4
$\begingroup$

Show that there is no homeomorphism $f:\mathbb{R}^2\setminus\mathbb{S}^1\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2\setminus\mathbb{S}^1$ such that $f(0, 0) = (2, 0)$. I proceed as follows (everything has its usual topology):

Suppose there is such a homeomorphism $f$. Then the restriction of $f$ to $\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{R}^2:x^2+y^2<1\}$ is a homeomorphism whose image is a connected component of $\mathbb{R}^2\setminus\mathbb{S}^1$. As $f(0,0)=(2,0)$, its image must be $\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{R}^2:x^2+y^2>1\}$. However, this is not possible, as those spaces have different fundamental group:

  • The unit disk $\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{R}^2:x^2+y^2<1\}$ is convex, and therefore it has trivial fundamental group.
  • The annulus $\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{R}^2:x^2+y^2>1\}$ has as a deformation retract the sphere centered at the origin of radius $2$, which has fundamental group $\mathbb{Z}$, and so does the annulus.

Is everything correct?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Yes, this seems ok $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 24, 2024 at 17:37
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ math.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/solution-verification: "For posts looking for feedback or verification of a proposed solution. "Is my proof correct?" is too broad or missing context. Instead, the question must identify precisely which step in the proof is in doubt, and why so." $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 24, 2024 at 17:41
  • $\begingroup$ Your proof is fine. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 24, 2024 at 21:11

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.