For a cylinder as the way $S^1 \times [0,1]$, both surfaces are orientable and with Euler characteristic 0. So they are homeomorphic, yeah?
But they have different fundamental group. So they are not homeomorphic??
Please, help me.
Thanks!
For a cylinder as the way $S^1 \times [0,1]$, both surfaces are orientable and with Euler characteristic 0. So they are homeomorphic, yeah?
But they have different fundamental group. So they are not homeomorphic??
Please, help me.
Thanks!
On
Well $\pi_1(S^1 \times [0, 1]) \cong \pi_1(S^1) \times \pi_1([0, 1]) = \mathbb{Z} \times \{1\} = \mathbb{Z}$. But $\pi_1(\mathbb{T}^2) = \mathbb{Z} \times \mathbb{Z}$, and since homeomorphic spaces have isomorphic fundamental groups the spaces are not homeomorphic.
On
We can handle this at a more basic level than fundamental groups, orientation, and Euler characteristic. The torus is a 2-manifold (without boundary). The closed cylinder $S^1\times [0,1]$ isn't; neighborhoods of points with second coordinate $0$ or $1$ aren't homeomorphic to the plane. As such, they're not homeomorphic.
And if we cut out those points and looked at $S^1\times (0,1)$ instead? That's a 2-manifold, but it's not compact. It can't be homeomorphic to the torus (which is compact) either.
On
The following would be a heuristic way to see that the two are not homeomorphic.
The cylinder has boundary, i.e. near the edges it will locally look like a closed half-disc, there is no way to continually deform the cylinder so to remove these, whereas torus is locally Euclidean (i.e. every point has a neighbourhood where it locally looks like the open 2-disc).
The cyclinder is not a CLOSED surface.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_(topology)#Classification_of_closed_surfaces