Why doesn't the circle retract to a point?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
7
down vote

favorite
3












OK, this appears to me like perhaps a dumb question. I am reading Allen Hatcher's Algebraic Topology. I've seen bits and pieces of further material here and there before, now I'm restarting from the beginning.



OK, visually I can see why, say, the 2-sphere $S^2$ can not deformation retract onto it's equator. Intuitively, we can't do this without tearing a hole (or rather two holes). Even with visualizing the 'cylinder' $S^2$ x I (well as a volume) for the function $F$ to $S^1$,



$F:S^2 times I rightarrow S^1$,



$F(x,t) = f_t(x)$ the family of homotopic maps. You can see that this mapping cylinder won't work in trying to identify points $F(x,1)$ to points in the circle.



The mapping cylinder for a map and spaces $f:X rightarrow Y$, is the quotient space



$[(X times I) amalg Y]/((x,1) sim f(x))$.



Or even $S^1$ to its equator, $S^0$ the union of two separate points: not "deformation-retractable". Again, looking at $S^1 times I$ doesn't appear to have a cont. function to $x cup y$ for distinct points $x,y$ in $S^1$. It doesn't seem to have any mapping cylinder as well.



Disclaimer: OBVIOUSLY a circle is NOT homotopic to a point. Just in case anyone gets any wrong ideas as to where I'm going with this. It's just a question on my part :) If anyone could guide me to the a better intuition or visualization to correct the error of what I'm seeing.



However, if we just pick one point $x_0$ from $S^1$, then the mapping cylinder looks just like a cone, with $F(x,0) = x$, $F(x_0, t) = x_0$ (which is a line going down the cone from the circle to the bottom apex), and $F(x,1) = x_0$. And it looks like the mapping cylinder shows how to continuously deform the circle to the point, even if the point is an element of the circle.



I am thinking this "homotopic picture" of what merely looks like, the circle def. retracting to a point, is somehow misleading me, in the sense that I am just missing something or looking at it wrong or etc...



Can anyone elucidate?










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 1




    I've added a title. Please verify that it is indeed what you are asking.
    – Alex Becker
    May 31 '13 at 3:45










  • Yes! Thanks. like I said I know it doesn't, the fundamental groups tell us why. But that is more symbolic than "visual", I was seeking a visual answer.
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:51














up vote
7
down vote

favorite
3












OK, this appears to me like perhaps a dumb question. I am reading Allen Hatcher's Algebraic Topology. I've seen bits and pieces of further material here and there before, now I'm restarting from the beginning.



OK, visually I can see why, say, the 2-sphere $S^2$ can not deformation retract onto it's equator. Intuitively, we can't do this without tearing a hole (or rather two holes). Even with visualizing the 'cylinder' $S^2$ x I (well as a volume) for the function $F$ to $S^1$,



$F:S^2 times I rightarrow S^1$,



$F(x,t) = f_t(x)$ the family of homotopic maps. You can see that this mapping cylinder won't work in trying to identify points $F(x,1)$ to points in the circle.



The mapping cylinder for a map and spaces $f:X rightarrow Y$, is the quotient space



$[(X times I) amalg Y]/((x,1) sim f(x))$.



Or even $S^1$ to its equator, $S^0$ the union of two separate points: not "deformation-retractable". Again, looking at $S^1 times I$ doesn't appear to have a cont. function to $x cup y$ for distinct points $x,y$ in $S^1$. It doesn't seem to have any mapping cylinder as well.



Disclaimer: OBVIOUSLY a circle is NOT homotopic to a point. Just in case anyone gets any wrong ideas as to where I'm going with this. It's just a question on my part :) If anyone could guide me to the a better intuition or visualization to correct the error of what I'm seeing.



However, if we just pick one point $x_0$ from $S^1$, then the mapping cylinder looks just like a cone, with $F(x,0) = x$, $F(x_0, t) = x_0$ (which is a line going down the cone from the circle to the bottom apex), and $F(x,1) = x_0$. And it looks like the mapping cylinder shows how to continuously deform the circle to the point, even if the point is an element of the circle.



I am thinking this "homotopic picture" of what merely looks like, the circle def. retracting to a point, is somehow misleading me, in the sense that I am just missing something or looking at it wrong or etc...



Can anyone elucidate?










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 1




    I've added a title. Please verify that it is indeed what you are asking.
    – Alex Becker
    May 31 '13 at 3:45










  • Yes! Thanks. like I said I know it doesn't, the fundamental groups tell us why. But that is more symbolic than "visual", I was seeking a visual answer.
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:51












up vote
7
down vote

favorite
3









up vote
7
down vote

favorite
3






3





OK, this appears to me like perhaps a dumb question. I am reading Allen Hatcher's Algebraic Topology. I've seen bits and pieces of further material here and there before, now I'm restarting from the beginning.



OK, visually I can see why, say, the 2-sphere $S^2$ can not deformation retract onto it's equator. Intuitively, we can't do this without tearing a hole (or rather two holes). Even with visualizing the 'cylinder' $S^2$ x I (well as a volume) for the function $F$ to $S^1$,



$F:S^2 times I rightarrow S^1$,



$F(x,t) = f_t(x)$ the family of homotopic maps. You can see that this mapping cylinder won't work in trying to identify points $F(x,1)$ to points in the circle.



The mapping cylinder for a map and spaces $f:X rightarrow Y$, is the quotient space



$[(X times I) amalg Y]/((x,1) sim f(x))$.



Or even $S^1$ to its equator, $S^0$ the union of two separate points: not "deformation-retractable". Again, looking at $S^1 times I$ doesn't appear to have a cont. function to $x cup y$ for distinct points $x,y$ in $S^1$. It doesn't seem to have any mapping cylinder as well.



Disclaimer: OBVIOUSLY a circle is NOT homotopic to a point. Just in case anyone gets any wrong ideas as to where I'm going with this. It's just a question on my part :) If anyone could guide me to the a better intuition or visualization to correct the error of what I'm seeing.



However, if we just pick one point $x_0$ from $S^1$, then the mapping cylinder looks just like a cone, with $F(x,0) = x$, $F(x_0, t) = x_0$ (which is a line going down the cone from the circle to the bottom apex), and $F(x,1) = x_0$. And it looks like the mapping cylinder shows how to continuously deform the circle to the point, even if the point is an element of the circle.



I am thinking this "homotopic picture" of what merely looks like, the circle def. retracting to a point, is somehow misleading me, in the sense that I am just missing something or looking at it wrong or etc...



Can anyone elucidate?










share|cite|improve this question















OK, this appears to me like perhaps a dumb question. I am reading Allen Hatcher's Algebraic Topology. I've seen bits and pieces of further material here and there before, now I'm restarting from the beginning.



OK, visually I can see why, say, the 2-sphere $S^2$ can not deformation retract onto it's equator. Intuitively, we can't do this without tearing a hole (or rather two holes). Even with visualizing the 'cylinder' $S^2$ x I (well as a volume) for the function $F$ to $S^1$,



$F:S^2 times I rightarrow S^1$,



$F(x,t) = f_t(x)$ the family of homotopic maps. You can see that this mapping cylinder won't work in trying to identify points $F(x,1)$ to points in the circle.



The mapping cylinder for a map and spaces $f:X rightarrow Y$, is the quotient space



$[(X times I) amalg Y]/((x,1) sim f(x))$.



Or even $S^1$ to its equator, $S^0$ the union of two separate points: not "deformation-retractable". Again, looking at $S^1 times I$ doesn't appear to have a cont. function to $x cup y$ for distinct points $x,y$ in $S^1$. It doesn't seem to have any mapping cylinder as well.



Disclaimer: OBVIOUSLY a circle is NOT homotopic to a point. Just in case anyone gets any wrong ideas as to where I'm going with this. It's just a question on my part :) If anyone could guide me to the a better intuition or visualization to correct the error of what I'm seeing.



However, if we just pick one point $x_0$ from $S^1$, then the mapping cylinder looks just like a cone, with $F(x,0) = x$, $F(x_0, t) = x_0$ (which is a line going down the cone from the circle to the bottom apex), and $F(x,1) = x_0$. And it looks like the mapping cylinder shows how to continuously deform the circle to the point, even if the point is an element of the circle.



I am thinking this "homotopic picture" of what merely looks like, the circle def. retracting to a point, is somehow misleading me, in the sense that I am just missing something or looking at it wrong or etc...



Can anyone elucidate?







algebraic-topology






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited May 31 '13 at 8:36









Stefan Hamcke

21k42776




21k42776










asked May 31 '13 at 3:41









user80309

3813




3813







  • 1




    I've added a title. Please verify that it is indeed what you are asking.
    – Alex Becker
    May 31 '13 at 3:45










  • Yes! Thanks. like I said I know it doesn't, the fundamental groups tell us why. But that is more symbolic than "visual", I was seeking a visual answer.
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:51












  • 1




    I've added a title. Please verify that it is indeed what you are asking.
    – Alex Becker
    May 31 '13 at 3:45










  • Yes! Thanks. like I said I know it doesn't, the fundamental groups tell us why. But that is more symbolic than "visual", I was seeking a visual answer.
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:51







1




1




I've added a title. Please verify that it is indeed what you are asking.
– Alex Becker
May 31 '13 at 3:45




I've added a title. Please verify that it is indeed what you are asking.
– Alex Becker
May 31 '13 at 3:45












Yes! Thanks. like I said I know it doesn't, the fundamental groups tell us why. But that is more symbolic than "visual", I was seeking a visual answer.
– user80309
May 31 '13 at 3:51




Yes! Thanks. like I said I know it doesn't, the fundamental groups tell us why. But that is more symbolic than "visual", I was seeking a visual answer.
– user80309
May 31 '13 at 3:51










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
12
down vote



accepted










First of all, let's clarify one thing. A circle does retract onto a point, because a retract of a circle to a point on it is just a constant map $r : S^1 to p$. What you're really asking about is the fact that a circle doesn't deformation retract onto a point.



A deformation retract would be a homotopy $F : S^1 times I to S^1$ taking the circle to one of its points, so to deformation retract a circle to a point you'd need to retract it to a point on the circle, via a series of maps $F_t$ that map the circle to itself. Your map seems to be shrinking the circle to a point, which doesn't work because you're moving the rest of the circle off of itself into the "empty space inside of it," which isn't allowed.



In other words, you're viewing the circle as being embedded in the plane, like you'd draw a circle on a piece of paper. But, topologically, the points "inside the circle" don't exist -- there's only the circle itself.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Oh I get that the hole is outside the $S^1$ space certainly, and the circle is always "inside the circle" via the homotopy maps. But as it gets smaller, like as you go down the cone, wouldn't the circle, still being inside itself, all continuously map to the point?
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:57










  • You're saying something like $F_t$ be the map sending the circle to a circle of radius $1-t$ tangent to the original circle at $p$. But For $0 < t < 1$, that map does not send the circle to itself, so it's not a homotopy. Each $F_t$ has to map the unit circle to the unit circle. In some very vague sense, you can't "shrink" it, not even a little bit.
    – Daniel McLaury
    May 31 '13 at 4:00











  • Yea ok that helps too thanks!
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 4:04






  • 2




    @user80309: Dear user, One way to think of it is that if you really want to identify the circle at time $t$ (which has radius $1 - t$) with the original circle at time $t = 0$ (which has radius $1$), you'll need to do a division by $1-t$ to renormalize the radius; but then this won't be defined when $t = 1$. So your picture of the mapping cone, which is correct, can't be converted into a deformation retract of the circle onto one of its points. Regards,
    – Matt E
    May 31 '13 at 4:56










  • Reviving an old thread sorry, but, is it correct to say that if you try to deformation retract $S^1$ to point $p$ then $p$ must be in $S^1$ or you aren't actually doing a deformation retraction?
    – Bob
    Feb 26 '16 at 23:51

















up vote
2
down vote













If I understand correctly, you are asking why a circle does not deformation retract onto a point. Recall that a deformation retract of $S^1$ onto a point $x_0in S$ is a function
$f:S^1times Ito S^1$ such that $f(x,0)=x$ for all $xin S^1$ and $f(x,1)=x_0$ for all $xin S^1$. You propose drawing a cone with one end (corresponding to $0$) equal to $S^1$ and the other (corresponding to $1$) equal to $x_0$, and defining $f(x,t)$ to be the point obtained by travelling a distance $t$ along the line segment connecting $x$ at one end to $x_0$ at the other. The issue is that for $tne 0,1$ and $xne x_0$, we will have $f(x,t)notin S^1$, so this map does not actually have range in $S^1$. Essentially, the problem with your cone visualization is that part of the cone lies outside $S^1$.






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • OH the homotopy cone has to be (or would have to be) entirely "inside" $S^1$. OK that takes care of it, thanks!
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:58


















up vote
0
down vote













I think your confusing homotopy equivalent and homeomorphic. The fact that you can wrap a disc into a point just means that they are homotopy equivalent, but not that they are homeomorphic, for that you would need a bijection. Since the map you describe is clearly not bijective, a point and $mathbbS^1$ are not homeomorphic.






share|cite|improve this answer




















  • No not the disc, its boundary the 1-sphere.
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 4:01

















up vote
0
down vote













I think I am not agree with Alex B. The picture of that cone we have in our mind is just intuitive. In the cylinder of S^1, we have the top most circle identified with a point on the circle. If u remove that point then we shall have an open subset of that cylinder. Which will be homeomorphic to the cone without the vertex. Now it you take the union of this cone without vertex with that extra point, you have the cone of circle.






share|cite|improve this answer




















    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: false,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    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%2f407361%2fwhy-doesnt-the-circle-retract-to-a-point%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest






























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    12
    down vote



    accepted










    First of all, let's clarify one thing. A circle does retract onto a point, because a retract of a circle to a point on it is just a constant map $r : S^1 to p$. What you're really asking about is the fact that a circle doesn't deformation retract onto a point.



    A deformation retract would be a homotopy $F : S^1 times I to S^1$ taking the circle to one of its points, so to deformation retract a circle to a point you'd need to retract it to a point on the circle, via a series of maps $F_t$ that map the circle to itself. Your map seems to be shrinking the circle to a point, which doesn't work because you're moving the rest of the circle off of itself into the "empty space inside of it," which isn't allowed.



    In other words, you're viewing the circle as being embedded in the plane, like you'd draw a circle on a piece of paper. But, topologically, the points "inside the circle" don't exist -- there's only the circle itself.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Oh I get that the hole is outside the $S^1$ space certainly, and the circle is always "inside the circle" via the homotopy maps. But as it gets smaller, like as you go down the cone, wouldn't the circle, still being inside itself, all continuously map to the point?
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 3:57










    • You're saying something like $F_t$ be the map sending the circle to a circle of radius $1-t$ tangent to the original circle at $p$. But For $0 < t < 1$, that map does not send the circle to itself, so it's not a homotopy. Each $F_t$ has to map the unit circle to the unit circle. In some very vague sense, you can't "shrink" it, not even a little bit.
      – Daniel McLaury
      May 31 '13 at 4:00











    • Yea ok that helps too thanks!
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 4:04






    • 2




      @user80309: Dear user, One way to think of it is that if you really want to identify the circle at time $t$ (which has radius $1 - t$) with the original circle at time $t = 0$ (which has radius $1$), you'll need to do a division by $1-t$ to renormalize the radius; but then this won't be defined when $t = 1$. So your picture of the mapping cone, which is correct, can't be converted into a deformation retract of the circle onto one of its points. Regards,
      – Matt E
      May 31 '13 at 4:56










    • Reviving an old thread sorry, but, is it correct to say that if you try to deformation retract $S^1$ to point $p$ then $p$ must be in $S^1$ or you aren't actually doing a deformation retraction?
      – Bob
      Feb 26 '16 at 23:51














    up vote
    12
    down vote



    accepted










    First of all, let's clarify one thing. A circle does retract onto a point, because a retract of a circle to a point on it is just a constant map $r : S^1 to p$. What you're really asking about is the fact that a circle doesn't deformation retract onto a point.



    A deformation retract would be a homotopy $F : S^1 times I to S^1$ taking the circle to one of its points, so to deformation retract a circle to a point you'd need to retract it to a point on the circle, via a series of maps $F_t$ that map the circle to itself. Your map seems to be shrinking the circle to a point, which doesn't work because you're moving the rest of the circle off of itself into the "empty space inside of it," which isn't allowed.



    In other words, you're viewing the circle as being embedded in the plane, like you'd draw a circle on a piece of paper. But, topologically, the points "inside the circle" don't exist -- there's only the circle itself.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Oh I get that the hole is outside the $S^1$ space certainly, and the circle is always "inside the circle" via the homotopy maps. But as it gets smaller, like as you go down the cone, wouldn't the circle, still being inside itself, all continuously map to the point?
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 3:57










    • You're saying something like $F_t$ be the map sending the circle to a circle of radius $1-t$ tangent to the original circle at $p$. But For $0 < t < 1$, that map does not send the circle to itself, so it's not a homotopy. Each $F_t$ has to map the unit circle to the unit circle. In some very vague sense, you can't "shrink" it, not even a little bit.
      – Daniel McLaury
      May 31 '13 at 4:00











    • Yea ok that helps too thanks!
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 4:04






    • 2




      @user80309: Dear user, One way to think of it is that if you really want to identify the circle at time $t$ (which has radius $1 - t$) with the original circle at time $t = 0$ (which has radius $1$), you'll need to do a division by $1-t$ to renormalize the radius; but then this won't be defined when $t = 1$. So your picture of the mapping cone, which is correct, can't be converted into a deformation retract of the circle onto one of its points. Regards,
      – Matt E
      May 31 '13 at 4:56










    • Reviving an old thread sorry, but, is it correct to say that if you try to deformation retract $S^1$ to point $p$ then $p$ must be in $S^1$ or you aren't actually doing a deformation retraction?
      – Bob
      Feb 26 '16 at 23:51












    up vote
    12
    down vote



    accepted







    up vote
    12
    down vote



    accepted






    First of all, let's clarify one thing. A circle does retract onto a point, because a retract of a circle to a point on it is just a constant map $r : S^1 to p$. What you're really asking about is the fact that a circle doesn't deformation retract onto a point.



    A deformation retract would be a homotopy $F : S^1 times I to S^1$ taking the circle to one of its points, so to deformation retract a circle to a point you'd need to retract it to a point on the circle, via a series of maps $F_t$ that map the circle to itself. Your map seems to be shrinking the circle to a point, which doesn't work because you're moving the rest of the circle off of itself into the "empty space inside of it," which isn't allowed.



    In other words, you're viewing the circle as being embedded in the plane, like you'd draw a circle on a piece of paper. But, topologically, the points "inside the circle" don't exist -- there's only the circle itself.






    share|cite|improve this answer














    First of all, let's clarify one thing. A circle does retract onto a point, because a retract of a circle to a point on it is just a constant map $r : S^1 to p$. What you're really asking about is the fact that a circle doesn't deformation retract onto a point.



    A deformation retract would be a homotopy $F : S^1 times I to S^1$ taking the circle to one of its points, so to deformation retract a circle to a point you'd need to retract it to a point on the circle, via a series of maps $F_t$ that map the circle to itself. Your map seems to be shrinking the circle to a point, which doesn't work because you're moving the rest of the circle off of itself into the "empty space inside of it," which isn't allowed.



    In other words, you're viewing the circle as being embedded in the plane, like you'd draw a circle on a piece of paper. But, topologically, the points "inside the circle" don't exist -- there's only the circle itself.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited May 31 '13 at 3:58

























    answered May 31 '13 at 3:52









    Daniel McLaury

    15.3k32876




    15.3k32876











    • Oh I get that the hole is outside the $S^1$ space certainly, and the circle is always "inside the circle" via the homotopy maps. But as it gets smaller, like as you go down the cone, wouldn't the circle, still being inside itself, all continuously map to the point?
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 3:57










    • You're saying something like $F_t$ be the map sending the circle to a circle of radius $1-t$ tangent to the original circle at $p$. But For $0 < t < 1$, that map does not send the circle to itself, so it's not a homotopy. Each $F_t$ has to map the unit circle to the unit circle. In some very vague sense, you can't "shrink" it, not even a little bit.
      – Daniel McLaury
      May 31 '13 at 4:00











    • Yea ok that helps too thanks!
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 4:04






    • 2




      @user80309: Dear user, One way to think of it is that if you really want to identify the circle at time $t$ (which has radius $1 - t$) with the original circle at time $t = 0$ (which has radius $1$), you'll need to do a division by $1-t$ to renormalize the radius; but then this won't be defined when $t = 1$. So your picture of the mapping cone, which is correct, can't be converted into a deformation retract of the circle onto one of its points. Regards,
      – Matt E
      May 31 '13 at 4:56










    • Reviving an old thread sorry, but, is it correct to say that if you try to deformation retract $S^1$ to point $p$ then $p$ must be in $S^1$ or you aren't actually doing a deformation retraction?
      – Bob
      Feb 26 '16 at 23:51
















    • Oh I get that the hole is outside the $S^1$ space certainly, and the circle is always "inside the circle" via the homotopy maps. But as it gets smaller, like as you go down the cone, wouldn't the circle, still being inside itself, all continuously map to the point?
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 3:57










    • You're saying something like $F_t$ be the map sending the circle to a circle of radius $1-t$ tangent to the original circle at $p$. But For $0 < t < 1$, that map does not send the circle to itself, so it's not a homotopy. Each $F_t$ has to map the unit circle to the unit circle. In some very vague sense, you can't "shrink" it, not even a little bit.
      – Daniel McLaury
      May 31 '13 at 4:00











    • Yea ok that helps too thanks!
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 4:04






    • 2




      @user80309: Dear user, One way to think of it is that if you really want to identify the circle at time $t$ (which has radius $1 - t$) with the original circle at time $t = 0$ (which has radius $1$), you'll need to do a division by $1-t$ to renormalize the radius; but then this won't be defined when $t = 1$. So your picture of the mapping cone, which is correct, can't be converted into a deformation retract of the circle onto one of its points. Regards,
      – Matt E
      May 31 '13 at 4:56










    • Reviving an old thread sorry, but, is it correct to say that if you try to deformation retract $S^1$ to point $p$ then $p$ must be in $S^1$ or you aren't actually doing a deformation retraction?
      – Bob
      Feb 26 '16 at 23:51















    Oh I get that the hole is outside the $S^1$ space certainly, and the circle is always "inside the circle" via the homotopy maps. But as it gets smaller, like as you go down the cone, wouldn't the circle, still being inside itself, all continuously map to the point?
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:57




    Oh I get that the hole is outside the $S^1$ space certainly, and the circle is always "inside the circle" via the homotopy maps. But as it gets smaller, like as you go down the cone, wouldn't the circle, still being inside itself, all continuously map to the point?
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:57












    You're saying something like $F_t$ be the map sending the circle to a circle of radius $1-t$ tangent to the original circle at $p$. But For $0 < t < 1$, that map does not send the circle to itself, so it's not a homotopy. Each $F_t$ has to map the unit circle to the unit circle. In some very vague sense, you can't "shrink" it, not even a little bit.
    – Daniel McLaury
    May 31 '13 at 4:00





    You're saying something like $F_t$ be the map sending the circle to a circle of radius $1-t$ tangent to the original circle at $p$. But For $0 < t < 1$, that map does not send the circle to itself, so it's not a homotopy. Each $F_t$ has to map the unit circle to the unit circle. In some very vague sense, you can't "shrink" it, not even a little bit.
    – Daniel McLaury
    May 31 '13 at 4:00













    Yea ok that helps too thanks!
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 4:04




    Yea ok that helps too thanks!
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 4:04




    2




    2




    @user80309: Dear user, One way to think of it is that if you really want to identify the circle at time $t$ (which has radius $1 - t$) with the original circle at time $t = 0$ (which has radius $1$), you'll need to do a division by $1-t$ to renormalize the radius; but then this won't be defined when $t = 1$. So your picture of the mapping cone, which is correct, can't be converted into a deformation retract of the circle onto one of its points. Regards,
    – Matt E
    May 31 '13 at 4:56




    @user80309: Dear user, One way to think of it is that if you really want to identify the circle at time $t$ (which has radius $1 - t$) with the original circle at time $t = 0$ (which has radius $1$), you'll need to do a division by $1-t$ to renormalize the radius; but then this won't be defined when $t = 1$. So your picture of the mapping cone, which is correct, can't be converted into a deformation retract of the circle onto one of its points. Regards,
    – Matt E
    May 31 '13 at 4:56












    Reviving an old thread sorry, but, is it correct to say that if you try to deformation retract $S^1$ to point $p$ then $p$ must be in $S^1$ or you aren't actually doing a deformation retraction?
    – Bob
    Feb 26 '16 at 23:51




    Reviving an old thread sorry, but, is it correct to say that if you try to deformation retract $S^1$ to point $p$ then $p$ must be in $S^1$ or you aren't actually doing a deformation retraction?
    – Bob
    Feb 26 '16 at 23:51










    up vote
    2
    down vote













    If I understand correctly, you are asking why a circle does not deformation retract onto a point. Recall that a deformation retract of $S^1$ onto a point $x_0in S$ is a function
    $f:S^1times Ito S^1$ such that $f(x,0)=x$ for all $xin S^1$ and $f(x,1)=x_0$ for all $xin S^1$. You propose drawing a cone with one end (corresponding to $0$) equal to $S^1$ and the other (corresponding to $1$) equal to $x_0$, and defining $f(x,t)$ to be the point obtained by travelling a distance $t$ along the line segment connecting $x$ at one end to $x_0$ at the other. The issue is that for $tne 0,1$ and $xne x_0$, we will have $f(x,t)notin S^1$, so this map does not actually have range in $S^1$. Essentially, the problem with your cone visualization is that part of the cone lies outside $S^1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • OH the homotopy cone has to be (or would have to be) entirely "inside" $S^1$. OK that takes care of it, thanks!
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 3:58















    up vote
    2
    down vote













    If I understand correctly, you are asking why a circle does not deformation retract onto a point. Recall that a deformation retract of $S^1$ onto a point $x_0in S$ is a function
    $f:S^1times Ito S^1$ such that $f(x,0)=x$ for all $xin S^1$ and $f(x,1)=x_0$ for all $xin S^1$. You propose drawing a cone with one end (corresponding to $0$) equal to $S^1$ and the other (corresponding to $1$) equal to $x_0$, and defining $f(x,t)$ to be the point obtained by travelling a distance $t$ along the line segment connecting $x$ at one end to $x_0$ at the other. The issue is that for $tne 0,1$ and $xne x_0$, we will have $f(x,t)notin S^1$, so this map does not actually have range in $S^1$. Essentially, the problem with your cone visualization is that part of the cone lies outside $S^1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • OH the homotopy cone has to be (or would have to be) entirely "inside" $S^1$. OK that takes care of it, thanks!
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 3:58













    up vote
    2
    down vote










    up vote
    2
    down vote









    If I understand correctly, you are asking why a circle does not deformation retract onto a point. Recall that a deformation retract of $S^1$ onto a point $x_0in S$ is a function
    $f:S^1times Ito S^1$ such that $f(x,0)=x$ for all $xin S^1$ and $f(x,1)=x_0$ for all $xin S^1$. You propose drawing a cone with one end (corresponding to $0$) equal to $S^1$ and the other (corresponding to $1$) equal to $x_0$, and defining $f(x,t)$ to be the point obtained by travelling a distance $t$ along the line segment connecting $x$ at one end to $x_0$ at the other. The issue is that for $tne 0,1$ and $xne x_0$, we will have $f(x,t)notin S^1$, so this map does not actually have range in $S^1$. Essentially, the problem with your cone visualization is that part of the cone lies outside $S^1$.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    If I understand correctly, you are asking why a circle does not deformation retract onto a point. Recall that a deformation retract of $S^1$ onto a point $x_0in S$ is a function
    $f:S^1times Ito S^1$ such that $f(x,0)=x$ for all $xin S^1$ and $f(x,1)=x_0$ for all $xin S^1$. You propose drawing a cone with one end (corresponding to $0$) equal to $S^1$ and the other (corresponding to $1$) equal to $x_0$, and defining $f(x,t)$ to be the point obtained by travelling a distance $t$ along the line segment connecting $x$ at one end to $x_0$ at the other. The issue is that for $tne 0,1$ and $xne x_0$, we will have $f(x,t)notin S^1$, so this map does not actually have range in $S^1$. Essentially, the problem with your cone visualization is that part of the cone lies outside $S^1$.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered May 31 '13 at 3:55









    Alex Becker

    48.2k695156




    48.2k695156











    • OH the homotopy cone has to be (or would have to be) entirely "inside" $S^1$. OK that takes care of it, thanks!
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 3:58

















    • OH the homotopy cone has to be (or would have to be) entirely "inside" $S^1$. OK that takes care of it, thanks!
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 3:58
















    OH the homotopy cone has to be (or would have to be) entirely "inside" $S^1$. OK that takes care of it, thanks!
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:58





    OH the homotopy cone has to be (or would have to be) entirely "inside" $S^1$. OK that takes care of it, thanks!
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 3:58











    up vote
    0
    down vote













    I think your confusing homotopy equivalent and homeomorphic. The fact that you can wrap a disc into a point just means that they are homotopy equivalent, but not that they are homeomorphic, for that you would need a bijection. Since the map you describe is clearly not bijective, a point and $mathbbS^1$ are not homeomorphic.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • No not the disc, its boundary the 1-sphere.
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 4:01














    up vote
    0
    down vote













    I think your confusing homotopy equivalent and homeomorphic. The fact that you can wrap a disc into a point just means that they are homotopy equivalent, but not that they are homeomorphic, for that you would need a bijection. Since the map you describe is clearly not bijective, a point and $mathbbS^1$ are not homeomorphic.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • No not the disc, its boundary the 1-sphere.
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 4:01












    up vote
    0
    down vote










    up vote
    0
    down vote









    I think your confusing homotopy equivalent and homeomorphic. The fact that you can wrap a disc into a point just means that they are homotopy equivalent, but not that they are homeomorphic, for that you would need a bijection. Since the map you describe is clearly not bijective, a point and $mathbbS^1$ are not homeomorphic.






    share|cite|improve this answer












    I think your confusing homotopy equivalent and homeomorphic. The fact that you can wrap a disc into a point just means that they are homotopy equivalent, but not that they are homeomorphic, for that you would need a bijection. Since the map you describe is clearly not bijective, a point and $mathbbS^1$ are not homeomorphic.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered May 31 '13 at 3:59









    nbubis

    26.8k552105




    26.8k552105











    • No not the disc, its boundary the 1-sphere.
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 4:01
















    • No not the disc, its boundary the 1-sphere.
      – user80309
      May 31 '13 at 4:01















    No not the disc, its boundary the 1-sphere.
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 4:01




    No not the disc, its boundary the 1-sphere.
    – user80309
    May 31 '13 at 4:01










    up vote
    0
    down vote













    I think I am not agree with Alex B. The picture of that cone we have in our mind is just intuitive. In the cylinder of S^1, we have the top most circle identified with a point on the circle. If u remove that point then we shall have an open subset of that cylinder. Which will be homeomorphic to the cone without the vertex. Now it you take the union of this cone without vertex with that extra point, you have the cone of circle.






    share|cite|improve this answer
























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      I think I am not agree with Alex B. The picture of that cone we have in our mind is just intuitive. In the cylinder of S^1, we have the top most circle identified with a point on the circle. If u remove that point then we shall have an open subset of that cylinder. Which will be homeomorphic to the cone without the vertex. Now it you take the union of this cone without vertex with that extra point, you have the cone of circle.






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        up vote
        0
        down vote










        up vote
        0
        down vote









        I think I am not agree with Alex B. The picture of that cone we have in our mind is just intuitive. In the cylinder of S^1, we have the top most circle identified with a point on the circle. If u remove that point then we shall have an open subset of that cylinder. Which will be homeomorphic to the cone without the vertex. Now it you take the union of this cone without vertex with that extra point, you have the cone of circle.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        I think I am not agree with Alex B. The picture of that cone we have in our mind is just intuitive. In the cylinder of S^1, we have the top most circle identified with a point on the circle. If u remove that point then we shall have an open subset of that cylinder. Which will be homeomorphic to the cone without the vertex. Now it you take the union of this cone without vertex with that extra point, you have the cone of circle.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Sep 7 at 7:50









        August aries

        12




        12



























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f407361%2fwhy-doesnt-the-circle-retract-to-a-point%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest













































































            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

            Carbon dioxide

            Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?