July 3rd, 2017, 05:31 PM  #1 
Senior Member Joined: Apr 2014 From: zagreb, croatia Posts: 234 Thanks: 33 Math Focus: philosophy/found of math, metamath, logic, set/category/order/number theory, algebra, topology  Euler characteristic
Where can I find a complete and rigorous proof that it's welldefined? For manifolds. When you polygonalize them, show that no matter how you do it, you get the same integer. Also, where can I find a proof it's a topological invariant? Last edited by skipjack; August 1st, 2017 at 02:30 AM. 
July 12th, 2017, 07:26 AM  #2 
Senior Member Joined: Oct 2009 Posts: 884 Thanks: 340 
I think that "Introduction to topological manifolds" by Lee gives the proof you seek. The only thing it doesn't prove explicitly is that surfaces have a triangulation, but that is fairly technical to prove actually.
Last edited by skipjack; August 1st, 2017 at 02:30 AM. 
July 31st, 2017, 09:58 AM  #3 
Senior Member Joined: Apr 2014 From: zagreb, croatia Posts: 234 Thanks: 33 Math Focus: philosophy/found of math, metamath, logic, set/category/order/number theory, algebra, topology 
Thanks. Also, I wonder what happens in higher dimensions? How do you even define Euler characteristic for an arbitrary manifold? It has to be compact or what? You then polytopize it, or what? Or via simplicial/CW complexes? It's defined by Betti numbers and homology groups, but can it be shawn maybe it's the same thing? As for a manifold to even have a polytopization or whatever, a general proof that every compact surface has a rectangular decomposition is given in Lefschetz's Introduction To Topology. 
July 31st, 2017, 10:30 AM  #4 
Senior Member Joined: Oct 2009 Posts: 884 Thanks: 340 
The easiest way to define the Euler characteristic and to show it is an invariant is through homology theory. Lee does this in his book. Note that in higher dimensions, manifolds are not always triangularizable. 
July 31st, 2017, 03:14 PM  #5 
Senior Member Joined: Apr 2014 From: zagreb, croatia Posts: 234 Thanks: 33 Math Focus: philosophy/found of math, metamath, logic, set/category/order/number theory, algebra, topology  Because triangles are twodimensional? How about simplicial complexes, then? Or something more general?

July 31st, 2017, 03:35 PM  #6 
Senior Member Joined: Oct 2009 Posts: 884 Thanks: 340 
Nono, a triangulation is more than triangles. It can involve tetrahedrons etc too. Formally it is finding a simplical complex that is homeomorphic to the space. You can do this for any 2dimensional and 3dimensional manifold, but not higher in general.

July 31st, 2017, 03:41 PM  #7  
Senior Member Joined: Apr 2014 From: zagreb, croatia Posts: 234 Thanks: 33 Math Focus: philosophy/found of math, metamath, logic, set/category/order/number theory, algebra, topology  Quote:
Why not, though? I don't see it...can you prove it please?  
August 1st, 2017, 02:26 AM  #8 
Senior Member Joined: Oct 2009 Posts: 884 Thanks: 340 
It is very difficult to prove. But see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E8_manifold 

Tags 
characteristic, euler 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  

Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Euler Paths and Euler Circuits  MMath  Elementary Math  11  May 27th, 2016 12:01 AM 
Euler method/ Euler formula  FalkirkMathFan  Calculus  1  November 5th, 2011 12:57 AM 
Euler method/ Euler formula  FalkirkMathFan  Real Analysis  0  November 4th, 2011 04:08 AM 
Euler Characteristic....  TTB3  Real Analysis  0  April 7th, 2009 08:51 AM 
Euler Characteristic....  TTB3  Real Analysis  2  March 4th, 2009 01:39 AM 