Mixing
Lefschetz number of constant map
$begingroup$
Consider a map from a connected $n$-manifold $M$ to itself defined by $f(p) = c$ for some fixed $c in M$. This is a Lefschetz map since the subset $M times {c }$ intersects the diagonal $Delta$ transversely.
We can compute the Lefchetz number in two different ways, first algerbaic-topologically as the alternating sum of the trace of $f_*$ on $H_*(M)$. Then $f_*$ is the identity on $H_0(M)$ and zero on the higher homology groups. So the trace of $f_*$ on $H_0(M)$ is $1$ and zero on the higher homology groups. Therefore we get that the Lefschetz number of $f$ is 1 using the algerbaic-topological method, let's write $L^{AT}(f) = 1$.
Now consider the differential topological description given by the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem as the sum of the local Lefschetz number of the fixed points. Clearly $f$ has precisely one fixed point $c$. The Local Lefschetz number $L_c (f)$ is equal to the sign of the determinant of $df_c - Id$. However, here we have $df_c = 0$ since $f$ is the constant map. So we have $det(df_c - Id) = det(0-Id) = det(-Id) = (-1)^n$ and so we have $L_c(f) = (-1)^n$ where $n$ is the dimension of the manifold. In particular this allows us to calculate the Lefschetz number differential-topologically and get $(-1)^n$ instead, let's write $L^{DT}(f) = (-1)^n$.
Now observe for odd dimensional manifolds we get $L^{DT}(f) = -1$ while $L^{AT}(f)=1$. However, the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem says these two definitions of the Lefschetz number should agree.
Question: Why do we have $L^{AT}(f) neq L^{DT} (f)$ for odd dimensional manifolds? Is there some error in my calculations?
algebraic-topology differential-topology fixed-point-theorems
asked Jan 16 at 20:08
Kai NakamuraKai Nakamura
30719
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider a map from a connected $n$-manifold $M$ to itself defined by $f(p) = c$ for some fixed $c in M$. This is a Lefschetz map since the subset $M times {c }$ intersects the diagonal $Delta$ transversely.
We can compute the Lefchetz number in two different ways, first algerbaic-topologically as the alternating sum of the trace of $f_*$ on $H_*(M)$. Then $f_*$ is the identity on $H_0(M)$ and zero on the higher homology groups. So the trace of $f_*$ on $H_0(M)$ is $1$ and zero on the higher homology groups. Therefore we get that the Lefschetz number of $f$ is 1 using the algerbaic-topological method, let's write $L^{AT}(f) = 1$.
Now consider the differential topological description given by the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem as the sum of the local Lefschetz number of the fixed points. Clearly $f$ has precisely one fixed point $c$. The Local Lefschetz number $L_c (f)$ is equal to the sign of the determinant of $df_c - Id$. However, here we have $df_c = 0$ since $f$ is the constant map. So we have $det(df_c - Id) = det(0-Id) = det(-Id) = (-1)^n$ and so we have $L_c(f) = (-1)^n$ where $n$ is the dimension of the manifold. In particular this allows us to calculate the Lefschetz number differential-topologically and get $(-1)^n$ instead, let's write $L^{DT}(f) = (-1)^n$.
Now observe for odd dimensional manifolds we get $L^{DT}(f) = -1$ while $L^{AT}(f)=1$. However, the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem says these two definitions of the Lefschetz number should agree.
Question: Why do we have $L^{AT}(f) neq L^{DT} (f)$ for odd dimensional manifolds? Is there some error in my calculations?
algebraic-topology differential-topology fixed-point-theorems
asked Jan 16 at 20:08
Kai NakamuraKai Nakamura
30719
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Whatever author you're reading is just using a convention that doesn't agree with the other. This is harmless. Your formula just then becomes $L^{AT}(f) = (-1)^n L^{DT}(f)$, so they differ by a uniform sign.
$endgroup$
– user98602
Jan 16 at 21:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider a map from a connected $n$-manifold $M$ to itself defined by $f(p) = c$ for some fixed $c in M$. This is a Lefschetz map since the subset $M times {c }$ intersects the diagonal $Delta$ transversely.
We can compute the Lefchetz number in two different ways, first algerbaic-topologically as the alternating sum of the trace of $f_*$ on $H_*(M)$. Then $f_*$ is the identity on $H_0(M)$ and zero on the higher homology groups. So the trace of $f_*$ on $H_0(M)$ is $1$ and zero on the higher homology groups. Therefore we get that the Lefschetz number of $f$ is 1 using the algerbaic-topological method, let's write $L^{AT}(f) = 1$.
Now consider the differential topological description given by the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem as the sum of the local Lefschetz number of the fixed points. Clearly $f$ has precisely one fixed point $c$. The Local Lefschetz number $L_c (f)$ is equal to the sign of the determinant of $df_c - Id$. However, here we have $df_c = 0$ since $f$ is the constant map. So we have $det(df_c - Id) = det(0-Id) = det(-Id) = (-1)^n$ and so we have $L_c(f) = (-1)^n$ where $n$ is the dimension of the manifold. In particular this allows us to calculate the Lefschetz number differential-topologically and get $(-1)^n$ instead, let's write $L^{DT}(f) = (-1)^n$.
Now observe for odd dimensional manifolds we get $L^{DT}(f) = -1$ while $L^{AT}(f)=1$. However, the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem says these two definitions of the Lefschetz number should agree.
Question: Why do we have $L^{AT}(f) neq L^{DT} (f)$ for odd dimensional manifolds? Is there some error in my calculations?
algebraic-topology differential-topology fixed-point-theorems
asked Jan 16 at 20:08
Kai NakamuraKai Nakamura
30719
$endgroup$
Consider a map from a connected $n$-manifold $M$ to itself defined by $f(p) = c$ for some fixed $c in M$. This is a Lefschetz map since the subset $M times {c }$ intersects the diagonal $Delta$ transversely.
We can compute the Lefchetz number in two different ways, first algerbaic-topologically as the alternating sum of the trace of $f_*$ on $H_*(M)$. Then $f_*$ is the identity on $H_0(M)$ and zero on the higher homology groups. So the trace of $f_*$ on $H_0(M)$ is $1$ and zero on the higher homology groups. Therefore we get that the Lefschetz number of $f$ is 1 using the algerbaic-topological method, let's write $L^{AT}(f) = 1$.
Now consider the differential topological description given by the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem as the sum of the local Lefschetz number of the fixed points. Clearly $f$ has precisely one fixed point $c$. The Local Lefschetz number $L_c (f)$ is equal to the sign of the determinant of $df_c - Id$. However, here we have $df_c = 0$ since $f$ is the constant map. So we have $det(df_c - Id) = det(0-Id) = det(-Id) = (-1)^n$ and so we have $L_c(f) = (-1)^n$ where $n$ is the dimension of the manifold. In particular this allows us to calculate the Lefschetz number differential-topologically and get $(-1)^n$ instead, let's write $L^{DT}(f) = (-1)^n$.
Now observe for odd dimensional manifolds we get $L^{DT}(f) = -1$ while $L^{AT}(f)=1$. However, the Lefschetz-Hopf theorem says these two definitions of the Lefschetz number should agree.
Question: Why do we have $L^{AT}(f) neq L^{DT} (f)$ for odd dimensional manifolds? Is there some error in my calculations?
algebraic-topology differential-topology fixed-point-theorems
algebraic-topology differential-topology fixed-point-theorems
asked Jan 16 at 20:08
Kai NakamuraKai Nakamura
30719
asked Jan 16 at 20:08
Kai NakamuraKai Nakamura
30719
asked Jan 16 at 20:08
Kai NakamuraKai Nakamura
30719
asked Jan 16 at 20:08
Kai NakamuraKai Nakamura
30719
asked Jan 16 at 20:08
Kai NakamuraKai Nakamura
30719
30719
1
$begingroup$
Whatever author you're reading is just using a convention that doesn't agree with the other. This is harmless. Your formula just then becomes $L^{AT}(f) = (-1)^n L^{DT}(f)$, so they differ by a uniform sign.
$endgroup$
– user98602
Jan 16 at 21:21
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Whatever author you're reading is just using a convention that doesn't agree with the other. This is harmless. Your formula just then becomes $L^{AT}(f) = (-1)^n L^{DT}(f)$, so they differ by a uniform sign.
$endgroup$
– user98602
Jan 16 at 21:21
1
1
$begingroup$
Whatever author you're reading is just using a convention that doesn't agree with the other. This is harmless. Your formula just then becomes $L^{AT}(f) = (-1)^n L^{DT}(f)$, so they differ by a uniform sign.
$endgroup$
– user98602
Jan 16 at 21:21
$begingroup$
Whatever author you're reading is just using a convention that doesn't agree with the other. This is harmless. Your formula just then becomes $L^{AT}(f) = (-1)^n L^{DT}(f)$, so they differ by a uniform sign.
$endgroup$
– user98602
Jan 16 at 21:21
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
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%2f3076227%2flefschetz-number-of-constant-map%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
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%2f3076227%2flefschetz-number-of-constant-map%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
1
$begingroup$
Whatever author you're reading is just using a convention that doesn't agree with the other. This is harmless. Your formula just then becomes $L^{AT}(f) = (-1)^n L^{DT}(f)$, so they differ by a uniform sign.
$endgroup$
– user98602
Jan 16 at 21:21