Algebraic Geometry Bucharest 1982. Proc. conf by L. Badescu, D. Popescu

Algebraic Geometry Bucharest 1982. Proc. conf by L. Badescu, D. Popescu

By L. Badescu, D. Popescu

Show description

Read Online or Download Algebraic Geometry Bucharest 1982. Proc. conf PDF

Similar geometry and topology books

Topologie und Analysis: Eine Einfuhrung in die Atiyah-Singer-Indexformel

"V. i. e. Ell6a. h1w. ng deA p. ltll. okay: tU. ehe. n Le. be. M . e. M. t Mnge. ge. n je. de. n, de. ll au6 I. l. i. eh a. eh;thabe. n w. U. R. , von unell Sede. d. i. e. Sehw-i. e. JL. i. gkede. n . i. n dell AM 6iihJumg deAl. > e. n, WM . i. hn 1. >0 okay. tnde. llR. ueh. t diink. te. , ge. hoJL. tg ellke.

Extra info for Algebraic Geometry Bucharest 1982. Proc. conf

Sample text

The idea of this proof comes from [B16]. g. 7 Addendum. Let N , N ′ be simple Poincar´e (n + 1)-ads with ∂n−1 N = ∅, ∂n N = ∂n−1 N ′ , and ∂n−1 N ′ ∩ ∂n N ′ = ∅: suppose |N | ∩ |N ′ | = |∂n N |. Define N ′′ by ∂n−1 N ′′ = ∂n−1 N , ∂n N ′′ = ∂n N ′ , and for {n − 1, n} ⊂ α ⊂ {1, 2, . . , n}, N ′′ (α) = N (α) ∪ N ′ (α). Then N ′′ is a simple Poincar´e (n + 1)ad with ∂n−1 N ′′ ∩ ∂n N ′′ = ∅. 3)]: in the case of finite complexes, the proof given in [W21] does give a simple homotopy equivalence. 8.

Since our spheres are nullhomotopic in N , Kk (N ) is unaltered : in fact N is replaced (up to simple homotopy) by its bouquet with corresponding (k + 1)-spheres, so we acquire a free module Kk+1 (N ′ ). Dually, the exact sequence of the triple M ′ ⊂ M ′ ∪ U ⊂ N ′ reduces (using excision) to 0 → Kk+1 (N ′ , M ′ ) → Kk+1 (N, M ) → Kk (U, U ∩ M ′ ) → Kk (N ′ , M ′ ) → 0 . The module Kk (U, U ∩ M ′ ) is free, with one basis element corresponding to each handle (represented by the core of the dual handle).

Since S m−2 links S 1 once, the inclusion S m−2 ⊂ U2 induces an isomorphism of (m − 2)nd homology groups, from which it follows at once that this inclusion is a simple homotopy equivalence. In our case, condition (b) likewise reduces to the requirement that π2 (U2 − K) = 0, and hence (n 5) that π2 (C) = 0. 2 we may certainly have π2 (C) = 0, π3 (C) = 0, if n 7. Mazur’s proof of his theorem appeared in [M4]. It is a straightforward deduction from his ‘relative non-stable neighbourhood theorem’. We conclude that our example is a counterexample to this theorem also.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.29 of 5 – based on 4 votes
Comments are closed.