I read in some books that have the notation $\pi_1(X)=0$ to mean $X$ has trivial fundamental group.
My question is why 0 and not 1, i.e. $\pi_1(X)=1$?
Is this a case of additive notation versus multiplicative notation?
Thanks!
I read in some books that have the notation $\pi_1(X)=0$ to mean $X$ has trivial fundamental group.
My question is why 0 and not 1, i.e. $\pi_1(X)=1$?
Is this a case of additive notation versus multiplicative notation?
Thanks!
Copyright © 2021 JogjaFile Inc.
I see this as an additive/multiplicative notation issue, exactly as you say. It's like when one talks about exact sequences of abelian groups or modules, one often writes $$ 0 \to A \to B \to C \to 0 $$ whereas one may more likely write $$ 1 \to X \to Y \to Z \to 1 $$ for an exact sequence in the category of all groups.