In mathematics, the term homology, originally introduced in algebraic topology, has three primary, closely related usages relating to chain complexes, mathematical objects, and topological spaces respectively. First, the most direct usage of the term is to take the homology of a chain complex, resulting in a sequence of Abelian group called homology groups. Secondly, as chain complexes are obtained from various other types of mathematical objects, this operation allows one to associate various named homologies or homology theories to these objects. Finally, since there are many homology theories for topological spaces that produce the same answer, one also often speaks of the homology of a topological space. (This latter notion of homology admits more intuitive descriptions for 1- or 2-dimensional topological spaces, and is sometimes referenced in popular mathematics.) There is also a related notion of the cohomology of a cochain complex, giving rise to various cohomology theories, in addition to the notion of the cohomology of a topological space.
The th homology group of this chain complex is then the quotient group of cycles Quotient group boundaries, where the th group of cycles is given by the kernel subgroup , and the th group of boundaries is given by the image subgroup . One can optionally endow chain complexes with additional structure, for example by additionally taking the groups to be modules over a coefficient ring , and taking the boundary maps to be -module homomorphisms, resulting in homology groups that are also Quotient module. Tools from homological algebra can be used to relate homology groups of different chain complexes.
In the language of category theory, a homology theory is a type of functor from the category of the mathematical object being studied to the category of abelian groups and group homomorphisms, or more generally to the category corresponding to the associated chain complexes. One can also formulate homology theories as Derived functor on appropriate abelian category, measuring the failure of an appropriate functor to be exact functor. One can describe this latter construction explicitly in terms of resolutions, or more abstractly from the perspective of Derived category or Model category.
Regardless of how they are formulated, homology theories help provide information about the structure of the mathematical objects to which they are associated, and can sometimes help distinguish different objects.
For 1-dimensional topological spaces, probably the simplest homology theory to use is graph homology, which could be regarded as a 1-dimensional special case of simplicial homology, the latter of which involves a decomposition of the topological space into Simplex. (Simplices are a generalization of triangles to arbitrary dimension; for example, an edge in a graph is Homeomorphism to a one-dimensional simplex, and a triangle-based pyramid is a 3-simplex.) Simplicial homology can in turn be generalized to singular homology, which allows more general maps of simplices into the topological space. Replacing simplices with disks of various dimensions results in a related construction called cellular homology.
There are also other ways of computing these homology groups, for example via Morse homology, or by taking the output of the Universal Coefficient Theorem when applied to a cohomology theory such as Čech cohomology or (in the case of real coefficients) De Rham cohomology.
Studying topological features such as these led to the notion of the cycles that represent homology classes (the elements of homology groups). For example, the two Embedding circles in a figure-eight shape provide examples of one-dimensional cycles, or 1-cycles, and the 2-torus and 2-sphere represent 2-cycles. Cycles form a group under the operation of formal addition, which refers to adding cycles symbolically rather than combining them geometrically. Any formal sum of cycles is again called a cycle.
Since such constructions are somewhat technical, informal discussions of homology sometimes focus instead on topological notions that parallel some of the group-theoretic aspects of cycles and boundaries.
For example, in the context of Chain complex, a boundary is any element of the image of the boundary homomorphism , for some . In topology, the boundary of a space is technically obtained by taking the space's closure minus its interior, but it is also a notion familiar from examples, e.g., the boundary of the unit disk is the unit circle, or more topologically, the boundary of is .
Topologically, the boundary of the closed interval is given by the disjoint union , and with respect to suitable orientation conventions, the oriented boundary of is given by the union of a positively oriented with a negatively oriented The simplicial chain complex analog of this statement is that . (Since is a homomorphism, this implies for any integer .)
In the context of chain complexes, a cycle is any element of the kernel, for some . In other words, is a cycle if and only if . The closest topological analog of this idea would be a shape that has "no boundary," in the sense that its boundary is the empty set. For example, since , and have no boundary, one can associate cycles to each of these spaces. However, the chain complex notion of cycles (elements whose boundary is a "zero chain") is more general than the topological notion of a shape with no boundary.
It is this topological notion of no boundary that people generally have in mind when they claim that cycles can intuitively be thought of as detecting holes. The idea is that for no-boundary shapes like , , and , it is possible in each case to glue on a larger shape for which the original shape is the boundary. For instance, starting with a circle , one could glue a 2-dimensional disk to that such that the is the boundary of that . Similarly, given a two-sphere , one can glue a ball to that such that the is the boundary of that . This phenomenon is sometimes described as saying that has a -shaped "hole" or that it could be "filled in" with a .
More generally, any shape with no boundary can be "filled in" with a cone, since if a given space has no boundary, then the boundary of the cone on is given by , and so if one "filled in" by gluing the cone on onto , then would be the boundary of that cone. (For example, a cone on is Homeomorphism to a disk whose boundary is that .) However, it is sometimes desirable to restrict to nicer spaces such as Manifold, and not every cone is homeomorphic to a manifold. Embedding representatives of 1-cycles, 3-cycles, and oriented 2-cycles all admit manifold-shaped holes, but for example the real projective plane and complex projective plane have nontrivial cobordism classes and therefore cannot be "filled in" with manifolds.
On the other hand, the boundaries discussed in the homology of a topological space are different from the boundaries of "filled in" holes, because the homology of a topological space has to do with the original space , and not with new shapes built from gluing extra pieces onto . For example, any embedded circle in already bounds some embedded disk in , so such gives rise to a boundary class in the homology of . By contrast, no embedding of into one of the 2 lobes of the figure-eight shape gives a boundary, despite the fact that it is possible to glue a disk onto a figure-eight lobe.
A one-dimensional sphere is a circle. It has a single connected component and a one-dimensional-boundary hole, but no higher-dimensional holes. The corresponding homology groups are given as where is the group of integers and is the trivial group. The group represents a finitely-generated abelian group, with a single generator representing the one-dimensional hole contained in a circle.
A two-dimensional sphere has a single connected component, no one-dimensional-boundary holes, a two-dimensional-boundary hole, and no higher-dimensional holes. The corresponding homology groups are
In general for an n-dimensional sphere the homology groups are
A two-dimensional ball is a solid disc. It has a single path-connected component, but in contrast to the circle, has no higher-dimensional holes. The corresponding homology groups are all trivial except for . In general, for an n-dimensional ball
The torus is defined as a product topology of two circles . The torus has a single path-connected component, two independent one-dimensional holes (indicated by circles in red and blue) and one two-dimensional hole as the interior of the torus. The corresponding homology groups are
If n products of a topological space X is written as , then in general, for an n-dimensional torus , (see and for more details).
The two independent 1-dimensional holes form independent generators in a finitely generated abelian group, expressed as the product group
For the projective plane P, a simple computation shows (where is the cyclic group of order 2): corresponds, as in the previous examples, to the fact that there is a single connected component. is a new phenomenon: intuitively, it corresponds to the fact that there is a single non-contractible "loop", but if we do the loop twice, it becomes contractible to zero. This phenomenon is called torsion.
The general construction begins with an object such as a topological space X, on which one first defines a C( X) encoding information about X. A chain complex is a sequence of abelian groups or modules . connected by homomorphisms which are called boundary operators. That is,
The statement that the boundary of a boundary is trivial is equivalent to the statement that , where denotes the image of the boundary operator and its kernel. Elements of are called boundaries and elements of are called cycles.
Since each chain group Cn is abelian all its subgroups are normal. Then because is a subgroup of Cn, is abelian, and since therefore is a normal subgroup of . Then one can create the quotient group
A chain complex is said to be exact sequence if the image of the ( n+1)th map is always equal to the kernel of the nth map. The homology groups of X therefore measure "how far" the chain complex associated to X is from being exact.
The Reduced homology of a chain complex C( X) are defined as homologies of the augmented chain complex
Computing the cycle and boundary groups is usually rather difficult since they have a very large number of generators. On the other hand, there are tools which make the task easier.
The simplicial homology groups Hn( X) of a simplicial complex X are defined using the simplicial chain complex C( X), with Cn( X) the free abelian group generated by the n-simplices of X. See simplicial homology for details.
The singular homology groups Hn( X) are defined for any topological space X, and agree with the simplicial homology groups for a simplicial complex.
Cohomology groups are formally similar to homology groups: one starts with a cochain complex, which is the same as a chain complex but whose arrows, now denoted point in the direction of increasing n rather than decreasing n; then the groups of cocycles and of follow from the same description. The nth cohomology group of X is then the quotient group
For an example, suppose is the figure eight. As usual, its first homotopy group, or fundamental group, is the group of homotopy classes of directed loops starting and ending at a predetermined point (e.g. its center). It is isomorphic to the free group of rank 2, , which is not commutative: looping around the lefthand cycle and then around the righthand cycle is different from looping around the righthand cycle and then looping around the lefthand cycle. By contrast, the figure eight's first homology group is abelian. To express this explicitly in terms of homology classes of cycles, one could take the homology class of the lefthand cycle and the homology class of the righthand cycle as basis elements of , allowing us to write .
The dimension of the n-th homology of X turns out to be the number of "holes" in X at dimension n. It may be computed by putting matrix representations of these boundary mappings in Smith normal form.
A common use of group (co)homology is to classify the possible Group extension E which contain a given G-module M as a normal subgroup and have a given quotient group G, so that
If the chain complex depends on the object X in a covariant manner (meaning that any morphism induces a morphism from the chain complex of X to the chain complex of Y), then the Hn are covariant from the category that X belongs to into the category of abelian groups (or modules).
The only difference between homology and cohomology is that in cohomology the chain complexes depend in a contravariant manner on X, and that therefore the homology groups (which are called cohomology groups in this context and denoted by Hn) form contravariant functors from the category that X belongs to into the category of abelian groups or modules.
Every short exact sequence
All maps in this long exact sequence are induced by the maps between the chain complexes, except for the maps The latter are called and are provided by the zig-zag lemma. This lemma can be applied to homology in numerous ways that aid in calculating homology groups, such as the theories of relative homology and Mayer-Vietoris sequences.
In , sensors may communicate information via an ad-hoc network that dynamically changes in time. To understand the global context of this set of local measurements and communication paths, it is useful to compute the homology of the network topology to evaluate, for instance, holes in coverage.
In theory in physics, Poincaré was one of the first to consider the interplay between the invariant manifold of a dynamical system and its topological invariants. Morse theory relates the dynamics of a gradient flow on a manifold to, for example, its homology. Floer homology extended this to infinite-dimensional manifolds. The KAM theorem established that can follow complex trajectories; in particular, they may form Braid theory that can be investigated using Floer homology.
In one class of finite element methods, boundary-value problems for differential equations involving the Hodge-Laplace operator may need to be solved on topologically nontrivial domains, for example, in electromagnetic simulations. In these simulations, solution is aided by fixing the cohomology class of the solution based on the chosen boundary conditions and the homology of the domain. FEM domains can be triangulated, from which the simplicial homology can be calculated.
The torus has closed curves which cannot be continuously deformed into each other, for example in the diagram none of the cycles a, b or c can be deformed into one another. In particular, cycles a and b cannot be shrunk to a point whereas cycle c can.
If the torus surface is cut along both a and b, it can be opened out and flattened into a rectangle or, more conveniently, a square. One opposite pair of sides represents the cut along a, and the other opposite pair represents the cut along b.
The edges of the square may then be glued back together in different ways. The square can be twisted to allow edges to meet in the opposite direction, as shown by the arrows in the diagram. The various ways of gluing the sides yield just four topologically distinct surfaces:
is the Klein bottle, which is a torus with a twist in it (In the square diagram, the twist can be seen as the reversal of the bottom arrow). It is a theorem that the re-glued surface must self-intersect (when immersed in Euclidean 3-space). Like the torus, cycles a and b cannot be shrunk while c can be. But unlike the torus, following b forwards right round and back reverses left and right, because b happens to cross over the twist given to one join. If an equidistant cut on one side of b is made, it returns on the other side and goes round the surface a second time before returning to its starting point, cutting out a twisted Möbius strip. Because local left and right can be arbitrarily re-oriented in this way, the surface as a whole is said to be non-orientable.
The projective plane has both joins twisted. The uncut form, generally represented as the Boy surface, is visually complex, so a hemispherical embedding is shown in the diagram, in which antipodal points around the rim such as A and A′ are identified as the same point. Again, a is non-shrinkable while c is. If b were only wound once, it would also be non-shrinkable and reverse left and right. However it is wound a second time, which swaps right and left back again; it can be shrunk to a point and is homologous to c.
Cycles can be joined or added together, as a and b on the torus were when it was cut open and flattened down. In the Klein bottle diagram, a goes round one way and − a goes round the opposite way. If a is thought of as a cut, then − a can be thought of as a gluing operation. Making a cut and then re-gluing it does not change the surface, so a + (− a) = 0.
But now consider two a-cycles. Since the Klein bottle is nonorientable, you can transport one of them all the way round the bottle (along the b-cycle), and it will come back as − a. This is because the Klein bottle is made from a cylinder, whose a-cycle ends are glued together with opposite orientations. Hence 2 a = a + a = a + (− a) = 0. This phenomenon is called torsion. Similarly, in the projective plane, following the unshrinkable cycle b round twice remarkably creates a trivial cycle which can be shrunk to a point; that is, b + b = 0. Because b must be followed around twice to achieve a zero cycle, the surface is said to have a torsion coefficient of 2. However, following a b-cycle around twice in the Klein bottle gives simply b + b = 2 b, since this cycle lives in a torsion-free homology class. This corresponds to the fact that in the fundamental polygon of the Klein bottle, only one pair of sides is glued with a twist, whereas in the projective plane both sides are twisted.
A square is a contractible topological space, which implies that it has trivial homology. Consequently, additional cuts disconnect it. The square is not the only shape in the plane that can be glued into a surface. Gluing opposite sides of an octagon, for example, produces a surface with two holes. In fact, all closed surfaces can be produced by gluing the sides of some polygon and all even-sided polygons (2 n-gons) can be glued to make different manifolds. Conversely, a closed surface with n non-zero classes can be cut into a 2 n-gon. Variations are also possible, for example a hexagon may also be glued to form a torus.
The first recognisable theory of homology was published by Henri Poincaré in his seminal paper "Analysis situs", J. Ecole polytech. (2) 1. 1–121 (1895). The paper introduced homology classes and relations. The possible configurations of orientable cycles are classified by the of the manifold (Betti numbers are a refinement of the Euler characteristic). Classifying the non-orientable cycles requires additional information about torsion coefficients.
The complete classification of 1- and 2-manifolds is given in the table.
+ Topological characteristics of closed 1- and 2-manifolds |
None |
None |
2 |
2 |
None |
None |
2 |
2 |
In a search for increased rigour, Poincaré went on to develop the simplicial homology of a triangulated manifold and to create what is now called a simplicial chain complex. Chain complexes (since greatly generalized) form the basis for most modern treatments of homology.
Emmy Noether and, independently, Leopold Vietoris and Walther Mayer further developed the theory of algebraic homology groups in the period 1925–28.For example L'émergence de la notion de groupe d'homologie, Nicolas Basbois (PDF), in French, note 41, explicitly names Noether as inventing the homology group.Hirzebruch, Friedrich, Emmy Noether and Topology in . The new combinatorial topology formally treated topological classes as . Homology groups are finitely generated abelian groups, and homology classes are elements of these groups. The Betti numbers of the manifold are the rank of the free part of the homology group, and in the special case of surfaces, the torsion part of the homology group only occurs for non-orientable cycles.
The subsequent spread of homology groups brought a change of terminology and viewpoint from "combinatorial topology" to "algebraic topology". Bourbaki and Algebraic Topology by John McCleary (PDF) gives documentation (translated into English from French originals). Algebraic homology remains the primary method of classifying manifolds.
|
|