Computing the homology groups of two tori attached in a certain way.

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











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Suppose $X_1$ and $X_2$ are both homeomorphic to the 2-dimensional torus $T^2$ and suppose $C_i subset X_i$ is a topological circle bounding a disc in $X_i$. Furthermore, assume a neighborhood of $C_i$ deformation retracts to $C_i$. Compute the homology of $Y$ which is constructed by gluing $X_1$ to $X_2$ along the circles $C_i$.




I want to decompose $Y=A cup B$ where $A=X_1 cup U_2$ and $B=X_2 cup U_1$ and apply Mayer-Vietors sequence to this to compute the homology groups.



With this decomposition $A cap B = U_1 cap U_2$ which is homotopy equivalent to the circle $S^1$. Also, $A,B$ are homotopy equivalent to $X_1$ and $X_2$ since $U_2$ and $U_1$ deformation retract onto the circle. My problem is that I'm not getting enough zeros in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to get isomorphisms.



What should I do to solve this?








share|cite|improve this question



















  • Are you gluing them only along a circle, or are you gluing them along the disk they bound?
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday










  • @AlfredYerger Along the circle only.
    – TuoTuo
    yesterday










  • cool. So the thing that you have to remember to get this right is that you don't just need 0s in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to know $H_i(X)$. You know some things about where the maps $i_*, j_*, k_*, l_* partial_*$ all come from because they are induced by maps of topological spaces. If you're computing purely algebraically, then you need a lot of 0s to get isomorphisms, but if you remember the topological descriptions, you can figure out what the groups are with this additional information.
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday











  • Also, you can work out the precise connecting homomorphism, and this will help you know the groups.
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday














up vote
1
down vote

favorite












Suppose $X_1$ and $X_2$ are both homeomorphic to the 2-dimensional torus $T^2$ and suppose $C_i subset X_i$ is a topological circle bounding a disc in $X_i$. Furthermore, assume a neighborhood of $C_i$ deformation retracts to $C_i$. Compute the homology of $Y$ which is constructed by gluing $X_1$ to $X_2$ along the circles $C_i$.




I want to decompose $Y=A cup B$ where $A=X_1 cup U_2$ and $B=X_2 cup U_1$ and apply Mayer-Vietors sequence to this to compute the homology groups.



With this decomposition $A cap B = U_1 cap U_2$ which is homotopy equivalent to the circle $S^1$. Also, $A,B$ are homotopy equivalent to $X_1$ and $X_2$ since $U_2$ and $U_1$ deformation retract onto the circle. My problem is that I'm not getting enough zeros in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to get isomorphisms.



What should I do to solve this?








share|cite|improve this question



















  • Are you gluing them only along a circle, or are you gluing them along the disk they bound?
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday










  • @AlfredYerger Along the circle only.
    – TuoTuo
    yesterday










  • cool. So the thing that you have to remember to get this right is that you don't just need 0s in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to know $H_i(X)$. You know some things about where the maps $i_*, j_*, k_*, l_* partial_*$ all come from because they are induced by maps of topological spaces. If you're computing purely algebraically, then you need a lot of 0s to get isomorphisms, but if you remember the topological descriptions, you can figure out what the groups are with this additional information.
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday











  • Also, you can work out the precise connecting homomorphism, and this will help you know the groups.
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday












up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











Suppose $X_1$ and $X_2$ are both homeomorphic to the 2-dimensional torus $T^2$ and suppose $C_i subset X_i$ is a topological circle bounding a disc in $X_i$. Furthermore, assume a neighborhood of $C_i$ deformation retracts to $C_i$. Compute the homology of $Y$ which is constructed by gluing $X_1$ to $X_2$ along the circles $C_i$.




I want to decompose $Y=A cup B$ where $A=X_1 cup U_2$ and $B=X_2 cup U_1$ and apply Mayer-Vietors sequence to this to compute the homology groups.



With this decomposition $A cap B = U_1 cap U_2$ which is homotopy equivalent to the circle $S^1$. Also, $A,B$ are homotopy equivalent to $X_1$ and $X_2$ since $U_2$ and $U_1$ deformation retract onto the circle. My problem is that I'm not getting enough zeros in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to get isomorphisms.



What should I do to solve this?








share|cite|improve this question











Suppose $X_1$ and $X_2$ are both homeomorphic to the 2-dimensional torus $T^2$ and suppose $C_i subset X_i$ is a topological circle bounding a disc in $X_i$. Furthermore, assume a neighborhood of $C_i$ deformation retracts to $C_i$. Compute the homology of $Y$ which is constructed by gluing $X_1$ to $X_2$ along the circles $C_i$.




I want to decompose $Y=A cup B$ where $A=X_1 cup U_2$ and $B=X_2 cup U_1$ and apply Mayer-Vietors sequence to this to compute the homology groups.



With this decomposition $A cap B = U_1 cap U_2$ which is homotopy equivalent to the circle $S^1$. Also, $A,B$ are homotopy equivalent to $X_1$ and $X_2$ since $U_2$ and $U_1$ deformation retract onto the circle. My problem is that I'm not getting enough zeros in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to get isomorphisms.



What should I do to solve this?










share|cite|improve this question










share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question









asked yesterday









TuoTuo

1,477512




1,477512











  • Are you gluing them only along a circle, or are you gluing them along the disk they bound?
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday










  • @AlfredYerger Along the circle only.
    – TuoTuo
    yesterday










  • cool. So the thing that you have to remember to get this right is that you don't just need 0s in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to know $H_i(X)$. You know some things about where the maps $i_*, j_*, k_*, l_* partial_*$ all come from because they are induced by maps of topological spaces. If you're computing purely algebraically, then you need a lot of 0s to get isomorphisms, but if you remember the topological descriptions, you can figure out what the groups are with this additional information.
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday











  • Also, you can work out the precise connecting homomorphism, and this will help you know the groups.
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday
















  • Are you gluing them only along a circle, or are you gluing them along the disk they bound?
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday










  • @AlfredYerger Along the circle only.
    – TuoTuo
    yesterday










  • cool. So the thing that you have to remember to get this right is that you don't just need 0s in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to know $H_i(X)$. You know some things about where the maps $i_*, j_*, k_*, l_* partial_*$ all come from because they are induced by maps of topological spaces. If you're computing purely algebraically, then you need a lot of 0s to get isomorphisms, but if you remember the topological descriptions, you can figure out what the groups are with this additional information.
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday











  • Also, you can work out the precise connecting homomorphism, and this will help you know the groups.
    – Alfred Yerger
    yesterday















Are you gluing them only along a circle, or are you gluing them along the disk they bound?
– Alfred Yerger
yesterday




Are you gluing them only along a circle, or are you gluing them along the disk they bound?
– Alfred Yerger
yesterday












@AlfredYerger Along the circle only.
– TuoTuo
yesterday




@AlfredYerger Along the circle only.
– TuoTuo
yesterday












cool. So the thing that you have to remember to get this right is that you don't just need 0s in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to know $H_i(X)$. You know some things about where the maps $i_*, j_*, k_*, l_* partial_*$ all come from because they are induced by maps of topological spaces. If you're computing purely algebraically, then you need a lot of 0s to get isomorphisms, but if you remember the topological descriptions, you can figure out what the groups are with this additional information.
– Alfred Yerger
yesterday





cool. So the thing that you have to remember to get this right is that you don't just need 0s in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence to know $H_i(X)$. You know some things about where the maps $i_*, j_*, k_*, l_* partial_*$ all come from because they are induced by maps of topological spaces. If you're computing purely algebraically, then you need a lot of 0s to get isomorphisms, but if you remember the topological descriptions, you can figure out what the groups are with this additional information.
– Alfred Yerger
yesterday













Also, you can work out the precise connecting homomorphism, and this will help you know the groups.
– Alfred Yerger
yesterday




Also, you can work out the precise connecting homomorphism, and this will help you know the groups.
– Alfred Yerger
yesterday










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
0
down vote













Here is my attempt, where everything seems reasonable and resists my sanity checks, but I'm not an algebraic topologist so please check over my work!



The main idea is what I wrote in the comment - we figure out what the maps are in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence by looking at where they come from topologically, and use the fact that a long exact sequence can be split up into short exact sequences, and the fact that $mathbbZ$ is projective in order to stitch together the homology from the image and kernel. This wouldn't work if all the groups in sight for $A, B, U_1, U_2$ weren't all just $mathbbZ$ and powers thereof. But since they are, we get some extra computing power from this too, so we'll use your decomposition, since it's a nice one for calculating with.



So let's start with the sequence.



$$0 to H_2(A cap B) to H_2(A) oplus H_2(B) to H_2(X) to H_1(A cap B) to H_1(A) oplus H_1(B) to H_1(X) to ...$$



The tail of the sequence is kind of trivial. We know that the zeroth homology is just the free group on the connected components. All our spaces are connected, so we know that the tail of the sequence is



$$ ...to mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ to 0 $$



But just to sanity check, let's take a quick look at the maps.



Thus, the map taking $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ takes the connected component corresponding to the the cylinder and includes it into each. We can choose orientations so that this is the map $1 mapsto (1,1)$. If we do this, it follows that the map taking $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ$ must be $(n,m) mapsto n - m$, which is reasonable, since this map is $k_* - l_*$, and both $k$ and $l$ ought to be the maps taking their respective generator to itself, as both tori are connected and the whole space is connected. It is easy to see this is exact.



So now let's do this with $H_2$ since it is the next easiest, in my opinion.



You correctly observe that the intersection is homotopy equivalent to a circle. This makes $H_2(A cap B) = 0$. Also, $H_2(A) = H_2(B) = mathbbZ$ as tori are orientable surfaces, and it is a standard fact that such surfaces have top homology $mathbbZ$. Note that our space is not a topological surface.



Now we know by injectivity (by exactness) that $H_2(X)$ must contain $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$. We know the homology groups of the circle and tori, so we are looking at the section of the sequence that looks like



$$ ... to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to H_2(X) to mathbbZ to mathbbZ^4 to ... $$



and we want to what this last map is. It is the sum of two maps, each $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$, taking the homology class of the cylinder into the torus. But our decomposition shows that this disk which it bounds is a boundary, and so this map is the $0$ map, and so this plus the algebraic observations at the beginning imply $H_2(X) = mathbbZ^3$.



This is a reasonable answer because thinking of this space as a CW complex, each torus has a contribution of a $mathbbZ$, and the gluing along a cylinder creates a sort of sphere enclosed inside the cylinder and the disks of the tori.



Now let's see about $H_1$. We expect that attaching the cylinder doesn't change anything because we already saw that the inclusions were the $0$ map, so there shouldn't be a homology class corresponding to the cylinder. To see this, observe that since $(i_*, j_*)$ is the $0$ map, the map $mathbbZ^4 to H_1(X)$ must be injective. Thus it's image is $mathbbZ^4$, which means the kernel of $partial_*$ is $mathbbZ^4$. But we already saw that the map $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ on $0$th homology was injective, and this means $partial_*$ has image $0$, since the next map has kernel $0$. Now we know that $partial_*$ is the $0$ map, and we know it's kernel, so we know that $H_1(X) = mathbbZ^4$ as well.



And we're done!






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%2f2872261%2fcomputing-the-homology-groups-of-two-tori-attached-in-a-certain-way%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest






























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    0
    down vote













    Here is my attempt, where everything seems reasonable and resists my sanity checks, but I'm not an algebraic topologist so please check over my work!



    The main idea is what I wrote in the comment - we figure out what the maps are in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence by looking at where they come from topologically, and use the fact that a long exact sequence can be split up into short exact sequences, and the fact that $mathbbZ$ is projective in order to stitch together the homology from the image and kernel. This wouldn't work if all the groups in sight for $A, B, U_1, U_2$ weren't all just $mathbbZ$ and powers thereof. But since they are, we get some extra computing power from this too, so we'll use your decomposition, since it's a nice one for calculating with.



    So let's start with the sequence.



    $$0 to H_2(A cap B) to H_2(A) oplus H_2(B) to H_2(X) to H_1(A cap B) to H_1(A) oplus H_1(B) to H_1(X) to ...$$



    The tail of the sequence is kind of trivial. We know that the zeroth homology is just the free group on the connected components. All our spaces are connected, so we know that the tail of the sequence is



    $$ ...to mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ to 0 $$



    But just to sanity check, let's take a quick look at the maps.



    Thus, the map taking $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ takes the connected component corresponding to the the cylinder and includes it into each. We can choose orientations so that this is the map $1 mapsto (1,1)$. If we do this, it follows that the map taking $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ$ must be $(n,m) mapsto n - m$, which is reasonable, since this map is $k_* - l_*$, and both $k$ and $l$ ought to be the maps taking their respective generator to itself, as both tori are connected and the whole space is connected. It is easy to see this is exact.



    So now let's do this with $H_2$ since it is the next easiest, in my opinion.



    You correctly observe that the intersection is homotopy equivalent to a circle. This makes $H_2(A cap B) = 0$. Also, $H_2(A) = H_2(B) = mathbbZ$ as tori are orientable surfaces, and it is a standard fact that such surfaces have top homology $mathbbZ$. Note that our space is not a topological surface.



    Now we know by injectivity (by exactness) that $H_2(X)$ must contain $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$. We know the homology groups of the circle and tori, so we are looking at the section of the sequence that looks like



    $$ ... to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to H_2(X) to mathbbZ to mathbbZ^4 to ... $$



    and we want to what this last map is. It is the sum of two maps, each $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$, taking the homology class of the cylinder into the torus. But our decomposition shows that this disk which it bounds is a boundary, and so this map is the $0$ map, and so this plus the algebraic observations at the beginning imply $H_2(X) = mathbbZ^3$.



    This is a reasonable answer because thinking of this space as a CW complex, each torus has a contribution of a $mathbbZ$, and the gluing along a cylinder creates a sort of sphere enclosed inside the cylinder and the disks of the tori.



    Now let's see about $H_1$. We expect that attaching the cylinder doesn't change anything because we already saw that the inclusions were the $0$ map, so there shouldn't be a homology class corresponding to the cylinder. To see this, observe that since $(i_*, j_*)$ is the $0$ map, the map $mathbbZ^4 to H_1(X)$ must be injective. Thus it's image is $mathbbZ^4$, which means the kernel of $partial_*$ is $mathbbZ^4$. But we already saw that the map $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ on $0$th homology was injective, and this means $partial_*$ has image $0$, since the next map has kernel $0$. Now we know that $partial_*$ is the $0$ map, and we know it's kernel, so we know that $H_1(X) = mathbbZ^4$ as well.



    And we're done!






    share|cite|improve this answer

























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      Here is my attempt, where everything seems reasonable and resists my sanity checks, but I'm not an algebraic topologist so please check over my work!



      The main idea is what I wrote in the comment - we figure out what the maps are in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence by looking at where they come from topologically, and use the fact that a long exact sequence can be split up into short exact sequences, and the fact that $mathbbZ$ is projective in order to stitch together the homology from the image and kernel. This wouldn't work if all the groups in sight for $A, B, U_1, U_2$ weren't all just $mathbbZ$ and powers thereof. But since they are, we get some extra computing power from this too, so we'll use your decomposition, since it's a nice one for calculating with.



      So let's start with the sequence.



      $$0 to H_2(A cap B) to H_2(A) oplus H_2(B) to H_2(X) to H_1(A cap B) to H_1(A) oplus H_1(B) to H_1(X) to ...$$



      The tail of the sequence is kind of trivial. We know that the zeroth homology is just the free group on the connected components. All our spaces are connected, so we know that the tail of the sequence is



      $$ ...to mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ to 0 $$



      But just to sanity check, let's take a quick look at the maps.



      Thus, the map taking $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ takes the connected component corresponding to the the cylinder and includes it into each. We can choose orientations so that this is the map $1 mapsto (1,1)$. If we do this, it follows that the map taking $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ$ must be $(n,m) mapsto n - m$, which is reasonable, since this map is $k_* - l_*$, and both $k$ and $l$ ought to be the maps taking their respective generator to itself, as both tori are connected and the whole space is connected. It is easy to see this is exact.



      So now let's do this with $H_2$ since it is the next easiest, in my opinion.



      You correctly observe that the intersection is homotopy equivalent to a circle. This makes $H_2(A cap B) = 0$. Also, $H_2(A) = H_2(B) = mathbbZ$ as tori are orientable surfaces, and it is a standard fact that such surfaces have top homology $mathbbZ$. Note that our space is not a topological surface.



      Now we know by injectivity (by exactness) that $H_2(X)$ must contain $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$. We know the homology groups of the circle and tori, so we are looking at the section of the sequence that looks like



      $$ ... to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to H_2(X) to mathbbZ to mathbbZ^4 to ... $$



      and we want to what this last map is. It is the sum of two maps, each $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$, taking the homology class of the cylinder into the torus. But our decomposition shows that this disk which it bounds is a boundary, and so this map is the $0$ map, and so this plus the algebraic observations at the beginning imply $H_2(X) = mathbbZ^3$.



      This is a reasonable answer because thinking of this space as a CW complex, each torus has a contribution of a $mathbbZ$, and the gluing along a cylinder creates a sort of sphere enclosed inside the cylinder and the disks of the tori.



      Now let's see about $H_1$. We expect that attaching the cylinder doesn't change anything because we already saw that the inclusions were the $0$ map, so there shouldn't be a homology class corresponding to the cylinder. To see this, observe that since $(i_*, j_*)$ is the $0$ map, the map $mathbbZ^4 to H_1(X)$ must be injective. Thus it's image is $mathbbZ^4$, which means the kernel of $partial_*$ is $mathbbZ^4$. But we already saw that the map $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ on $0$th homology was injective, and this means $partial_*$ has image $0$, since the next map has kernel $0$. Now we know that $partial_*$ is the $0$ map, and we know it's kernel, so we know that $H_1(X) = mathbbZ^4$ as well.



      And we're done!






      share|cite|improve this answer























        up vote
        0
        down vote










        up vote
        0
        down vote









        Here is my attempt, where everything seems reasonable and resists my sanity checks, but I'm not an algebraic topologist so please check over my work!



        The main idea is what I wrote in the comment - we figure out what the maps are in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence by looking at where they come from topologically, and use the fact that a long exact sequence can be split up into short exact sequences, and the fact that $mathbbZ$ is projective in order to stitch together the homology from the image and kernel. This wouldn't work if all the groups in sight for $A, B, U_1, U_2$ weren't all just $mathbbZ$ and powers thereof. But since they are, we get some extra computing power from this too, so we'll use your decomposition, since it's a nice one for calculating with.



        So let's start with the sequence.



        $$0 to H_2(A cap B) to H_2(A) oplus H_2(B) to H_2(X) to H_1(A cap B) to H_1(A) oplus H_1(B) to H_1(X) to ...$$



        The tail of the sequence is kind of trivial. We know that the zeroth homology is just the free group on the connected components. All our spaces are connected, so we know that the tail of the sequence is



        $$ ...to mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ to 0 $$



        But just to sanity check, let's take a quick look at the maps.



        Thus, the map taking $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ takes the connected component corresponding to the the cylinder and includes it into each. We can choose orientations so that this is the map $1 mapsto (1,1)$. If we do this, it follows that the map taking $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ$ must be $(n,m) mapsto n - m$, which is reasonable, since this map is $k_* - l_*$, and both $k$ and $l$ ought to be the maps taking their respective generator to itself, as both tori are connected and the whole space is connected. It is easy to see this is exact.



        So now let's do this with $H_2$ since it is the next easiest, in my opinion.



        You correctly observe that the intersection is homotopy equivalent to a circle. This makes $H_2(A cap B) = 0$. Also, $H_2(A) = H_2(B) = mathbbZ$ as tori are orientable surfaces, and it is a standard fact that such surfaces have top homology $mathbbZ$. Note that our space is not a topological surface.



        Now we know by injectivity (by exactness) that $H_2(X)$ must contain $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$. We know the homology groups of the circle and tori, so we are looking at the section of the sequence that looks like



        $$ ... to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to H_2(X) to mathbbZ to mathbbZ^4 to ... $$



        and we want to what this last map is. It is the sum of two maps, each $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$, taking the homology class of the cylinder into the torus. But our decomposition shows that this disk which it bounds is a boundary, and so this map is the $0$ map, and so this plus the algebraic observations at the beginning imply $H_2(X) = mathbbZ^3$.



        This is a reasonable answer because thinking of this space as a CW complex, each torus has a contribution of a $mathbbZ$, and the gluing along a cylinder creates a sort of sphere enclosed inside the cylinder and the disks of the tori.



        Now let's see about $H_1$. We expect that attaching the cylinder doesn't change anything because we already saw that the inclusions were the $0$ map, so there shouldn't be a homology class corresponding to the cylinder. To see this, observe that since $(i_*, j_*)$ is the $0$ map, the map $mathbbZ^4 to H_1(X)$ must be injective. Thus it's image is $mathbbZ^4$, which means the kernel of $partial_*$ is $mathbbZ^4$. But we already saw that the map $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ on $0$th homology was injective, and this means $partial_*$ has image $0$, since the next map has kernel $0$. Now we know that $partial_*$ is the $0$ map, and we know it's kernel, so we know that $H_1(X) = mathbbZ^4$ as well.



        And we're done!






        share|cite|improve this answer













        Here is my attempt, where everything seems reasonable and resists my sanity checks, but I'm not an algebraic topologist so please check over my work!



        The main idea is what I wrote in the comment - we figure out what the maps are in the Mayer-Vietoris sequence by looking at where they come from topologically, and use the fact that a long exact sequence can be split up into short exact sequences, and the fact that $mathbbZ$ is projective in order to stitch together the homology from the image and kernel. This wouldn't work if all the groups in sight for $A, B, U_1, U_2$ weren't all just $mathbbZ$ and powers thereof. But since they are, we get some extra computing power from this too, so we'll use your decomposition, since it's a nice one for calculating with.



        So let's start with the sequence.



        $$0 to H_2(A cap B) to H_2(A) oplus H_2(B) to H_2(X) to H_1(A cap B) to H_1(A) oplus H_1(B) to H_1(X) to ...$$



        The tail of the sequence is kind of trivial. We know that the zeroth homology is just the free group on the connected components. All our spaces are connected, so we know that the tail of the sequence is



        $$ ...to mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ to 0 $$



        But just to sanity check, let's take a quick look at the maps.



        Thus, the map taking $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ takes the connected component corresponding to the the cylinder and includes it into each. We can choose orientations so that this is the map $1 mapsto (1,1)$. If we do this, it follows that the map taking $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to mathbbZ$ must be $(n,m) mapsto n - m$, which is reasonable, since this map is $k_* - l_*$, and both $k$ and $l$ ought to be the maps taking their respective generator to itself, as both tori are connected and the whole space is connected. It is easy to see this is exact.



        So now let's do this with $H_2$ since it is the next easiest, in my opinion.



        You correctly observe that the intersection is homotopy equivalent to a circle. This makes $H_2(A cap B) = 0$. Also, $H_2(A) = H_2(B) = mathbbZ$ as tori are orientable surfaces, and it is a standard fact that such surfaces have top homology $mathbbZ$. Note that our space is not a topological surface.



        Now we know by injectivity (by exactness) that $H_2(X)$ must contain $mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$. We know the homology groups of the circle and tori, so we are looking at the section of the sequence that looks like



        $$ ... to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ to H_2(X) to mathbbZ to mathbbZ^4 to ... $$



        and we want to what this last map is. It is the sum of two maps, each $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$, taking the homology class of the cylinder into the torus. But our decomposition shows that this disk which it bounds is a boundary, and so this map is the $0$ map, and so this plus the algebraic observations at the beginning imply $H_2(X) = mathbbZ^3$.



        This is a reasonable answer because thinking of this space as a CW complex, each torus has a contribution of a $mathbbZ$, and the gluing along a cylinder creates a sort of sphere enclosed inside the cylinder and the disks of the tori.



        Now let's see about $H_1$. We expect that attaching the cylinder doesn't change anything because we already saw that the inclusions were the $0$ map, so there shouldn't be a homology class corresponding to the cylinder. To see this, observe that since $(i_*, j_*)$ is the $0$ map, the map $mathbbZ^4 to H_1(X)$ must be injective. Thus it's image is $mathbbZ^4$, which means the kernel of $partial_*$ is $mathbbZ^4$. But we already saw that the map $mathbbZ to mathbbZ oplus mathbbZ$ on $0$th homology was injective, and this means $partial_*$ has image $0$, since the next map has kernel $0$. Now we know that $partial_*$ is the $0$ map, and we know it's kernel, so we know that $H_1(X) = mathbbZ^4$ as well.



        And we're done!







        share|cite|improve this answer













        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer











        answered yesterday









        Alfred Yerger

        9,2761743




        9,2761743






















             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


























             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2872261%2fcomputing-the-homology-groups-of-two-tori-attached-in-a-certain-way%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest













































































            Comments

            Popular posts from this blog

            What is the equation of a 3D cone with generalised tilt?

            Color the edges and diagonals of a regular polygon

            Relationship between determinant of matrix and determinant of adjoint?