How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Singular homology satisfies dimension and arbitrary additivity
Statement
For any abelian group , and for every integer . For every set-indexed family of pairs the canonical map is an isomorphism. Together with the structural axioms, singular homology is an ordinary theory with coefficient group .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The objects and hypotheses in the statement above.
A CW pair is with a CW subcomplex of , as in def-skeleta-cw-subcomplex-and-relative-cw-complex. Morphisms are all continuous maps of pairs, not just cellular maps. An ordinary unreduced homology theory assigns covariant functors from CW pairs to abelian groups, for every , and natural homomorphisms , where , satisfying: - Homotopic maps of pairs induce equal homomorphisms. - The inclusion maps and form an exact sequence . - For CW subcomplexes of , inclusion induces . - For a point , when ; write . - For every set-indexed family of CW pairs, including the empty family, the inclusions induce . Thus . No finite-dimensionality or finite-cell restriction is implicit. (Unreduced homology theory on cw pairs)
For every fixed abelian group , singular homology , extended by zero in negative degrees, satisfies homotopy invariance, pair exactness, naturality of the connecting maps, and CW excision in def-unreduced-homology-theory-on-cw-pairs. (Singular homology satisfies homotopy exactness and excision)
For a topological space and an abelian group , the singular chain groups and boundary maps of def-singular-boundary-operator form the singular chain complex because thm-the-singular-boundary-squares-to-zero gives . Its degree- cycles and boundaries are in the sense of def-cycle-and-boundary-subobjects-of-a-complex. The th singular homology group is the homology object of this chain complex: equivalently in the notation of def-homology-object-of-a-chain-complex. When the coefficient group is , write simply and when no confusion can arise. (The singular chain complex and singular homology)
Let be a disjoint union of topological spaces, and let be an abelian group. Then for every , (The singular homology of a disjoint union is the direct sum)
Proof
In the point complex there is one singular simplex in every nonnegative degree. The boundary on its copy of is multiplication by : it is the identity for positive even and zero for odd ; . Thus its homology is in degree zero and zero in every other degree, also when .
A singular simplex has connected domain and hence its image lies in a single summand of a disjoint union. The chain complex of a union is consequently the direct sum of the chain complexes; this is the chain mechanism underlying F4. Taking the quotient by the corresponding subspace chains gives the direct sum of the relative chain complexes.
A finite-support tuple is a cycle exactly when every coordinate is a cycle. It is a boundary exactly when every coordinate is a boundary: choose a bounding chain in each of its finitely many nonzero coordinates. Thus homology commutes with this direct sum. This includes the empty family, whose chain complex is zero, and a singleton family. With F2 this verifies all axioms of F1.
Depends on
Used by
- Finite additivity alone does not prove infinite cw uniqueness Counterexample
- Two homology theories with different coefficient groups Example
- A map of nonzero degree between spheres is surjective Lemma
- Coefficient comparison on finite cw pairs Lemma
- Degree of identity constant reflection and antipodal sphere maps Proposition
- Eilenberg steenrod uniqueness on all cw pairs Theorem
- No retraction from a disk onto its boundary Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
15 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Miller, Algebraic Topology I lecture notes, Definition 11.1, pp.25–26 (standard reference, not scraped)