Kσ,+, and*
3. (3)
whenever Y is a metrizable compactum with YτK, then YτKσ,+.∎
5. Lemma for an Extension
Lemma 5.1 is critical for our proof of Proposition 8.1. It is one
of the key ingredients in our technique for avoiding complicated extensions, that is, to staying
away from Edwards type lemmas as we mentioned in the Introduction.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let (n,L,K,Σn) be as in Definition\refallstickons.
Suppose that E is a compact polyhedron, f:E→∣L∣ a map, S an n-regular subdivision of L,
and that for each σ∈L with dimσ=n+1, the map f∣f−1(∣N(∂σ,S)∣):f−1(∣N(∂σ,S)∣)→∣N(∂σ,S)∣⊂Kσ,+ extends to a map of E to Kσ,+. Let N be a
triangulation of E that admits a simplicial approximation f1:∣N∣→∣L∣ of the map f.
Then there exists a map h:∣N(n+1)∣→FL,K,Σn∗(Definition\refcorepart) such that,
(1)
h(x)=f1(x)* for all x∈f1−1(∣L(n)∣)∩∣N(n+1)∣, and*
2. (2)
for each σ∈L with dimσ=n+1, h(f1−1(σ)∩∣N(n+1)∣)⊂Kσ.
Proof.
Let M be a subdivision of N that admits a map f2:∣M∣→∣S∣ such that
f2 is simultaneously a simplicial approximation of f and f1. Temporarily fix
σ∈L with dimσ=n+1. We claim that:
(†1)f2(f1−1(∂σ))⊂∂σ,
(†2)f1−1(∂σ)⊂f2−1(∂σ), and
(†3)f2∣f1−1(∂σ):f1−1(∂σ)→∂σ is homotopic
to f1∣f1−1(∂σ):f1−1(∂σ)→∂σ.
Plainly (†2) follows from (†1); let us prove (†1).
Let x∈f1−1(∂σ); then f1(x)∈∂σ which implies that there
exists τ∈S such that f1(x)∈intτ⊂τ⊂∂σ. Since f2:∣M∣→∣S∣
is a simplicial approximation of f1, then f2(x)∈τ⊂∂σ as needed
for (†1). Since {f1(x),f2(x)}⊂τ⊂∂σ, then f1 and f2
are “straight-line” homotopic as maps to ∂σ, so (†3) is also established.
Now let us prove some parallel facts:
(†4)f(f2−1(∂σ))⊂∣N(∂σ,S)∣,
(†5)f2−1(∂σ)⊂f−1(∣N(∂σ,S)∣, and
(†6)f∣f2−1(∂σ):f2−1(∂σ)→∣N(∂σ,S)∣ is homotopic
to f2∣f2−1(∂σ):f2−1(∂σ)→∂σ⊂∣N(∂σ,S)∣.
Plainly (†5) follows from (†4). We proceed to prove (†4).
Let x∈f2−1(∂σ); there exists τ∈S with f(x)∈intτ. Since
f2:∣M∣→∣S∣ is a simplicial approximation of f and τ∈S, then f2(x)∈τ.
But f2(x)∈∂σ∩τ which implies that τ⊂∣N(∂σ,S)∣.
Hence f(x)∈intτ⊂τ⊂∣N(∂σ,S)∣,
which gives us (†4). Since {f(x),f2(x)}⊂τ⊂∣N(∂σ,S)∣, then f
and f2 are “straight-line” homotopic as maps to ∣N(∂σ,S)∣, so (†6) is also established.
By hypothesis, the map
[TABLE]
extends to a map of E to Kσ,+.
This, alongside (†5) and (†6), shows that,
(†7)f2∣f2−1(∂σ):f2−1(∂σ)→∂σ⊂∣N(∂σ,S)∣
extends to a map of E to Kσ,+.
Taking into consideration (†7), (†2), and (†3), one concludes that:
(†8)f1∣f1−1(∂σ):f1−1(∂σ)→∂σ⊂∣N(∂σ,S)∣
extends to a map of E to Kσ,+.
Making use of (†8) and the strong deformation retraction guaranteed us by Lemma 4.7(2),
we have,
(†9)f1∣f1−1(∂σ):f1−1(∂σ)→∂σ⊂∣N(∂σ,S)∣
extends to a map f1,σ:E→Kσ.
Having accomplished the preceding for each fixed σ, now notice that
∣L(n+1)∣=∣L(n)∣∪⋃{σ∣(σ∈L)∧(dimσ=n+1)}.
Of course, f1(∣N(n+1)∣)⊂∣L(n+1)∣. Hence,
There exists a subcomplex N0 of N(n+1) such that ∣N0∣=f1−1(∣L(n)∣)∩∣N(n+1)∣.
Moreover, for each σ∈L with dimσ=n+1, there is also a subcomplex Nσ of
N(n+1) such that ∣Nσ∣=f1−1(σ)∩∣N(n+1)∣.
Using this and (†10) we see that,
(†11)∣N(n+1)∣=∣N0∣∪⋃{∣Nσ∣∣(σ∈L)∧(dimσ=n+1)}.
Taking into account (†9), for each σ∈L with dimσ=n+1, we put
Making use of (†11)–(†15) and (†9), we see that,
[TABLE]
is a map of ∣N(n+1)∣ to FL,K,Σn∗ satisfying (1) and (2). This completes our proof.
∎
6. Eilenberg-MacLane Complexes for Z, Z/p, Q
When X is a space, we shall write XτK to mean that X
is an absolute co-extensor for K. This simply means that if A is a closed subset of X,
and f:A→K is a map, then there is a map g:X→K that extends f. We assume that the
reader is familiar with the concept of an Eilenberg-MacLane CW-complex K of type K(G,n); such
complexes exist for each abelian group G, and for a given abelian group G any CW-complexes K1, K2 of
type K(G,n) are homotopy equivalent. It is well-known that if X is a metrizable compactum and K1, K2 are
Eilenberg-MacLane CW-complexes of type K(G,n), then XτK1 if and only if XτK2.
According to Theorem 1.1 of [Dr],
Lemma 6.1**.**
For each n∈N,
compact metrizable space X, and Eilenberg-MacLane CW-complex K of type K(G,n), dimGX≤n if and only
if XτK.
When we encounter a space X which is homeomorphic to Sn, then we shall
assume that there is a fixed isomorphism between πn(X) and Z.
In this way if Y is also homeomorphic to Sn and f:X→Y is a map,
then the degree of f, denoted deg(f), is well-defined.
In what follows, we will use standard constructions of the CW-complexes K(Z,n), K(Z/p,n),
and K(Q,n) for n∈N and p≥2. For K(Z,n) and K(Q,n) we shall require that n≥2, but
for K(Z/p,n), n≥1 will be permitted. These restrictions on n will typically be implicit in the sequel.
Each of K(Z,n) and K(Z/p,n) respectively contains a unique “canonical” copy ΣZ=K(Z,n)(n) and
ΣZ/p=K(Z/p,n)(n) of Sn. In this setting,
K(Z,n)(n+1)=K(Z,n)(n)=ΣZ; moreover
K(Z/p,n)(n+1) is a standard Moore space of type (Z/p,n), i.e., an (n+1)-cell
Bn+1 attached to ΣZ/p via a map of ∂(Bn+1) of degree p.
We shall denote κZ:ΣZ↪K(Z,n) and
κZ/p:ΣZ/p↪K(Z/p,n).
(∗) In case f:Sn→ΣZ/p
is a map and πn(κZ/p)∘πn(f):πn(Sn)→πn(K(Z/p,n)) is the trivial
map, then deg(f) is a multiple of p.
The situation with K(Q,n) is different because K(Q,n)(n) is a countable wedge, say
⋁{Sin∣i∈N} of copies Sin of Sn. So there is not a canonically unique choice of
Sn as we had above for the groups Z and Z/p.
Definition 6.2**.**
Select a fixed isomorphism ψ:πn(K(Q,n))→Q. We may do this
so that for some i∈N, if we define ΣQ=Sin, then the following is true. Let
κQ:ΣQ↪K(Q,n). Then the composition ψ∘πn(κQ):πn(ΣQ)→Q sends πn(ΣQ) isomorphically onto the standard copy of Z in Q.
Lemma 6.3**.**
Let n∈N and μ be an (n+1)-simplex.
(1)
If f:∂μ→ΣZ is a map such that
κZ∘f:∂μ→K(Z,n) extends to a map f∗:μ→K(Z,n), then
f is homotopic to a constant map.
2. (2)
If f:∂μ→ΣZ/p is a map such that κZ/p∘f:∂μ→K(Z/p,n)
extends to a map f∗:μ→K(Z/p,n)(n+1), then deg(f) is a multiple of p.
3. (3)
If f:∂μ→ΣQ is a map such
that κQ∘f:∂μ→K(Q,n) extends to a map f∗:μ→K(Q,n), then
deg(f)=0.
Proof.
Note that πn(κZ):πn(ΣZ)→πn(K(Z,n)) is an
isomorphism. Assume that f is not homotopic to a constant map. It follows that there exists k∈N such
that deg(f)∈{k,−k}. Select a generator g of πn(∂μ). Then for some
generator g of πn(ΣZ), πn(f)(g)=k⋅g
is a nontrivial element of πn(ΣZ). Hence
πn(κZ)(k⋅g)=πn(κZ)(πn(f)(g))=πn(κZ∘f)(g) is a nontrivial element of
πn(K(Z,n)). But by the assumption in (1), κZ∘f:∂μ→K(Z,n) extends
to the map f∗:μ→K(Z,n) showing that πn(κZ∘f)(g)=πn(κZ)∘πn(f)(g) is the trivial element of πn(K(Z,n)). Since πn(κZ)
is an isomorphism, it has to be true that πn(f)(g) is the trivial element of
πn(K(Z,n)), a contradiction. We have demonstrated (1).
Next we prove (2). Note that K(Z/p,n)(n+1) is a Moore space of type (Z/p,n). We have that
κZ/p∘f:∂μ→K(Z/p,n)(n+1) extends to a map f∗:μ→K(Z/p,n)(n+1).
This shows that πn(κZ/p)∘πn(f)=πn(κZ/p∘f):πn(∂μ)→πn(K(Z/p,n)(n+1)) is the trivial map of πn(∂μ). It follows from (∗) that
deg(f) is a multiple of p.
Let us prove (3). Suppose that deg(f)=0.
Consider the case that deg(f)∈{1,−1}. Then πn(f):πn(∂μ)→πn(ΣQ)
is an isomorphism. This and Definition 6.2, show that
But the assumption that
κQ∘f extends to a map of μ into K(Q,n) shows that the homomorphism
πn(κQ∘f) is trivial, which in turn implies that
ψ∘πn(κQ∘f) sends πn(∂μ) trivially into Q, a contradiction.
We consider the case that k≥2 and deg(f)∈{k,−k}. Then
(†2) there is a generator g of πn(ΣQ) such that
πn(f)(g)=k⋅g which is a nontrivial element of πn(ΣQ).
Hence, ψ∘πn(κQ)(k⋅g)=ψ∘πn(κQ)(πn(f)(g))=ψ∘πn(κQ)∘πn(f)(g)=ψ∘πn(κQ∘f)(g)
is a nontrivial element of Z⊂Q. But the assumption in (3) implies that κQ∘f
is homotopic to a constant map, so ψ∘πn(κQ∘f)(g) is the trivial element of Z⊂Q,
a contradiction.
∎
7. Simple Extensions
In [Wa], [Dr] (see also [RT]), and [Le], the proofs of Theorems
1.1–1.3 made
use of increasingly more complex extensions. One of our goals, as stated in the Introduction, is to provide
proofs of these theorems that employ much simpler extensions. The groundwork for producing them was laid in
Sections 4 and 6. Now we shall provide the precise definitions for the
extensions we are going to use.
When n∈N is given, G∈{Z,Z/p,Q}, and L is a finite simplicial complex, then the CW-complex
FL,K,Σn of Definition 4.1 will be constructed with Σn=ΣG,
the particular canonical copy of Sn in K (see Definition 6.2 in case
G=Q), and we shall conserve notation by simply denoting FL,K,Σn=FL,K.
For each σ∈L with dimσ=n+1, the inclusion κσ:∂σ↪Kσ will correspond to the inclusion κG:ΣG↪K, G∈{Z,Z/p,Q}.
Lemma 6.3 can now be applied to arrive at the following.
Lemma 7.1**.**
Let L be a finite simplicial complex, σ∈L with
dimσ=n+1, and μ an (n+1)-simplex.
(1)
If K=K(Z,n) and f:∂μ→∂σ is a map such that
f=κσ∘f:∂μ→Kσ extends to a map f∗:μ→Kσ, then deg(f)=0.
2. (2)
If K=K(Z/p,n) and f:∂μ→∂σ is a map such that
f=κσ∘f:∂μ→Kσ extends to a map f∗:μ→Kσ(n+1), then
deg(f) is a multiple of p.
3. (3)
If K=K(Q,n) and f:∂μ→∂σ is a map such
that f=κσ∘f:∂μ→Kσ extends to a map f∗:μ→Kσ, then
deg(f)=0.
8. Proposition for Control of the (n+1)-skeleton
Proposition 8.1**.**
Let n∈N, K∈{K(Z,n),K(Z/p,n),K(Q,n)}, E a
compact polyhedron, L a finite simplicial complex,
p:E→∣L∣ a map, and S an n-regular subdivision of L. Suppose that for each σ∈L
with dimσ=n+1, the map p∣(p)−1(∣N(∂σ,S)∣):(p)−1(∣N(∂σ,S)∣)→∣N(∂σ,S)∣⊂Kσ,+ extends to a map of E to Kσ,+. Let N be a
triangulation of E that admits a simplicial approximation p1:∣N∣→∣L∣ of the map p,
L0 a subdivision of N, and φ:∣L0∣→∣N∣ a simplicial approximation to id:∣L0∣→∣N∣.
Then there exists a map gK:∣N(n+1)∣→∣L(n+1)∣ such that:
(1)
gK* is an L-modification of both \overline{p}_{1}\big{|}|N^{(n+1)}|:|N^{(n+1)}|\to|L^{(n+1)}|\subset|L|
and \overline{p}\big{|}|N^{(n+1)}|:|N^{(n+1)}|\to|L|;*
2. (2)
gK(∣N(n+1)∣)⊂∣L(n+1)∣, gK(∣N(n)∣)⊂∣L(n)∣,
gK∘φ(∣L0(n+1)∣)⊂∣L(n+1)∣, and gK∘φ(∣L0(n)∣)⊂∣L(n)∣;
3. (3)
for each x∈∣L0(n+1)∣, there exists σ∈L with {p(x),gK∘φ(x)}⊂σ;
4. (4)
for each ν∈L0(n+1), p1(φ(ν))∈L(n+1),
and gK(φ(ν))⊂p1(φ(ν));
5. (5)
gK(x)=p1(x)* for all x∈(p1)−1(∣L(n)∣)∩∣N(n+1)∣;*
6. (6)
in case K=K(Z,n) and τ∈N(n+1), then
gK(τ)⊂∣L(n)∣ so gK(∣N(n+1)∣)⊂∣L(n)∣; the preceding implies that
gK∘φ(∣L0(n+1)∣)⊂gK(∣N(n+1)∣)⊂∣L(n)∣.
Now let v∈N(0), Nv, L0,v respectively be the subcomplexes of N, L0
with ∣Nv∣=∣L0,v∣=st(v,N), and L be a subcomplex of L with
gK(∣Nv∣)⊂L. Then,
7. (7)
both gK(∣Nv(n)∣)⊂∣L(n)∣ and
gK(φ(∣L0,v(n)∣))⊂∣L(n)∣,
8. (8)
In case K=K(Z,n), then g_{K}\circ\varphi\big{|}|L_{0,v}^{(n)}|:|L_{0,v}^{(n)}|\to|\widetilde{L}^{(n)}| is null homotopic;
9. (9)
in case K=K(Z/p,n), then the induced homomorphism H_{n}(g_{K}\circ\varphi\big{|}|L_{0,v}^{(n)}|;\operatorname{{\mathbb{Z}}}/p):H_{n}(|L_{0,v}^{(n)}|;\operatorname{{\mathbb{Z}}}/p)\to H_{n}(|\widetilde{L}^{(n)}|;\operatorname{{\mathbb{Z}}}/p) is trivial, and
10. (10)
in case K=K(Q,n), then the induced homomorphism H_{n}(g_{K}\circ\varphi\big{|}|L_{0,v}^{(n)}|;\operatorname{{\mathbb{Z}}}):H_{n}(|L_{0,v}^{(n)}|;\operatorname{{\mathbb{Z}}})\to H_{n}(|\widetilde{L}^{(n)}|;\operatorname{{\mathbb{Z}}}) is trivial.
Proof.
We shall treat the pair \big{(}|N^{(n+1)}|,(\overline{p}_{1})^{-1}(|L^{(n)}|)\cap|N^{(n+1)}|\big{)}
as a relative CW-complex (see 7.6.4, p. 401 of [Sp] for the notion of a relative CW-complex).
We want to apply Lemma 5.1 to (n,L,K,Σn) with K as given and Σn
the canonical copy of Sn in K (see Section 7). The map f of Lemma 5.1
is replaced by our p:E→∣L∣; the simplicial approximation f1 is the current p1.
Let hK:∣N(n+1)∣→FL,K∗ be a map as granted to us by Lemma 5.1.
From Lemma 5.1(1), it is seen that hK is a pair map,
[TABLE]
Of course, (FL,K∗,∣L(n)∣) is also a relative CW-complex.
Part (1) of Lemma 5.1 shows in addition that since hK equals the simplicial map
p1 on (p1)−1(∣L(n)∣)\break∩∣N(n+1)∣, then
(†1)hK is simplicial from (p1)−1(∣L(n)∣)∩∣N(n+1)∣ to ∣L(n)∣.
Using the cellular approximation theorem (7.17, p. 404 of [Sp]),
one finds a relative cellular approximation
[TABLE]
of the map hK. This is done so that
(†2)hK∗=hK=p1 on (p1)−1(∣L(n)∣)∩∣N(n+1)∣.
The cellular approximation theorem requires that if x∈∣N(n+1)∣ and hK(x) lies in a
subcomplex M of FL,K∗, then hK∗(x)∈M(n+1). It then follows that
(†3) if σ∈L with dimσ=n+1, x∈∣N(n+1)∣, and
hK(x)∈Kσ, then hK∗(x)∈Kσ(n+1).
(†4)rL,K:(FL,K∗,∣L(n)∣)→(∣L(n+1)∣,∣L(n)∣) as a pair map where
rL,K(x)=x for all x∈∣L(n)∣.
Now we define
(†5)gK:∣N(n+1)∣→∣L(n+1)∣ by gK(x)=rL,K∘hK∗(x).
From this and (†4), it follows that,
(†6) if x∈∣N(n+1)∣ and hK∗(x)∈∣L(n)∣, then gK(x)=hK∗(x).
To check (1), let x∈∣N(n+1)∣ and let τ∈L be the unique simplex with p(x)∈intτ.
Since p1 is a simplicial approximation of p, then
p1(x)∈τ. But x∈∣N(n+1)∣ and p1
is simplicial, so there exists a unique σ∈L(n+1) with σ⊂τ
and p1(x)∈intσ.
If x∈(p1)−1(∣L(n)∣)∩∣N(n+1)∣, then by (†2),
hK∗(x)=hK(x)=p1(x)∈∣L(n)∣.
Using (†6), one sees that gK(x)=hK∗(x)=p1(x)∈σ⊂τ. So gK is an
L-modification of p1 with respect to the domain (p1)−1(∣L(n)∣)∩∣N(n+1)∣.
The alternate case is that x∈/(p1)−1(∣L(n)∣) and
hence p1(x)∈∣L(n+1)∣∖∣L(n)∣.
So dimσ=n+1. By Lemma 5.1(2),
hK((p1)−1(σ)∩∣N(n+1)∣)⊂Kσ.
But x∈(p1)−1(σ)∩∣N(n+1)∣, so hK(x)∈Kσ.
This puts hK∗(x)∈Kσ.
Applying Lemma 4.6(2,3), one sees that rL,K(Kσ)⊂σ.
Therefore gK(x)=rL,K∘hK∗(x)∈σ⊂τ. So gK is an
L-modification of p1 with respect to the complementary part of the domain.
Putting the two cases together, one sees that gK is an L-modification of
\overline{p}_{1}\big{|}|N^{(n+1)}|:|N^{(n+1)}|\to|L^{(n+1)}|.
So the first part of (1) is true. To show that gK is an L-modification of
\overline{p}\big{|}|N^{(n+1)}|:|N^{(n+1)}|\to|L|, let x∈∣N(n+1)∣ and σ∈L
be the unique simplex with p(x)∈intσ. Then because p1:∣N∣→∣L∣
is a simplicial approximation of p, one has that p1(x)∈σ.
By the first part of (1), gK(x)∈σ, as required to complete our proof of (1).
Statement (2) follows from (1) and the fact that \overline{p}_{1}\big{|}|N^{(n+1)}|:|N^{(n+1)}|\to|L^{(n+1)}|
is simplicial, and hence both gK(∣N(n+1)∣)⊂∣L(n+1)∣ and gK(∣N(n)∣)\break⊂∣L(n)∣
hold.
Now we prove (3). Let x∈∣L0(n+1)∣⊂∣N∣, σ∈L be the unique simplex
with p(x)∈intσ,
μ∈L0(n+1) the unique simplex with x∈intμ, and λ∈N
the unique simplex with x∈intλ. Then φ(μ)∈N(n+1)
and φ(x)∈φ(μ)⊂λ.
Now, p1:∣N∣→∣L∣ is a simplicial approximation of p,
so p1(x)∈σ. It follows that p1(λ)⊂σ, so
p1∘φ(x)∈σ. But, gK is an L-modification of p1,
so gK∘φ(x)∈σ. Thus {gK∘φ(x),p(x)}⊂σ.
The first part of (4) is true because both p1 and φ are simplicial.
The second part comes from the first part and (1). One obtains (5) from (†2), (†4), and (†5).
In order to prove properties from (6) onward, let us notice some additional facts.
Since p1:∣N∣→∣L∣ is simplicial, then for each τ∈N(n+1), p1(τ)∈L(n+1). Let us use this in proving that,
(†7) if τ∈N(n+1) and dimτ=n+1=dimp1(τ),
then hK∗(τ)⊂Kp1(τ)(n+1),
and hK∗(∂τ)⊂Kp1(τ)(n)=∂(p1(τ)).
Now τ⊂(p1)−1(p1(τ))∩∣N(n+1)∣.
By Lemma 5.1(2) with p1(τ) in place of σ,
hK((p1)−1(p1(τ))∩∣N(n+1)∣)⊂Kp1(τ). By (†3),
hK∗((p1)−1(p1(τ))∩∣N(n+1)∣)⊂Kp1(τ)(n+1).
Hence the first part of (†7) holds true. The second part is true because
hK∗ is cellular. Next we show that,
(†8) if τ∈N(n+1) and dimτ=n+1=dimp1(τ),
then gK(τ)⊂p1(τ),
gK(∂τ)⊂∂(p1(τ)), and gK∣∂τ=hK∗∣∂τ.
By the first part of (†7), hK∗(τ)⊂Kp1(τ)(n+1), and
by (†5), x∈τ implies that gK(x)=rL,K∘hk∗(x). Apply this with
Lemma 4.6(3) to obtain the first part of (†8). The second
and third parts follow respectively from the second part of (†7) and (†6).
If we put together (†7) and (†8), we arrive at the next fact.
(†9) if τ∈N(n+1) and dimτ=n+1=dim(p1(τ)), then
gK∣∂τ:∂τ→∂(p1(τ)) extends to a map
of τ to Kp1(τ).
To prove (6), consider first the case that p1(τ)⊂∣L(n)∣, i.e.,
p1(τ)∈L(n). Then use
(5) to see that gK(τ)=p1(τ)⊂∣L(n)∣. In the complementary case, p1(τ)∈L(n+1) and dimp1(τ)=n+1.
Note that since K=K(Z,n), then Kp1(τ)(n+1)=Kp1(τ)(n)=∂(p1(τ)). This and (†7) show that hK∗(τ)⊂∂(p1(τ))⊂∣L(n)∣. Now employ (†6) to see that
gK(τ)=hK∗(τ)⊂∂(p1(τ))⊂∣L(n)∣. The first part of (7) follows
from the second part of (2); its second part uses the first part and the fact that φ is a simplicial
approximation of the identity. As to (8),
use Lemma 3.2 to see that there is a homotopy H:∣L0,v(n)∣×[0,1]→∣L0,v(n+1)∣
between the inclusion ι:∣L0,v(n)∣↪∣L0,v(n+1)∣ and
a constant map. Now apply (6) to the homotopy gK∘φ∘H:∣L0,v(n)∣×[0,1]→∣L(n)∣ (with appropriate domain restrictions) to get a null homotopy
as desired in (8).
In proving (9) and (10) we shall use the following fact from Lemma 3.9.
(†10)
There exists m∈N and a set {σi∣1≤i≤m} of
(n+1)-simplexes of Nv, such that for any abelian group G and each z∈Zn(∣Nv(n)∣;G),
there is a set {gi∣1≤i≤m}⊂G with z=∑i=1mgi⋅∂σi.
Statement (9) will be true if we can prove that
(†11)Hn(gK;Z/p):Hn(∣Nv(n)∣;Z/p)→Hn(L(n);Z/p) is trivial.
We see that (†11) is true if for each z=∑i=1mgi⋅∂σi∈Zn(∣Nv(n)∣;Z/p), Zn(gK;Z/p)(z) is homologous to [math] in
Zn(L(n);Z/p). Let 1≤i≤m and with σi in place of τ,
let us consider the two cases that we explored in our proof of (6) above. In the first
of these, we have that p1(σi)∈L(n) and gK(σi)=p1(σi).
It follows that gK maps ∂σi trivially into ∣L(n)∣. So,
Zn(gK;Z/p)(gi⋅∂σi) is homologous to [math] in Zn(L(n);Z/p).
In the second case, using (†9) with σi replacing τ, one has that gK∣∂σi:∂σi→∂(p1(σi)) extends
to a map of σi into Kp1(σi)(n+1). By Lemma
7.1(2), gK∣∂σi:∂σi→∂(p1(σi)) has degree a multiple of p.
From this and the first part of Lemma 3.10(2), it follows that Zn(gK;Z/p)(gi⋅∂σi)
is homologous to [math] in Zn(∂(p1(σi));Z/p) and hence in
Zn(L(n);Z/p). This gives us (9). To obtain (10), use the same argument
we just made, but replace Z/p with Z and the first part of Lemma 3.10(2) by
the second part of Lemma 3.10(2).
∎
9. Extensor Lemma
For the remainder of this paper, I∞ will denote the
Hilbert cube, i.e., I∞=∏{Ii∣i∈N} where
Ii=[0,1] for each i. For each k∈N, we use Ik to denote
{x∈I∞∣xi=0fori>k}.
Of course if 1≤j≤k, then Ij⊂Ik, and pjk:Ik→Ij denotes the coordinate projection.
If P⊂Ik, then
P[∞] will designate the set of x in I∞ whose first k coordinates
are the same as those of an element of P.
Plainly if P⊂Q⊂Ik, then P[∞]⊂Q[∞]. One sees that if P is closed, respectively open, in Ik, then
P[∞] is closed, respectively open, in I∞.
Let pk,∞:I∞→Ik denote the coordinate projection of the Hilbert cube to its finite part,
and we have that (pj,∞∣Ik)∘pk,∞=pj,∞:I∞→Ij.
It is therefore true that
[TABLE]
If 1≤i≤j≤k, then
[TABLE]
We shall use the metric ρ on I∞ given by
ρ(x,y)=∑i=1∞2i∣xi−yi∣.
With this metric on I∞, diamI∞=1. Moreover, if 1≤j≤k
and y∈Ik, then
[TABLE]
Similarly, for any x∈I∞,
[TABLE]
The main result of this section is Lemma 9.3, a type of “extensor lemma.” It provides us
with a statement, see (2) of that lemma, about extending a map under the condition that a given compactum X is
a subspace of I∞. A couple of preliminaries will be useful.
Lemma 9.1**.**
Let K be a CW-complex.
Then K has an open cover V such that any two
V-close maps of any space to K are homotopic.
Proof.
There exists a simplicial complex L such that
∣L∣m, that is ∣L∣ with the metric topology, is homotopy
equivalent to K. Choose a homotopy equivalence
f:K→∣L∣m. By Theorem III.11.3 (page 106) of [Hu],
∣L∣m is an ANR. Theorem IV.1.1 (page 111) of [Hu]
shows that there is an open cover W of ∣L∣m
having the property that any two W-close maps of
any space to ∣L∣m are homotopic. The open cover needed for
K is V=f−1(W).
∎
Lemma 9.2**.**
Let X⊂I∞ be compact and nonempty.
Then there exist an increasing sequence (nj) in N and a sequence (Pj)
of nonempty compact polyhedra Pj⊂Inj such that for all j∈N:
(1)
X⊂intI∞(Pj[∞])⊂Pj[∞]⊂N(X,j2),
2. (2)
pnjnj+1(Pj+1)⊂intInjPj, and
3. (3)
Pj+1[∞]⊂intI∞(Pj[∞]).
Then,
(∗1)* X=⋂{Pj[∞]∣j∈N}.*
Suppose moreover, that j∈N and Bj⊂Pj. Then,
(∗2)* if k≥j, and Bk=(pnjnk)−1(Bj)∩Pk, one has that
Bk⊂Pk⊂Ink and pnjnk(Bk)⊂Bj, and*
(∗3)* if we put Bj,∞=pnj,∞−1(Bj)∩X, then for any open
neighborhood S of Bj,∞ in I∞, there exists k≥j such
that for all l≥k, Bl⊂S.*
If the increasing sequence (nj) is replaced by an increasing subsequence, then
all of the above still hold true.
Proof.
We shall construct the sets Pj by recursion. Put n1=1 and P1=I1.
One sees that P1⊂P1[∞]=I∞, so (1) is true in case j=1
since diamI∞=1. Because we are using a recursive
construction, when we come to a particular j, we only have to consider statements (1)–(3)
“up to j.” Hence (2) and (3) need not be considered yet, and we will deal with
(∗1)–(∗3) later.
Suppose that j∈N, and we have found finite sequences 1=n1<⋯<nj
in N and compact polyhedra P1,…,Pj such that
for 1≤s≤j, Ps⊂Ins, and (1)–
(3) are true up to j.
One may choose nj+1∈N such that nj+1>nj and X⊂(pnj+1,∞(X))[∞]⊂N(X,j+12).
There is a neighborhood V of pnj+1,∞(X) in Inj+1 such that
V[∞]⊂N(X,j+12). Choose a compact
polyhedron Pj+1 of Inj+1 so that,
pnj+1,∞(X)⊂intInj+1Pj+1⊂Pj+1⊂V. From this, X⊂(pnj+1,∞(X))[∞]⊂(intI∞Pj+1)[∞]⊂Pj+1[∞]⊂V[∞]⊂N(X,j+12). This gives us (1) for j+1.
Notice that (1) for j implies,
pnj,∞(X)=pnjnj+1∘pnj+1,∞(X)⊂intInjPj. Hence,
pnj+1,∞(X)⊂(pnjnj+1)−1(intInj(Pj)).
Thus, making Pj+1 smaller if necessary, we may have (1) and
simultaneously, Pj+1⊂(pnjnj+1)−1(intInj(Pj)).
This achieves (2) for j+1. From (2) we get (3).
One gets (∗1) readily from (1), and (∗2) is true for elementary reasons.
To prove (∗3) let S be an open neighborhood of Bj,∞ in
I∞. If the conclusion of (∗3) is not true, then there
is an increasing sequence (mi) in N, m1≥j, so that
for each i, there exists bi∈Bmi∖S⊂Pmi. Passing to a subsequence if necessary,
we may assume that the sequence (bi) in the compactum
I∞∖S converges in I∞ to b∈I∞∖S.
Applying (∗1) and (∗2) along with the fact that bi∈Pmi, one sees that b∈X∖Bj,∞, from which we deduce that pnj,∞(b)∈/Bj.
For each i, pnjsi(bi)=pnj,∞(bi)∈Bj, si=nmi.
Hence {pnj,∞(bi)∣i∈N}⊂Bj. Since Bj is closed in
Pj, pnj,∞ is a map, and (bi) converges to b, then pnj,∞(b)∈Bj, a
contradiction. This yields (∗3). We leave the validation of the final statement
to the reader.
∎
In reading Lemma 9.3, one should consult Lemma 9.2(2)
to see that whenever j≤l, then pnjnl(Pl)⊂Pj.
Lemma 9.3**.**
Let X⊂I∞, (nj), (Pj) be as in
Lemma\refintersectinH, and K be a CW-complex
with XτK. The following are true.
(1)
Suppose that j∈N and Bj is a nonempty closed subset of Pj.
For each k≥j, let Bk=(pnjnk)−1(Bj)∩Pk.
If M is a finite subcomplex of K and f:Bj→M is
a map, then there exists k≥j such that for all l≥k, there
is a map f∗:Pl→K that extends the composition f∘pnjnl∣Bl:Bl→M, where we treat pnjnl∣Bl:Bl→Bj.
2. (2)
Suppose that K∈{K(Z,n),K(Z/p,n),K(Q,n)} and Lj is a triangulation of
Pj. Then there exists k≥j
such that for all l≥k, there is a triangulation Nl of Pl,
a simplicial approximation pj:∣Nl∣→∣Lj∣ of pnjnl:Pl→Pj, and
a map gK:∣Nl(n+1)∣→∣Lj(n+1)∣ as in
Proposition\refpushandshove2 where (E,N,L,p,p1)
of that proposition is replaced by (Pl,Nl,Lj,pnjnl,pj) in
the present context.
Proof.
We shall first prove (1).
Observe that Bj,∞=pnj,∞−1(Bj)∩X is a closed subset of X and that
pnj,∞(Bj,∞)⊂Bj. Since XτK, then
the map f∘pnj,∞∣Bj,∞:Bj,∞→M
extends to a map h:X→M where M is a
finite subcomplex of K and M⊂M. Since
M is an ANR, we may additionally
assume that there is an open neighborhood U
of X in I∞ and that h:U→M.
Employing Lemma 9.1,
select an open cover V of M
such that for any space Y, any maps g1:Y→M
and g2:Y→M
that are V-close are homotopic. Let V1
be an open cover of M that star-refines V.
Choose an open cover W of Bj such that if
W∈W, then there
exists VW∈V1 with f(W)⊂VW.
Select a cover R of
X by sets open in U having the property that for each
R∈R, there exists VR∈V1 with
h(R)⊂VR. Let S=⋃R⊂U. Then
S is an open neighborhood of X in I∞, and of course Bj,∞⊂X. So
by (∗3) of Lemma 9.2, we may choose k0∈N so that k0≥j
and for all l≥k0,
Bl⊂S. Using Lemma 9.2(3) and Lemma 9.2((∗1)), we may
also require that for such l, Pl⊂S.
Put B∗=Bj,∞∪⋃{Bl∣l≥k0}⊂S. An
application of Lemma 9.2((∗2)) yields that pnj,∞∣B∗:B∗→Bj is a map.
For each b∈Bj,∞,
select an open neighborhood Eb of b in B∗ such that pnj,∞(Eb)
is contained in an element Wb of W and that in
addition, there exists Rb∈R with Eb⊂Rb.
Let S0=⋃{Eb∣b∈Bj,∞}. Then S0 is an
open neighborhood of Bj,∞ in B∗⊂I∞. So
there is an open subset S1 of I∞ having the property that S1∩B∗=S0.
Plainly, S1 is an open neighborhood of Bj,∞ in I∞.
An application of (∗3) of Lemma 9.2, with S1 in place of S gives
us the existence of a k≥k0 so that for all l≥k, we have Bl⊂S1.
For such l, Bl⊂S1∩B∗=S0.
We are going to show that for all l≥k,
f∘pnjnl∣Bl:Bl→∣M∣⊂∣M∣
is homotopic to h∣Bl:Bl→∣M∣.
For in that case, if we define h0=h∣Bl:Bl→∣M∣, then of course
since Pl⊂S, h0 extends to the map
h∣Pl:Pl→∣M∣, and the homotopy
extension theorem will complete our proof of (1).
Let x∈Bl. It will be sufficient to show that
f∘pnjnl(x) and h0(x)
lie in an element of V.
There exists b∈Bj,∞ such that x∈Eb. Now
b∈Eb⊂Rb∈R. It follows that
h({b,x})={h(b),h(x)}={h(b),h0(x)}⊂V1=VRb∈V1. One sees from the
definition of h and the fact
that b∈Bj,∞, that h(b)=f∘pnj,∞(b).
So we have that {f∘pnj,∞(b),h0(x)}⊂V1∈V1.
We know that pnj,∞(b)∈pnj,∞(Eb)⊂Wb∈W.
Thus f∘pnj,∞(b)∈f∘pnj,∞(Eb)⊂f(Wb)⊂V2=VWb∈V1.
Now x∈Eb∩Bl⊂Eb∩Pl⊂Eb∩Inl, so pnj,∞(x)=pnjnl(x)∈pnj,∞(Eb), and we see that f∘pnjnl(x)∈f∘pnj,∞(Eb)⊂V2.
Hence, {f∘pnj,∞(b),f∘pnjnl(x)}⊂V2. Since V1 is a star-refinement of V,
f∘pnj,∞(b)∈V1∩V2, h0(x)∈V1,
and f∘pnjnl(x)∈V2,
one may find V∈V with {f∘pnjnl(x),h0(x)}⊂V1∪V2⊂V. Our proof of (1) is complete.
Now we must prove (2). Let S be an n-regular subdivision of Lj. Suppose
that σ∈Lj with dimσ=n+1. Let M=∣N(∂σ,S)∣,
and treat M as a finite CW-subcomplex of Kσ,+.
By Lemma 4.10(3), XτKσ,+.
Denote fσ=id:M→M, and put Bj=M. Apply (1) to these data to get kσ≥j
as indicated there. Put k=max{kσ∣(σ∈Lj)∧(dimσ=n+1)}.
Hence for all σ∈Lj with dimσ=n+1 and
l≥k, there is a map fσ∗:Pl→Kσ,+
that extends the composition fσ∘pnjnl∣(pnjnl)−1(∣N(∂σ,S)∣):(pnjnl)−1(∣N(∂σ,S)∣)→∣N(∂σ,S)∣.
Suppose that l≥k. Let E=Pl, p=pnjnl∣Pl:Pl→Pj,
and Nl be a triangulation of Pl that
admits a simplicial approximation pj:∣Nl∣→∣Lj∣ of the map p.
Now apply Proposition 8.1 to get a map gK:∣Nl(n+1)∣→∣Lj(n+1)∣
as requested.
∎
10. Epsilons, Deltas, Maps, and Fibers
We rely on the notation established in the
first part of Section 9 concerning the Hilbert cube I∞
and its metric ρ. Throughout this section X⊂I∞
will denote a nonempty compactum.
Assume in addition that we are given an increasing sequence (nj) in N and a sequence
(Pj) of nonempty compact polyhedra Pj⊂Inj satisfying (1)-(3) of Lemma\refintersectinH. The following technical lemma is similar to Lemma 3.1
of [AJR] (repeated in [RT] as Lemma 2.1).
Lemma 10.1**.**
Suppose that for each j∈N we have selected a closed subset Tj of Pj, δj>0,
ϵj>0, and a map gjj+1:Tj+1→Tj so that:
(1)
if u, v∈I∞ and
ρ(u,v)≤ϵj+1, then ρ(pnj,∞(u),pnj,∞(v))<δj,
2. (2)
9⋅2−nj<ϵj,
3. (3)
ρ(gjj+1(u),pnjnj+1(u))<δj* for all u∈Tj+1, and*
4. (4)
0<δj<21−nj=2⋅2−nj.
Put T=(Tj,gjj+1), and Z=limT.
Then Z is a metrizable compactum, and
for each z=(a1,a2,…)∈Z⊂∏j=1∞Tj,
(∗1)
the associated sequence (aj)
is a Cauchy sequence in I∞ whose limit lies in X, and
2. (∗2)
the function π:Z→X given by π(z)=j→∞lim(aj) is a map.
Fix x∈X and for each j∈N, let Bx,j=N(pnj,∞(x),2δj)∩Tj,Bx,j#=N(pnj,∞(x),ϵj)∩Tj. Then,
(∗3)
Bx,j, Bx,j# are closed in Tj
and Bx,j⊂Bx,j#⊂Tj⊂Pj, and
2. (∗4)
gjj+1(Bx,j+1#)⊂Bx,j.
If we let Tx=(Bx,j,gjj+1) and Tx#=(Bx,j#,gjj+1), then,
(∗5)
limTx=limTx#⊂Z,
2. (∗6)
π−1(x)=limTx,
3. (∗7)
if for each j one has chosen Ex,j with Bx,j⊂Ex,j⊂Bx,j#, then gjj+1(Ex,j+1)⊂Ex,j and
with Ex=(Ex,j,gjj+1), π−1(x)=limEx=limTx, and lastly
4. (∗8)
if Bx,j=∅ for each j, then
π−1(x)=∅.
Proof.
Since each Tj is a metrizable compactum, then by Theorem 2.11(1),
Z=limT is a metrizable compactum.
Employing (†5) of Section 9, we have,
(†1) for all x∈I∞ and j∈N, ρ(pnj,∞(x),x)=ρ(pnjnj+1∘pnj+1,∞(x),x)≤2−nj.
The triangle inequality along with (†1), (3), and (4) show
that, independently of choice of z=(a1,a2,…)∈Z, for all j∈Nρ(aj,aj+1)=ρ(gjj+1(aj+1),aj+1)≤ρ(gjj+1(aj+1),pnjnj+1(aj+1))+ρ(pnjnj+1(aj+1),aj+1)=ρ(gjj+1(aj+1),pnjnj+1(aj+1))+ρ(pnj,∞(aj+1),aj+1)<δj+2−nj<21−nj+2−nj=2⋅2−nj+2−nj=3⋅2−nj<22⋅2−nj, so
(†2) independently of choice of z=(a1,a2,…)∈Z, for all
j∈Nρ(aj,aj+1)<22−nj.
From (†2) and the fact that (nj) is increasing, such (aj) is a Cauchy sequence in I∞.
An application of Lemma 9.2(3) shows that
for each j, Pj+1[∞]⊂Pj[∞].
By Lemma 9.2(∗1), X=⋂j=1∞Pj[∞]⊂I∞. Since aj∈Tj⊂Pj⊂Pj[∞]
for each j, one concludes the validity of (∗1).
The statement (∗2) is true since (†2) shows that π is the
limit of the uniformly convergent sequence of maps πj:Z→Inj⊂I∞ where
πj(z)=aj whenever z=(a1,a2,…)∈Z.
We prove (∗3) by noting that (4) and (2) imply that 2δj<ϵj
so that Bx,j⊂Bx,j#.
Next let u∈Bx,j+1#⊂N(pnj+1,∞(x),ϵj+1). Thus,
(†3)ρ(u,pnj+1,∞(x))≤ϵj+1, and u∈Tj+1.
By hypothesis, gjj+1(u)∈Tj. So it remains to prove that
(†4)ρ(gjj+1(u),pnj,∞(x))<2δj.
As a consequence of (1) and the first part of (†3),
ρ(pnj,∞(u),pnj,∞∘pnj+1,∞(x))=ρ(pnjnj+1(u),pnj,∞(x))<δj. This,
the triangle inequality, and (3) show that ρ(gij+1(u),pnj,∞(x))≤ρ(gij+1(u),pnj,∞(u))+ρ(pnj,∞(u),\breakpnj,∞(x))=ρ(gjj+1(u),pnjnj+1(u))+ρ(pnjnj+1(u),pnj,∞(x))<δj+δj=2δj. This validates (†4) and hence
establishes (∗4). Item (∗5) is an immediate consequence of (∗3) and (∗4).
We now want to prove (∗6), that π−1(x)=limTx. If
a=(a1,a2,…) is a thread of Tx, then for j∈N, aj∈Bx,j,
and hence ρ(aj,pnj,∞(x))≤2δj. By applying this, (†1),
and (4), ρ(aj,x)≤ρ(aj,pnj,∞(x))+ρ(pnj,∞(x),x)≤2δj+2−nj≤5⋅2−nj. Hence, π(a)=lim(aj)=x, so
limTx⊂π−1(x).
Towards the opposite inclusion, suppose that a thread (a1,a2,…)
of T lies in π−1(x). Apply the triangle inequality, the
fact that (aj) converges to x, (†1), (†2), (4), and (2) to see that when j>1,
ρ(aj,pnj,∞(x))≤ρ(aj,x)+ρ(x,pnj,∞(x))≤∑k=j∞ρ(ak,ak+1)+2−nj<∑k=j∞22−nk+2−nj≤2⋅22−nj+2−nj=9⋅2−nj<ϵj. This puts aj∈Bx,j#. So
(a1,a2,…)∈limTx#=limTx, showing that π−1(x)⊂limTx. Hence π−1(x)=limTx as we had
proclaimed.
The statement (∗7) is plainly true. Employing Theorem 2.11(3) and (∗6),
one sees that if Bx,j=∅ for each j, then limTx=π−1(x)=∅, which establishes (∗8).
∎
Lemma 10.2**.**
Let j∈N, ϵj>0, Nj a triangulation
of Pj with 2⋅meshNj<ϵj, λj be a Lebesgue number of the open cover
Nj={st(v,Nj)∣v∈Nj(0)} of Pj, δj>0, and
4⋅δj<λj. Then for all x∈X, there exists vx,j∈Nj(0) such
that N(pnj,∞(x),2δj)⊂st(vx,j,Nj)⊂N(pnj,∞(x),ϵj).
Proof.
By (∗1) of Lemma 9.2, x∈Pj[∞], so pnj,∞(x)∈Pj. It follows from the
fact that 4⋅δj<λj and the
definition of Nj that there exists vx,j∈Nj(0) such that
N(pnj,∞(x),2δj)⊂st(vx,j,Nj).
Now, pnj,∞(x)∈st(vx,j,Nj), and 2⋅mesh(Nj)<ϵj.
This implies that st(vx,j,Nj)⊂N(pnj,∞(x),ϵj).
∎
Lemma 10.3**.**
Let n∈N, K∈{K(Z,n),K(Z/p,n),K(Q,n)}),
and j∈N. Suppose that ϵj>0 and a triangulation Nj
of Pj have been chosen so that 2⋅mesh(Nj)<ϵj.
Then there exist δj, Lj, and φj, and for any given m∈N,
there exist l∈N≥m and ϵl such that:
(1)
0<δj<21−nj=2⋅2−nj,
2. (2)
Lj* is a subdivision of Nj with meshLj<δj,*
3. (3)
φj:∣Lj∣→∣Nj∣* is a simplicial approximation of idPj,*
4. (4)
for each x∈X, there exists vx,j∈Nj(0)⊂Lj(0) such that
we have N(pnj,∞(x),2δj)⊂st(vx,j,Nj)⊂N(pnj,∞(x),ϵj),
5. (5)
j<l,
6. (6)
9⋅2−nl<ϵl,
7. (7)
if u, v∈I∞ and
ρ(u,v)≤ϵl, then ρ(pnj,∞(u),pnj,∞(v))<δj,
8. (8)
Nl* is a triangulation of Pl with
2⋅meshNl<ϵl that admits a simplicial approximation
pj:∣Nl∣→∣Lj∣ of pnjnl:Pl→Pj, and*
9. (9)
there is a map gK=gj,K:∣Nl(n+1)∣→∣Lj(n+1)∣
as in Lemma\refendset(2) with respect to the current
(Pl,Nl,Lj,pnjnl,pj),
10. (10)
for any subdivision Ll of Nl and simplicial approximation
φl:∣Ll∣→∣Nl∣ of idPl,
gj,K(φl(∣Ll(s)∣))⊂∣Lj(s)∣ for s∈{n,n+1},
11. (11)
for all x∈∣Ll(n+1)∣, there exists σ∈Lj(n+1) such that
{pnjnl(x),gK∘φl(x)}⊂σ, and
12. (12)
for all x∈∣Ll(n+1)∣,
ρ(pnjnl(x),gK∘φl(x))<δj.
Proof.
Let λj be a Lebesgue number of the open cover
Nj={st(v,Nj)∣v∈Nj(0)} of Pj, and find
δj>0 so that (1) and 4⋅δj<λj are true.
Select Lj as in (2) and using Lemma 3.1(1), obtain φj
as needed in (3). According to Lemma 10.2,
(4) holds true. Using Lemma 9.3(2), one can obtain l so that (5)-(9) are in
effect. Proposition 8.1(2) gives us (10), (10) and
Proposition 8.1(3) give us (11); (11) and (2) lead to (12).
∎
11. Recursion
Lemma 11.1**.**
Let X⊂I∞ be a nonempty compactum
and n∈N. Suppose that (nj) is an increasing sequence in N, (Pj) is a sequence
of nonempty compact polyhedra Pj⊂Inj satisfying (1)-(3) of Lemma\refintersectinH, and
[TABLE]
with XτK.
Let ϵ1=2−1⋅9⋅2−n1, and N1 be a triangulation of
P1 with 2⋅meshN1<ϵ1. Then
there exist a function l:N→N with l(1)=1, a sequence
(ϵj,Nj,δj,Lj,φj,pj,gj,K),
and for each x∈X, a sequence (vx,j,Nx,j,Lx,j) such that for all j∈N,
(1)
0<δj<21−nl(j)=2⋅2−nl(j),
2. (2)
Nj* is a triangulation of Pl(j) and Lj is a subdivision
of Nj with meshLj<δj,*
3. (3)
φj:∣Lj∣→∣Nj∣* is a simplicial approximation to idPl(j),*
4. (4)
vx,j∈Nj(0)⊂Lj(0)* and we have N(pnl(j),∞(x),2δj)⊂st(vx,j,Nj)⊂N(pnl(j),∞(x),ϵj),*
5. (5)
l(j)<l(j+1),
6. (6)
9⋅2−nl(j)<ϵj,
7. (7)
if u, v∈I∞ and
ρ(u,v)≤ϵj+1, then ρ(pnl(j),∞(u),pnl(j),∞(v))<δj,
8. (8)
Nj* is a triangulation of Pl(j) with 2⋅meshNj<ϵj
that admits a simplicial approximation
pj:∣Nj+1∣→∣Lj∣ of pnl(j)nl(j+1):Pl(j+1)→Pl(j),*
9. (9)
there is a map gj,K:∣Nj+1(n+1)∣→∣Lj(n+1)∣ as in
Lemma\refendset(2) with (Pl(j+1),Nj+1,Lj,pnl(j)nl(j+1),pj) playing the role of (Pl,Nl,Lj,pnjnl,pj) of that lemma,
10. (10)
gj,K(φj+1(∣Lj+1(s)∣))⊂∣Lj(s)∣* for s∈{n,n+1},*
11. (11)
if x∈∣Lj+1(n+1)∣, there exists σ∈Lj(n+1) such that
{pnl(j)nl(j+1)(x),gj,K∘φj+1(x)}⊂σ, and
12. (12)
if x∈∣Lj+1(n+1)∣, ρ(pnl(j)nl(j+1)(x),gj,K∘φj+1(x))<δj.
Proof.
Define l(1)=1 and ϵ1=2−1⋅9⋅2−nl(1); select a triangulation N1 of
Pl(1) with 2⋅meshN1<ϵ1. Then apply Lemma
10.3 recursively to obtain this result.
∎
Lemma 11.2**.**
Under the hypothesis of Lemma\refnewtechnicalrecur,
for each j∈N, let Nx,j, Lx,j respectively
be defined as the subcomplexes of Nj and Lj such that st(vx,j,Nj)=∣Nx,j∣=∣Lx,j∣. Then,
(1)
st(vx,j,Nj)=∣Nx,j∣=∣Lx,j∣* is a contractible
metrizable continuum,*
2. (2)
for all s≥0, st(vx,j,Nj)∩∣Lj(s)∣=∣Lx,j(s)∣,
3. (3)
vx,j∈st(vx,j,Nj)∩∣Lx,j(0)∣,
so st(vx,j,Nj)∩∣Lx,j(0)∣=∅,
4. (4)
for all s≥1, ∣Lx,j(s)∣ is a metrizable continuum and
for all s≥0, ∣Lx,j(s)∣ contracts to a point in ∣Lx,j(s+1)∣,
5. (5)
for any abelian group G and 1≤s<n, Hs(∣Lx,j(n)∣;G)=0,
6. (6)
for any abelian group G and s>n, Hs(∣Lx,j(n)∣;G)=0,
7. (7)
Hn((∣Lx,j(n)∣;Z)* is free abelian of finite rank, and*
8. (8)
H0(∣Lx,j(n)∣;Z)* is isomorphic to Z, so it is free abelian
of finite rank.*
Proof.
As mentioned in
Section 3, st(vx,j,Nj) is a contractible closed subset of the
compact polyhedron ∣Nj∣, so it is a contractible metrizable continuum
and we get (1). It is plain that (2) is true.
Surely vx,j∈st(vx,j,Nj)∩∣Nx,j(0)∣⊂st(vx,j,Nj)∩∣Lx,j(0)∣, so we have (3).
It follows from (1) that ∣Lx,j(s)∣ is connected, and since it is
closed in ∣Lx,j∣, it is a metrizable continuum. The rest of (4) is a result of
Lemma 3.2. We get (5) from (1) and Lemma 3.4, and (6) is of
course true since dim∣Lx,j(n)∣≤n<s. Lemma 3.9 gives us (7).
We get (8) from (4).
∎
12. Proof of Main Results
We now provide our coordinated proofs of Theorems 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3.
Proof.
Let K∈{K(Z,n),K(Z/p,n),K(Q,n)}), n∈N, and X⊂I∞ be
a compactum with XτK. The reader should keep in mind that by
Lemma 6.1, dimGX≤n is equivalent to XτK(G,n).
Use the notation and facts that were developed in Lemmas 11.1
and 11.2 as applied to the current X and n.
From Lemma 11.1(5), one sees that
(†1)(nl(j)) is an increasing
sequence in N.
For each j∈N, let Tj=∣Lj(n)∣. Then,
an application of Lemma 11.1(2)
to the fact that ∣Lj∣=Pl(j)=∅ shows that
(†2) for all j∈N, Tj is a nonempty compact polyhedron
with dimTj≤n.
This gives us an inverse sequence T=(Tj,gjj+1) (depending on K)
of nonempty compact polyhedra (see (†2)).
Let Z=limT. The first thing to observe is that since Tj is a
nonempty compact polyhedron and dimTj≤n for each j, then by Theorem 2.11,
(†3)Z is a nonempty metrizable compactum, and dimZ≤n.
Items (7), (6), (12), and (1) of Lemma 11.1, respectively, give
us (1)-(4) of Lemma 10.1, which then provides us with a map π:Z→X.
An internal description of the fibers of π is now in order.
Now fix x∈X. Using Lemma 11.1(4)
and Lemma 11.2(2), one sees that for
all j∈N, N(pnl(j),∞(x),2⋅δj)∩Tj=N(pnl(j),∞(x),2⋅δj)∩∣Lj(n)∣⊂st(vx,j,Nj)∩Tj=st(vx,j,Nj)∩∣Lj(n)∣=∣Lx,j(n)∣⊂N(pnl(j),∞(x),ϵj)∩Tj. The leftmost and rightmost
sets in the preceding expression correspond respectively to Bx,j and Bx,j#
in Lemma 10.1. Looking at (∗7) of Lemma 10.1 with Ex,j=∣Lx,j(n)∣,
one sees that Ex=(∣Lx,j(n)∣,gjj+1) is an inverse sequence such
that π−1(x)=limEx. An application of Lemma 11.2(3,4) shows that
each coordinate space in Ex is nonempty and each is a metrizable continuum; therefore,
(†4) for each x∈X, π−1(x) is a nonempty metrizable continuum.
Proof of Theorem 1.1. This time K=K(Z,n).
Using 11.1(9), we may apply
Proposition 8.1(8) to see that each gjj+1 in Ex is
null homotopic. Apply Lemma 2.4 to complete this part of the proof.
Proof of Theorems 1.2 and 1.3. In these cases we have that
K∈{K(Z/p,n),K(Q,n)}). By Proposition 8.1(9,10)
(†5) if K=K(Z/p,n), then the induced homomorphism
Hn(gjj+1;Z/p):Hn(∣Lx,j+1(n)∣;Z/p)→Hn(∣Lx,j(n)∣;Z/p) is trivial, and
(†6) if K=K(Q,n), then the induced homomorphism Hn(gjj+1;Z):Hn(∣Lx,j+1(n)∣;Z)→Hn(∣Lx,j(n)∣;Z) is trivial.
Our proof of Theorem 1.2 follows from (†5), Lemma 11.2(5,6,7)
(Lemma 11.2(8) in case n=1),
and Lemma 2.9. Our proof of Theorem 1.3 follows from (†6),
Lemma 11.2(5,6) (remember that n≥2 in this setting), and Lemma 2.7.
∎
Bibliography16
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[AJR] S. Ageev, R. Jiménez and L. Rubin, Cell-like resolutions in the strongly countable ℤ ℤ \operatorname{{\mathbb{Z}}} -dimensional case , Topology and its Appls. 140 (2004), 5–14.
2[Dr] A. N. Dranishnikov, Cohomological dimension theory of compact metric spaces , Topology Atlas Invited Contributions, http://at.yorku.ca/t/a/i/c/43.pdf
3[Ed] R. D. Edwards, A theorem and a question related to cohomological dimension and cell-like maps , Notices Amer. Math. Soc. 25 (1978), A 58–A 59.
4[Hu] S. Hu, Theory of Retracts , Wayne State University Press, Detroit, 1965.
5[IR] I. Ivanšić and L. Rubin, Extension, Dimension and Shape , Element Press, Zagreb, 2020.
6[KY] A. Koyama and K. Yokoi, Cohomological dimension and acyclic resolutions , Topology and its Appls. 120 (2002), 175–204.
7[Ku] V. I. Kuz’minov, Homological Dimension Theory , Russian Math. Surveys 23 (1968), 1–45.