Singular Homology: every $0$-chain is a $0$-circle











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












I am having trouble understanding this fact, that is deemed as trivial and thus not proved in most books.



First of all, I understand that the boundary operator $operatorname{Bdy}$ goes from $S_n$ to $S_{n-1}$ (where $S_n$ is the group of $n$-chains).
In this case, which is the codomain? I assumed it is $S_0$ as well, exceptionally.



Secondly, if $f$ is a $0$-chain, it should have the $0$-simplex, a point, as it's domain.
$operatorname{Bdy}(f)$ should be $f(0)$ in this case. But $0$ does $0$ belong to the $0$-simplex?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • The boundary map $partial_0$ either goes $S_0to 0$ (and you get the usual homology) or it goes $S_0to mathbb Z$ sending each $0$-simplex to $1$, you then get reduced homology.
    – Christoph
    Nov 22 at 10:48

















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












I am having trouble understanding this fact, that is deemed as trivial and thus not proved in most books.



First of all, I understand that the boundary operator $operatorname{Bdy}$ goes from $S_n$ to $S_{n-1}$ (where $S_n$ is the group of $n$-chains).
In this case, which is the codomain? I assumed it is $S_0$ as well, exceptionally.



Secondly, if $f$ is a $0$-chain, it should have the $0$-simplex, a point, as it's domain.
$operatorname{Bdy}(f)$ should be $f(0)$ in this case. But $0$ does $0$ belong to the $0$-simplex?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • The boundary map $partial_0$ either goes $S_0to 0$ (and you get the usual homology) or it goes $S_0to mathbb Z$ sending each $0$-simplex to $1$, you then get reduced homology.
    – Christoph
    Nov 22 at 10:48















up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











I am having trouble understanding this fact, that is deemed as trivial and thus not proved in most books.



First of all, I understand that the boundary operator $operatorname{Bdy}$ goes from $S_n$ to $S_{n-1}$ (where $S_n$ is the group of $n$-chains).
In this case, which is the codomain? I assumed it is $S_0$ as well, exceptionally.



Secondly, if $f$ is a $0$-chain, it should have the $0$-simplex, a point, as it's domain.
$operatorname{Bdy}(f)$ should be $f(0)$ in this case. But $0$ does $0$ belong to the $0$-simplex?










share|cite|improve this question















I am having trouble understanding this fact, that is deemed as trivial and thus not proved in most books.



First of all, I understand that the boundary operator $operatorname{Bdy}$ goes from $S_n$ to $S_{n-1}$ (where $S_n$ is the group of $n$-chains).
In this case, which is the codomain? I assumed it is $S_0$ as well, exceptionally.



Secondly, if $f$ is a $0$-chain, it should have the $0$-simplex, a point, as it's domain.
$operatorname{Bdy}(f)$ should be $f(0)$ in this case. But $0$ does $0$ belong to the $0$-simplex?







algebraic-topology homology-cohomology simplex






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 22 at 10:51









Christoph

11.6k1541




11.6k1541










asked Nov 22 at 10:44









Francesco Bilotta

82




82












  • The boundary map $partial_0$ either goes $S_0to 0$ (and you get the usual homology) or it goes $S_0to mathbb Z$ sending each $0$-simplex to $1$, you then get reduced homology.
    – Christoph
    Nov 22 at 10:48




















  • The boundary map $partial_0$ either goes $S_0to 0$ (and you get the usual homology) or it goes $S_0to mathbb Z$ sending each $0$-simplex to $1$, you then get reduced homology.
    – Christoph
    Nov 22 at 10:48


















The boundary map $partial_0$ either goes $S_0to 0$ (and you get the usual homology) or it goes $S_0to mathbb Z$ sending each $0$-simplex to $1$, you then get reduced homology.
– Christoph
Nov 22 at 10:48






The boundary map $partial_0$ either goes $S_0to 0$ (and you get the usual homology) or it goes $S_0to mathbb Z$ sending each $0$-simplex to $1$, you then get reduced homology.
– Christoph
Nov 22 at 10:48












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










The codomain is $0$ literally, this also makes every $0$-chain into a $0$-cycle(respectively, if you like to think about it that way: a point has no boundary, if you think about it, every point is a degenerate simplex with trivial boundary).



I know this is quite a technicality, however, it helps a lot although sometimes it is also useful to pass to the reduced homology, where you kill the class of the basepoint, since precisely this technicality can make stuff weird.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Note that $0$ as the codomain here and in my comment is used to denote the trivial group with only one element.
    – Christoph
    Nov 22 at 10:53











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',
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
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3008984%2fsingular-homology-every-0-chain-is-a-0-circle%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








up vote
1
down vote



accepted










The codomain is $0$ literally, this also makes every $0$-chain into a $0$-cycle(respectively, if you like to think about it that way: a point has no boundary, if you think about it, every point is a degenerate simplex with trivial boundary).



I know this is quite a technicality, however, it helps a lot although sometimes it is also useful to pass to the reduced homology, where you kill the class of the basepoint, since precisely this technicality can make stuff weird.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Note that $0$ as the codomain here and in my comment is used to denote the trivial group with only one element.
    – Christoph
    Nov 22 at 10:53















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










The codomain is $0$ literally, this also makes every $0$-chain into a $0$-cycle(respectively, if you like to think about it that way: a point has no boundary, if you think about it, every point is a degenerate simplex with trivial boundary).



I know this is quite a technicality, however, it helps a lot although sometimes it is also useful to pass to the reduced homology, where you kill the class of the basepoint, since precisely this technicality can make stuff weird.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Note that $0$ as the codomain here and in my comment is used to denote the trivial group with only one element.
    – Christoph
    Nov 22 at 10:53













up vote
1
down vote



accepted







up vote
1
down vote



accepted






The codomain is $0$ literally, this also makes every $0$-chain into a $0$-cycle(respectively, if you like to think about it that way: a point has no boundary, if you think about it, every point is a degenerate simplex with trivial boundary).



I know this is quite a technicality, however, it helps a lot although sometimes it is also useful to pass to the reduced homology, where you kill the class of the basepoint, since precisely this technicality can make stuff weird.






share|cite|improve this answer












The codomain is $0$ literally, this also makes every $0$-chain into a $0$-cycle(respectively, if you like to think about it that way: a point has no boundary, if you think about it, every point is a degenerate simplex with trivial boundary).



I know this is quite a technicality, however, it helps a lot although sometimes it is also useful to pass to the reduced homology, where you kill the class of the basepoint, since precisely this technicality can make stuff weird.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 22 at 10:51









Enkidu

1,02618




1,02618












  • Note that $0$ as the codomain here and in my comment is used to denote the trivial group with only one element.
    – Christoph
    Nov 22 at 10:53


















  • Note that $0$ as the codomain here and in my comment is used to denote the trivial group with only one element.
    – Christoph
    Nov 22 at 10:53
















Note that $0$ as the codomain here and in my comment is used to denote the trivial group with only one element.
– Christoph
Nov 22 at 10:53




Note that $0$ as the codomain here and in my comment is used to denote the trivial group with only one element.
– Christoph
Nov 22 at 10:53


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































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.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • 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.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3008984%2fsingular-homology-every-0-chain-is-a-0-circle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

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







Popular posts from this blog

Ellipse (mathématiques)

Quarter-circle Tiles

Mont Emei