§ Snake lemma
§ Why homomorphisms for chain maps?
First of all, to define a mapping between simplicial complexes {Gi}
and {Hi}, one might naively assume that we can ask for functions
{fi:Gi→Hi}:
∂ ∂
G3 → G2 → G1 → 0
| | |
f g h
↓ ↓ ↓
0 → H3 → H2 → H1
∂ ∂
Unfortunately, to be able to use the
machinery of Homology, we need the {fi} to be abelian group homomorphisms.
However, this is no great loss. Intuitively, when we want to map complexes,
we first say where the generators of the abelian group ( Z-module)
maps to; Everything else is determined by the generators. This aligns
nicely with our intuition of what a map between complexes should look like:
we tell where the geometry goes ("this edge goes there"), and the algebra
is "dragged along for the ride". This gives us the diagram:
G3--∂-→G2--∂-→G1
| | |
f3 f2 f1
↓ ↓ ↓
0 →H3--∂-→H2--∂-→H1
where the fi
are homomorphisms . So, this means we can talk about kernels and
images!
Ker(f3)----→Ker(f2)--→Ker(f1)
| | |
↓ ↓ ↓
G3--∂----→G2----∂---→G1--→ 0
| | |
f3 f2 f1
↓ ↓ ↓
Im(f3)--∂--→Im(f2)--∂-→Im(f1)
F → E → V → {0}
{0} → {e} → {v} → {0}
The Snake Lemma gives us a mapping d:Ker(f1)→Im(f3) such that
this long exact sequence is saatisfied:
§ What do we wish to compute?
- Now that we've agreed that this family of maps {fi:Gi→Hi}ought to be structured maps, the next question is "OK, now what? What does one want to determine"? Ideally, we would get a new chain complex which I tacitly denote as {f(Gi)}, consisting of the image of Gi inside Hi and the ability to determine its structure.
- However, this is the boring bit. We don't really care about the chain complex {f(Gi)} per se. What we actually care about are the homology groups! So we would really like a tool that allows us to compute Hi(f(G)) in some convenient fashion.