Talk:Kuiper's theorem

Error in the lead?

"X would be a complex general linear group and not at all contractible because it has the topology of its maximal compact subgroup, the unitary group U of H" – Really? Or rather, "has the homotopy type of..."? Boris Tsirelson (talk) 16:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it means "algebraic topology" and so "homotopy type". While we are discussing this, I forgot to mention explicitly that the topology on the space on Fredholm operators is the norm topology. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added clarifications; I think in ordinary conversation the term "topology" isn't always meant as topology (structure). Charles Matthews (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Sorry for being off-topic, but maybe you can also answer my question on Talk:Poincaré–Hopf theorem#Sketch of Proof? Boris Tsirelson (talk) 19:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming of this article

This article is not really mainly about the result cited in the lead. It could be fixed to be renamed for example "Infinite dimensional geometric topology", to resemble the article GAGA.

Marsupilamov (talk) 08:36, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]