Projective planes homeomorphic?Tangent bundle of a noncompact surfaceHow to Classify $2$-Plane Bundles over...
Landing in very high winds
What is GPS' 19 year rollover and does it present a cybersecurity issue?
How is it possible for user's password to be changed after storage was encrypted? (on OS X, Android)
Domain expired, GoDaddy holds it and is asking more money
Could a US political party gain complete control over the government by removing checks & balances?
Crop image to path created in TikZ?
COUNT(*) or MAX(id) - which is faster?
How did the USSR manage to innovate in an environment characterized by government censorship and high bureaucracy?
What happens when a metallic dragon and a chromatic dragon mate?
How would photo IDs work for shapeshifters?
Symmetry in quantum mechanics
Does it makes sense to buy a new cycle to learn riding?
What do the Banks children have against barley water?
What is the meaning of "of trouble" in the following sentence?
What does it exactly mean if a random variable follows a distribution
Denied boarding due to overcrowding, Sparpreis ticket. What are my rights?
Why do UK politicians seemingly ignore opinion polls on Brexit?
What are the advantages and disadvantages of running one shots compared to campaigns?
Lied on resume at previous job
Why was the "bread communication" in the arena of Catching Fire left out in the movie?
Are objects structures and/or vice versa?
A poker game description that does not feel gimmicky
Unbreakable Formation vs. Cry of the Carnarium
How do I create uniquely male characters?
Projective planes homeomorphic?
Tangent bundle of a noncompact surfaceHow to Classify $2$-Plane Bundles over $S^2$?Maps from Sum of Projective Planes to CircleWhy is a triangle with edges identified according to $aab$ a Mobius strip?Constructing pairs of pants2 -manifolds that can't be decomposed into two equal partsHow to visualize the real projective plane $mathbb RP^2$ in three dimensions, if possible?What shapes do these quotients represent? Do they have a name?Space homeomorphic to Mobius Strip?
$begingroup$
I am having major trouble showing that the version of the projective plane here (with a Mobius strip) is homeomorphic to the projective plane that is defined as the quotient of the sphere $S^2$..
Is this a matter of showing one is orientable and the other isn't (the one with the Mobius Strip) and going from there? Not sure what to do. Thanks for any help/attempts at a proof.
geometric-topology
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am having major trouble showing that the version of the projective plane here (with a Mobius strip) is homeomorphic to the projective plane that is defined as the quotient of the sphere $S^2$..
Is this a matter of showing one is orientable and the other isn't (the one with the Mobius Strip) and going from there? Not sure what to do. Thanks for any help/attempts at a proof.
geometric-topology
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Do you see that the boundary identifications look exactly like antipodal pairs?
$endgroup$
– Randall
Feb 15 at 14:29
$begingroup$
That picture is unclear. All four arrows look identical, so I am unsure which arrow glues to which.
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 15 at 19:28
$begingroup$
My fault, I have just updated the image. Hope that helps.
$endgroup$
– user645044
Feb 15 at 19:38
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am having major trouble showing that the version of the projective plane here (with a Mobius strip) is homeomorphic to the projective plane that is defined as the quotient of the sphere $S^2$..
Is this a matter of showing one is orientable and the other isn't (the one with the Mobius Strip) and going from there? Not sure what to do. Thanks for any help/attempts at a proof.
geometric-topology
$endgroup$
I am having major trouble showing that the version of the projective plane here (with a Mobius strip) is homeomorphic to the projective plane that is defined as the quotient of the sphere $S^2$..
Is this a matter of showing one is orientable and the other isn't (the one with the Mobius Strip) and going from there? Not sure what to do. Thanks for any help/attempts at a proof.
geometric-topology
geometric-topology
edited Mar 20 at 18:17
asked Feb 15 at 14:14
user645044
$begingroup$
Do you see that the boundary identifications look exactly like antipodal pairs?
$endgroup$
– Randall
Feb 15 at 14:29
$begingroup$
That picture is unclear. All four arrows look identical, so I am unsure which arrow glues to which.
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 15 at 19:28
$begingroup$
My fault, I have just updated the image. Hope that helps.
$endgroup$
– user645044
Feb 15 at 19:38
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Do you see that the boundary identifications look exactly like antipodal pairs?
$endgroup$
– Randall
Feb 15 at 14:29
$begingroup$
That picture is unclear. All four arrows look identical, so I am unsure which arrow glues to which.
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 15 at 19:28
$begingroup$
My fault, I have just updated the image. Hope that helps.
$endgroup$
– user645044
Feb 15 at 19:38
$begingroup$
Do you see that the boundary identifications look exactly like antipodal pairs?
$endgroup$
– Randall
Feb 15 at 14:29
$begingroup$
Do you see that the boundary identifications look exactly like antipodal pairs?
$endgroup$
– Randall
Feb 15 at 14:29
$begingroup$
That picture is unclear. All four arrows look identical, so I am unsure which arrow glues to which.
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 15 at 19:28
$begingroup$
That picture is unclear. All four arrows look identical, so I am unsure which arrow glues to which.
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 15 at 19:28
$begingroup$
My fault, I have just updated the image. Hope that helps.
$endgroup$
– user645044
Feb 15 at 19:38
$begingroup$
My fault, I have just updated the image. Hope that helps.
$endgroup$
– user645044
Feb 15 at 19:38
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
First, notice that in the diagram you provided, if you are given two points $p ne q$ in the square, those two points $p,q$ are identified under the gluing if and only if $p,q$ are endpoints of a "diameter" of the square, meaning that the line segment $overline{pq}$ passes through the center of the square.
Now round out the square to get a round disc $D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}$. It's boundary circle is $partial D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 = 1$. Again the identifications are that two points $p ne q in D^2$ are identified if and only if $overline{pq}$ is a diameter of $D^2$.
Now consider the upper hemisphere of $S^2$, namely
$$S^2_+ = {(x,y,sqrt{1-x^2-y^2}) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}
$$
The boundary of $S^2_+$ is the equator of $S^2$. Again two points $p ne q in S^2_+$ are identified if and only if $p,q$ endpoints of a diameter of the equator.
Finally, take the union of the upper and lower hemispheres to get the whole sphere $S^2$, where two points $p ne q in S^2$ are identified if and only if they are endpoints of a diameter of $S^2$. You get a bijection between the quotient of $S^2_+$ and the quotient of $S^2$, because if $p ne q in S^2_+$ then they are identified in the quotient of $S^2_+$ if and only if they are identified in the quotient of $S^2$.
That should give you enough intuition. There are some further formalities that require some topology, to prove that this sequence of maps between quotients is a sequence of homeomorphisms.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm referring to some universality theorems satisfied by quotient maps, which one can find for example in Munkres "Topology".
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 16 at 14:42
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3113959%2fprojective-planes-homeomorphic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
First, notice that in the diagram you provided, if you are given two points $p ne q$ in the square, those two points $p,q$ are identified under the gluing if and only if $p,q$ are endpoints of a "diameter" of the square, meaning that the line segment $overline{pq}$ passes through the center of the square.
Now round out the square to get a round disc $D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}$. It's boundary circle is $partial D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 = 1$. Again the identifications are that two points $p ne q in D^2$ are identified if and only if $overline{pq}$ is a diameter of $D^2$.
Now consider the upper hemisphere of $S^2$, namely
$$S^2_+ = {(x,y,sqrt{1-x^2-y^2}) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}
$$
The boundary of $S^2_+$ is the equator of $S^2$. Again two points $p ne q in S^2_+$ are identified if and only if $p,q$ endpoints of a diameter of the equator.
Finally, take the union of the upper and lower hemispheres to get the whole sphere $S^2$, where two points $p ne q in S^2$ are identified if and only if they are endpoints of a diameter of $S^2$. You get a bijection between the quotient of $S^2_+$ and the quotient of $S^2$, because if $p ne q in S^2_+$ then they are identified in the quotient of $S^2_+$ if and only if they are identified in the quotient of $S^2$.
That should give you enough intuition. There are some further formalities that require some topology, to prove that this sequence of maps between quotients is a sequence of homeomorphisms.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm referring to some universality theorems satisfied by quotient maps, which one can find for example in Munkres "Topology".
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 16 at 14:42
add a comment |
$begingroup$
First, notice that in the diagram you provided, if you are given two points $p ne q$ in the square, those two points $p,q$ are identified under the gluing if and only if $p,q$ are endpoints of a "diameter" of the square, meaning that the line segment $overline{pq}$ passes through the center of the square.
Now round out the square to get a round disc $D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}$. It's boundary circle is $partial D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 = 1$. Again the identifications are that two points $p ne q in D^2$ are identified if and only if $overline{pq}$ is a diameter of $D^2$.
Now consider the upper hemisphere of $S^2$, namely
$$S^2_+ = {(x,y,sqrt{1-x^2-y^2}) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}
$$
The boundary of $S^2_+$ is the equator of $S^2$. Again two points $p ne q in S^2_+$ are identified if and only if $p,q$ endpoints of a diameter of the equator.
Finally, take the union of the upper and lower hemispheres to get the whole sphere $S^2$, where two points $p ne q in S^2$ are identified if and only if they are endpoints of a diameter of $S^2$. You get a bijection between the quotient of $S^2_+$ and the quotient of $S^2$, because if $p ne q in S^2_+$ then they are identified in the quotient of $S^2_+$ if and only if they are identified in the quotient of $S^2$.
That should give you enough intuition. There are some further formalities that require some topology, to prove that this sequence of maps between quotients is a sequence of homeomorphisms.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm referring to some universality theorems satisfied by quotient maps, which one can find for example in Munkres "Topology".
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 16 at 14:42
add a comment |
$begingroup$
First, notice that in the diagram you provided, if you are given two points $p ne q$ in the square, those two points $p,q$ are identified under the gluing if and only if $p,q$ are endpoints of a "diameter" of the square, meaning that the line segment $overline{pq}$ passes through the center of the square.
Now round out the square to get a round disc $D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}$. It's boundary circle is $partial D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 = 1$. Again the identifications are that two points $p ne q in D^2$ are identified if and only if $overline{pq}$ is a diameter of $D^2$.
Now consider the upper hemisphere of $S^2$, namely
$$S^2_+ = {(x,y,sqrt{1-x^2-y^2}) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}
$$
The boundary of $S^2_+$ is the equator of $S^2$. Again two points $p ne q in S^2_+$ are identified if and only if $p,q$ endpoints of a diameter of the equator.
Finally, take the union of the upper and lower hemispheres to get the whole sphere $S^2$, where two points $p ne q in S^2$ are identified if and only if they are endpoints of a diameter of $S^2$. You get a bijection between the quotient of $S^2_+$ and the quotient of $S^2$, because if $p ne q in S^2_+$ then they are identified in the quotient of $S^2_+$ if and only if they are identified in the quotient of $S^2$.
That should give you enough intuition. There are some further formalities that require some topology, to prove that this sequence of maps between quotients is a sequence of homeomorphisms.
$endgroup$
First, notice that in the diagram you provided, if you are given two points $p ne q$ in the square, those two points $p,q$ are identified under the gluing if and only if $p,q$ are endpoints of a "diameter" of the square, meaning that the line segment $overline{pq}$ passes through the center of the square.
Now round out the square to get a round disc $D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}$. It's boundary circle is $partial D^2 = {(x,y) mid x^2 + y^2 = 1$. Again the identifications are that two points $p ne q in D^2$ are identified if and only if $overline{pq}$ is a diameter of $D^2$.
Now consider the upper hemisphere of $S^2$, namely
$$S^2_+ = {(x,y,sqrt{1-x^2-y^2}) mid x^2 + y^2 le 1}
$$
The boundary of $S^2_+$ is the equator of $S^2$. Again two points $p ne q in S^2_+$ are identified if and only if $p,q$ endpoints of a diameter of the equator.
Finally, take the union of the upper and lower hemispheres to get the whole sphere $S^2$, where two points $p ne q in S^2$ are identified if and only if they are endpoints of a diameter of $S^2$. You get a bijection between the quotient of $S^2_+$ and the quotient of $S^2$, because if $p ne q in S^2_+$ then they are identified in the quotient of $S^2_+$ if and only if they are identified in the quotient of $S^2$.
That should give you enough intuition. There are some further formalities that require some topology, to prove that this sequence of maps between quotients is a sequence of homeomorphisms.
answered Feb 15 at 20:22
Lee MosherLee Mosher
51.8k33889
51.8k33889
$begingroup$
I'm referring to some universality theorems satisfied by quotient maps, which one can find for example in Munkres "Topology".
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 16 at 14:42
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm referring to some universality theorems satisfied by quotient maps, which one can find for example in Munkres "Topology".
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 16 at 14:42
$begingroup$
I'm referring to some universality theorems satisfied by quotient maps, which one can find for example in Munkres "Topology".
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 16 at 14:42
$begingroup$
I'm referring to some universality theorems satisfied by quotient maps, which one can find for example in Munkres "Topology".
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 16 at 14:42
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3113959%2fprojective-planes-homeomorphic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Do you see that the boundary identifications look exactly like antipodal pairs?
$endgroup$
– Randall
Feb 15 at 14:29
$begingroup$
That picture is unclear. All four arrows look identical, so I am unsure which arrow glues to which.
$endgroup$
– Lee Mosher
Feb 15 at 19:28
$begingroup$
My fault, I have just updated the image. Hope that helps.
$endgroup$
– user645044
Feb 15 at 19:38