๐Ÿงฎ Brain Teaser
2026-06-16
โœ๏ธŽ

The Comb Space Is Contractible โ€” Or Is It?

Consider the closed cone over the Hawaiian Earring (sometimes called the "cone" construction). Actually, let's focus on something more elementary and surprising:

Let X={0}ร—[0,1]โˆชโ‹ƒn=1โˆž[1n+1,1n]ร—{0}X = \{0\} \times [0,1] \cup \bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty} \left[\tfrac{1}{n+1}, \tfrac{1}{n}\right] \times \{0\}...

No โ€” here is the clean problem:


Define the closed topologist's comb as:

C=({0}ร—[0,1])โˆช([0,1]ร—{0})โˆชโ‹ƒn=1โˆž{1n}ร—[0,1]C = \left(\{0\} \times [0,1]\right) \cup \left([0,1] \times \{0\}\right) \cup \bigcup_{n=1}^{\infty} \left\{\tfrac{1}{n}\right\} \times [0,1]

as a subspace of R2\mathbb{R}^2.

(a) Is CC path-connected?

(b) Is CC contractible (i.e., is the identity map idC\mathrm{id}_C null-homotopic)?

(c) Yet, is the point p=(0,1)p = (0, 1) a "strong deformation retract" of any neighborhood of it in CC?

The surprise: answer (a) and (b) first โ€” you will find both are yes โ€” then explain why (c) is no, and what this reveals about the difference between contractibility and local contractibility.

Answer: 2026-06-16_pm

Key Idea / Intuition

The comb space looks like it should behave nicely โ€” it is connected, simply connected, and even contractible. But the "top of the left spine," the point p=(0,1)p = (0,1), has no contractible neighborhood: any neighborhood of pp must contain points on the high teeth {1/n}ร—{1}\{1/n\} \times \{1\} for large nn, and no path from those points can reach pp and then contract back, because the teeth are isolated from each other near the top. This is a perfect illustration that contractible โ‡’ฬธ\not\Rightarrow locally contractible, and it explains why the comb space is a standard counterexample in topology.


Formal Proof / Solution

Part (a): Path-Connectedness

We show any point qโˆˆCq \in C can be connected to p=(0,1)p = (0,1) by a path.

  • Points on the base [0,1]ร—{0}[0,1] \times \{0\}: go along the base to (0,0)(0,0), then up the left spine to (0,1)(0,1).
  • Points on a tooth {1/n}ร—[0,1]\{1/n\} \times [0,1]: travel down the tooth to (1/n,0)(1/n, 0), along the base to (0,0)(0,0), then up the left spine.
  • Points on the left spine {0}ร—[0,1]\{0\} \times [0,1]: travel directly up or down the spine.

All these are explicit continuous paths, so CC is path-connected. โœ“\checkmark


Part (b): Contractibility

Define a homotopy H:Cร—[0,1]โ†’CH : C \times [0,1] \to C in two stages:

Stage 1 (tโˆˆ[0,1/2]t \in [0, 1/2]): "Comb down all teeth to the base." Define

H(x,y,t)=(x,โ€‰(1โˆ’2t)โ€‰y)forย tโˆˆ[0,1/2].H(x, y, t) = \left(x,\, (1 - 2t)\,y\right) \quad \text{for } t \in [0, 1/2].

At t=0t = 0 this is the identity; at t=1/2t = 1/2 every point is mapped to (x,0)(x, 0), i.e., the base [0,1]ร—{0}[0,1] \times \{0\}.

Check it stays in CC: For a point (1/n,y)(1/n, y) on a tooth, H(1/n,y,t)=(1/n,(1โˆ’2t)y)โˆˆ{1/n}ร—[0,1]โŠ‚CH(1/n, y, t) = (1/n, (1-2t)y) \in \{1/n\} \times [0,1] \subset C. For (0,y)(0, y), it goes to (0,(1โˆ’2t)y)โˆˆ{0}ร—[0,1](0,(1-2t)y) \in \{0\} \times [0,1]. For (x,0)(x,0), it stays on the base. โœ“

Stage 2 (tโˆˆ[1/2,1]t \in [1/2, 1]): "Slide everything along the base to (0,0)(0,0), then up the spine to (0,1)(0,1)."

H(x,0,t)=((1โˆ’2(tโˆ’1/2))โ€‰x,โ€…โ€Š0)tโˆˆ[1/2,3/4],H(x, 0, t) = \left((1 - 2(t - 1/2))\,x,\; 0\right) \quad t \in [1/2, 3/4],

H(0,0,t)=(0,โ€…โ€Š2(tโˆ’3/4)โ‹…1)tโˆˆ[3/4,1].H(0, 0, t) = \left(0,\; 2(t - 3/4) \cdot 1\right) \quad t \in [3/4, 1].

Combining, H(โ‹…,1)=(0,1)=pH(\cdot, 1) = (0,1) = p for all points. Since each piece is continuous and they agree on overlaps, HH is a contraction of CC to the point pp. Thus CC is contractible. โœ“\checkmark


Part (c): p=(0,1)p = (0,1) Has No Contractible Neighborhood

Claim: Every open neighborhood UU of p=(0,1)p = (0,1) in CC is not locally path-connected (and in particular cannot deformation retract onto pp).

Take any open ball Bฯต(p)โˆฉCB_\epsilon(p) \cap C for small ฯต>0\epsilon > 0. For nn large enough that 1/n<ฯต1/n < \epsilon, the point qn=(1/n,1)โˆˆBฯต(p)โˆฉCq_n = (1/n, 1) \in B_\epsilon(p) \cap C lies on the tip of the nn-th tooth.

Key observation: Any path ฮณ:[0,1]โ†’C\gamma : [0,1] \to C starting at qn=(1/n,1)q_n = (1/n, 1) that reaches p=(0,1)p = (0,1) must at some time pass through the base (since the only connection between different teeth and the spine is through the base y=0y = 0). Explicitly:

  • The tooth {1/n}ร—[0,1]\{1/n\} \times [0,1] is connected only to the rest of CC via (1/n,0)(1/n, 0) on the base.
  • So any path from qnq_n to pp must dip down to y=0y = 0 at some point.

But then the path leaves Bฯต(p)B_\epsilon(p) (since the base is at distance โ‰ฅ1โˆ’ฯต\geq 1 - \epsilon from pp vertically when ฯต<1\epsilon < 1).

Therefore, within U=Bฯต(p)โˆฉCU = B_\epsilon(p) \cap C, the points qnq_n for large nn cannot be connected to pp by a path staying in UU. Hence UU is not path-connected, and certainly admits no deformation retraction of UU onto pp.


The Lesson

| Property | Comb Space CC | |---|---| | Connected | โœ“ | | Path-connected | โœ“ | | Contractible | โœ“ (global homotopy exists) | | Locally contractible at (0,1)(0,1) | โœ— | | Locally path-connected at (0,1)(0,1) | โœ— |

This shows: contractible spaces need not be locally contractible. The global homotopy "cheats" by routing everything through the base, but no local neighborhood of the spine-tip can do the same. This is why CW complexes or ANRs (absolute neighborhood retracts) are better-behaved: they are always locally contractible.

Written to: questions/Q103_comb_contractible_not_locally.md

Answer written to: questions/A103_comb_contractible_not_locally.md