Atlas home || Conferences | Abstracts | about Atlas

Spring General Topology & Dynamic Systems Conference
March 16-19, 2000
University of the Incarnate Word and The University of Texas at San Antonio
San Antonio, TX, USA

View Abstracts
Conference Homepage

Compacta with the shape of finite complexes: a new look at the Edwards-Geoghegan-Wall obstruction
by
Craig R. Guilbault
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

In the 1970's D.A. Edwards and R. Geoghegan solved two fundamental problems in shape theory-both related to the issue of ``stability''. Roughly speaking, these problems ask when a ``bad'' space has the same shape as a ``good'' space. For simplicity, we focus on the following versions of these problems:

Problem A. Give necessary and sufficient conditions for a connectd finite dimensional pointed compactum Z to have the pointed shape of a CW complex.

Problem B. Give necessary and sufficient conditions for a connected finite dimensional pointed compactum Z to have the pointed shape of a finite CW complex.

One particularly nice version of the solution to Problem A states: Z has the pointed shape of a CW complex if and only if each of its homotopy pro-groups is stable. By combining the solution to Problem A with C.T.C. Wall's famous work on finite homotopy types, Edwards and Geoghegan then provided the following solution to Problem B: Z has the pointed shape of a finite CW complex if and only if each of its homotopy pro-groups is stable and an intrinsically defined Wall obstruction \omega( Z, z) in [K\tilde]0( \check\pi1( Z, z) ) vanishes. In order to understand Edwards and Geoghegan's solution to Problem B, it is then necessary to understand two things-the solution to Problem A, and Wall's work on the finiteness obstruction. In this talk, we will discuss a more direct, and (we believe) simpler solution to Problem B.

If time permits, we will take a quick look at the issues which led us reconsider Problem B. Let X be a connected non-compact finite dimensional complex which admits a Z-compactification [^X]=X \cup Z. If the Z-boundary Z is a ``bad'' space, one may wish to choose a new Z-compactification X \cup Z' where Z' is a ``good'' space. For example, one may ask whether X admits a Z-compactification with a CW-complex or a compact ANR as a Z-boundary. Although two Z-boundaries of the same space may be quite different, it is well known that they always have the same shape. Hence, this question is intimately tied to Problem B.

http://www.uwm.edu/~craigg/

Date received: February 10, 2000


Copyright © 2000 by the author(s). The author(s) of this document and the organizers of the conference have granted their consent to include this abstract in Atlas Conferences Inc. Document # cady-40.