How do I prove that the union of two simply connected open sets whose intersection is path connected is simply connected?

3.2k Views Asked by At

I'm trying to understand Ronnie Brown's answer here: union of two simply connected open , with open and non empty intersection in $R^2$

Let $X$ be a topological space and $U,V$ be simply connected open subsets of $X$ such that $U\cap V $ is path-conneted.

Fix $x\in U\cap V$.

Let $r$ be a loop in $X$ based at $x$.

By Lebesgue number lemma, there is a partition $\{s_0,\cdots,s_n\}$ of $[0,1]$ such that $r([s_i,s_{i+1}])\subset U$ or $r([s_i,s_{i+1}])\subset V$.

Now, define $r_j(t)=r((1-t)s_j + t\cdot s_{j+1})$ for $1\leq i < n$. ($t\in [0,1]$)

Then, each $r_j$ is a path from $r(s_j)$ to $r(s_{j+1})$.

I completely understand till here.

However, he says that for each $j$, it is possible to choose a path $\alpha$ "in $U\cap V$" such that $\alpha(0)=x$ and $\alpha(1)=r(x_j)$.

How is that possible?

Since $r$ is an arbitrary path, it ranges over all $X$ not restricted in $U\cap V$. Since $U\cap V$ is path connected, if $r(x_j)$ is in $U\cap V$, then that makes sense, but it's possible that $r(s_j)\notin U\cap V$.

Would someone please complete the proof?

2

There are 2 best solutions below

0
On

You are correct - there is a gap in the proof, but it is easily filled. It is possible that you have chosen the partition so that two consecutive $s_j$'s are in $U$, and then it is possible that $r(s_j)$ is not in $U \cap V$, and no such $\alpha$ exists.

However, all you need to do to fix this is to change your partition. It is always possible to choose a subset $\{t_1,\dots,t_k\} \subseteq \{s_1,\dots,s_n\}$ which satisfies

  • For each $i$, either $r([t_{i-1},t_i]) \subseteq U$ or $r([t_{i-1},t_i]) \subseteq V$
  • If $r([t_{i-1},t_i]) \subseteq U$, then $r([t_{i},t_{i+1}]) \subseteq V$, and vice versa.

The second condition ensures that $r(t_i) \in U \cap V$ for each $i$, and then you know you can choose a path as Brown suggested.

1
On

We can show this property using the Seifert-van-Kampen's theorem.

Infact $U$,$V$ and $U\cap V$ are path connected for hypothesis.
Let's consider a point $x_0\in U\cap V$and the fundamental group of $X$ based at $x_0$ $$\Pi_1(X,x_0)=\langle\text{generators of }\Pi_1(U),\text{generators of }\Pi_1(V)|R_U\cup R_V\cup R_S\rangle=\langle S_1\cup S_2|R_1\cup R_2\cup R_S\rangle,$$ but $S_1,S_2=\emptyset\implies \Pi_1(X,x_0)=\langle\emptyset|\emptyset\rangle\implies X$ is simply connected, since its fundamental group is trivial.