• Keine Ergebnisse gefunden

Cobordism theory and the s-cobordism theorem

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Aktie "Cobordism theory and the s-cobordism theorem"

Copied!
51
0
0

Wird geladen.... (Jetzt Volltext ansehen)

Volltext

(1)

Cobordism theory and the s-cobordism theorem

Wolfgang Lück Bonn Germany

email wolfgang.lueck@him.uni-bonn.de http://131.220.77.52/lueck/

Bonn, 12 & 17. April 2018

(2)

Outline

Cobordism theory

The Pontrjagin-Thom construction Thes-Cobordism Theorem Sketch of its proof

The Whitehead group

(3)

Cobordism theory

Definition (Singular cobordism) LetX be aCW-complex.

Define then-th singular bordism group Ωn(X)

by the oriented bordism classes of mapsf:M →X with a closed oriented manifold as source.

Addition comes from the disjoint union, the neutral element is represented by the map∅ →X, and the inverse is given by changing the orientation.

It becomes a covariant functor by composing the reference map to X with a mapf:X →Y.

(4)

We callf0:M0→X andf1:M1→X oriented bordant, if there is a compact oriented manifoldW whose boundary is a disjoint union

∂W =∂0W q∂1W, a mapF:W →X, and orientation preserving diffeomorphismsui:Mi=→∂iW such thatF ◦ui =fi.

One can defineΩn(X,A)also for pairs(X,A).

We will orient the boundary of∂W using the isomorphism TW|∂W ∼=ν(∂W,W)⊕T∂W and the orientation ofν(∂W,W) coming from theoutward normal vector field.

This is consistent with the standard orientation onD2⊆R2and on S1.

(5)

Figure (Outward normal vector field)

(6)

Theorem (Singular bordism as homology theory) We obtain byΩ a (generalized) homology theory.

We get for its coefficient groupsΩn = Ωn({•})

0123456789

Z 0 0 0 Z Z/2 0 0 Z⊕Z Z/2⊕Z/2 Explicitly the isomorphismΩ0−→Z is given by counting the number of elements of a zero-dimensional closed manifold taking the orientation, which is essentially a sign±, into account. A generator of the infinite cyclic groupΩ4is given by({•},+).

Explicitly the isomorphismΩ4=→Zis given by thesignature. A generator of the infinite cyclic groupΩ0isCP2.

(7)

Example (Low-dimensions)

LetX be a connectedCW-complex. Let prX → {•}be the projection.

We conclude from the Atyiah-Hirzebruch spectral sequence:

We obtain a bijection

pr: Ω0(X)−→=0({•})∼=Z;

We get forn=1,2,3 a bijection

cn: Ωn(X)−=→Hn(X;Z)

wherecn: Ωn(X)−=→Hn(X;Z)sends the class off:M→X to f([M]);

We get a bijection

pr×c4: Ω4(X)−=→Ω4({•})×H4(X;Z)∼=Z×H4(X;Z).

(8)

The cartesian product implements the structure of anexternal productonΩ.

One can weaken or strengthen the condition thatM is orientable.

For instance, one can consider theunoriented bordism theory N(X). Its coefficient ringN =N({•})is given by

N ∼=F2[{xi |i ∈N,i 6=2k −1}] =F2[x2,x4,x5,x6,x8, . . .]

wherexi sits in degreei.There are explicite representatives for the xi, for instanceRPi representsxi for eveni.

One can also considerSpin-bordismΩSpin. We get for its coefficient groupsΩSpinn = ΩSpinn ({•})

Spin0Spin1Spin2Spin3Spin4Spin5Spin6Spin7Spin8 Z Z/2 Z/2 0 Z 0 0 0 Z⊕Z

(9)

The Pontrjagin-Thom construction

All these various bordism theories can be obtained as special case fromξ-bordism for ak-dimensional vector bundleξwith projectionpξ:E →X over a spaceX.

Recall that for ann-dimensional manifoldM there exists an

embeddingi:M →Rk+n, which is unique up to isotopy, fork large enough. Furthermorei possesses a well-definednormal bundle ν(i).

Definition (ξ-bordism)

LetΩn(ξ)be the bordism group of quadruples(M,i,f,f)consisting of a closedn-dimensional manifoldM, an embeddingi:M→Rn+k, and a map bundle mapf:ν(i)→ξ covering a mapf:M→X.

(10)

Definition (Thom space)

TheThom spaceof a vector bundlepξ:E →X over a finite

CW-complex is defined byDE/SE, or equivalently, by the one-point compactificationE∪ {∞}. It has a preferred base point∞=SE/SE.

For a finite-dimensional vector spaceV we denote the trivial vector bundle with fibreV byV.

There are homeomorphisms of pointed spaces Th(ξ×η) ∼= Th(ξ)∧Th(η);

Th(ξ⊕Rk) ∼= ΣkTh(ξ).

(11)

Theorem (Pontrjagin-Thom Construction)

Letξ:E →X be a k -dimensional vector bundle over a CW -complex X . Then the map

Pn(ξ) : Ωn(ξ)−→πn+k(Th(ξ)),

which sends the bordism class of(M,i,f,f)to the homotopy class of the composite Sn+k c−→Th(ν(M))−−−→Th(f) Th(ξ), is a well-defined isomorphism, natural inξ.

We sketch the proof, the details can be found inBröcker-tom Dieck[2].

(12)

Let(N(M), ∂N(M))be atubular neighbourhoodofM. Recall that there is a diffeomorphism

u: (Dν(M),Sν(M))→(N(M), ∂N(M)).

TheThom collapse map

c:Sn+k =Rn+k q {∞} →Th(ν(M))

is the pointed map which is given by the diffeomorphismu−1on the interior ofN(M)and sends the complement of the interior of N(M)to the preferred base point∞.

(13)

Figure (Pontrjagin-Thom construction)

Sν

Dν M

Collapse

(14)

Thus we obtain a well-defined homomorphism

Pn(ξ) : Ωn(ξ)−→πn+k(Th(ξ)) [M,i,f,f]7→[Th(f)◦c].

Next we define its inverse.

Consider a pointed map(Sn+k,∞)→(Th(ξ),∞).

We can changef up to homotopy relative{∞}such thatf

becomes transverse toX. Notice that transversality makes sense althoughX is not a manifold, one needs only the fact thatX is the zero-section in a vector bundle.

PutM =f−1(X). The transversality construction yields a bundle mapf:ν(M)→ξ coveringf|M. Leti:M →Rn+k =Sn+k − {∞}

be the inclusion.

Then the inverse ofPn(ξ)sends the class off to the class of (M,i,f|M,f).

(15)

Letpξk:Ek →BSO(k)be the universal orientedk-dimensional vector bundle.

Letjkk⊕R→ξk+1be a bundle map covering a map

jk: BSO(k)→BSO(k+1). Up to homotopy of bundle maps this map is unique.

Denote byγk the bundle idX×pξk:X ×Ek →X ×BSO(k).

We get a map

n(ik) : Ωnk)→Ωnk+1)

which sends the class of(M,i,f,f)to the class of the quadruple which comes from the embeddingj:M −→i Rn+k ⊂Rn+k+1and the canonical isomorphismν(i)⊕R=ν(j).

(16)

Consider the homomorphism

Vk: Ωnk)→Ωn(X)

which sends the class of(M,i,f,f)to(M,prX◦f), where prX is the projectionX×BSO(k)→X, and we equipMwith the orientation determined byf.

Let colimk→∞nk)be the colimit of the directed system indexed byk ≥0

. . .−−−−−→n(ik−1)nk)−−−→n(ik)nk+1)−−−−−→n(ik+1) . . .

We obtain a bijection

V: colim

k→∞nk)−=→Ωn(X).

We see a sequence of spaces Th(γk)together with maps Th(ik) : ΣTh(γk) =Th(γk⊕R)→Th(γk+1).

(17)

We obtain homomorphisms

skn+k(Th(γk))→πn+k+1(ΣTh(γk))

πn+k+1(Th(ik))

−−−−−−−−−→πn+k+1(Th(γk+1)), where the first map is the suspension homomorphism.

We now define the group colimk→∞πn+k(Th(γk))to be the colimit of the directed system

· · ·−−−→sk−1 πn+k(Th(γk))−→sk πn+k+1(Th(γk+1))−−→ · · ·sk+1 .

From the theorem above we obtain a bijection P: colim

k→∞nk)−=→colim

k→∞ πn+k(Th(γk)).

(18)

Theorem (Pontrjagin-Thom Construction and Oriented Bordism) There is an isomorphism of abelian groups natural in X

P: Ωn(X)−=→colim

k→∞ πn+k(Th(γk)).

Notice that the sequence of Thom spaces above yields the so calledThom spectrumTh(γ)and the right handside in the isomorphism above isπns(Th(γ)).

Analogously one gets forframed bordismΩfr(X)an isomorphism Ωfrn(X)−→= πsn(X)

whereπs denotes stable homotopy.

(19)

The s-Cobordism Theorem

Definition (h-cobordism)

Anh-cobordismover a closed manifoldM0is a compact manifoldW whose boundary is the disjoint unionM0qM1such that both inclusions M0→W andM1→W are homotopy equivalences.

The next result is due toBarden,Mazur,Stallings, see [1, 7]. Its topological version was proved byKirbyandSiebenmann[6, Essay II].

More information about thes-cobordism theorem can be found for instance in [5], [9], [10].

(20)

Theorem (s-Cobordism Theorem)

Let M0be a closed connected smooth manifold of dimension n≥5 with fundamental groupπ=π1(M0). Then

1 Let(W;M0,f0,M1,f1)be an h-cobordism over M0. Then W is trivial over M0if and only if itsWhitehead torsiontaking values in theWhitehead group

τ(W,M0)∈ Wh(π) vanishes;

2 For any x ∈Wh(π)there is an h-cobordism(W;M0,f0,M1,f1)over M0withτ(W,M0) =x ∈Wh(π);

3 The function assigning to an h-cobordism(W;M0,f0,M1,f1)over M0its Whitehead torsion yields a bijection from the

diffeomorphism classes relative M0of h-cobordisms over M0to the Whitehead groupWh(π).

(21)

Conjecture (Poincaré Conjecture)

Let M be an n-dimensional topological manifold which is a homotopy sphere, i.e., homotopy equivalent to Sn.

Then M is homeomorphic to Sn.

Theorem

For n≥5the Poincaré Conjecture is true.

(22)

Proof.

We sketch the proof forn≥6.

LetM be an-dimensional homotopy sphere.

LetW be obtained fromMby deleting the interior of two disjoint embedded disksDn1andD2n. ThenW is a simply connected h-cobordism.

Since Wh({1})is trivial, we can find a homeomorphism f:W −→= ∂Dn1×[0,1]which is the identity on∂D1n=D1n× {0}.

By theAlexander trickwe can extend the homeomorphism f|Dn

1×{1}:∂Dn2=→∂D1n× {1}to a homeomorphismg:D1n→D2n. The three homeomorphismsidDn

1,f andgfit together to a homeomorphismh:M →D1n∂Dn

1×{0}∂Dn1×[0,1]∪∂Dn

1×{1}D1n. The target is obviously homeomorphic toSn.

(23)

Figure (Proof of the Poincaré Conjecture)

homotopy n-sphere Sn−1×[0,1]

embedded disks

f

idSn−1

∼=

(24)

The argument above does not imply that for a smooth manifoldM we obtain a diffeomorphismg:M →Sn since the Alexander trick does not work smoothly.

Indeed, there exist so calledexotic spheres, i.e., closed smooth manifolds which are homeomorphic but not diffeomorphic toSn. Thes-cobordism theorem is a key ingredient in theSurgery Programfor the classification of closed manifolds due toBrowder, Novikov, SullivanandWall, which we will explain later.

(25)

Theorem (Geometric characterization of Wh(G) ={0})

The following statements are equivalent for a finitely presented group G and a fixed integer n ≥6

Every compact n-dimensional h-cobordism W with G∼=π1(W)is trivial;

Wh(G) ={0}.

Conjecture (Vanishing of Wh(G)for torsionfreeG) If G is torsionfree, then

Wh(G) ={0}.

(26)

Sketch of the proof of the s-Cobordism Theorem

We follow the exposition which will appear in Crowley-Lück-Macko[3].

Definition (Handlebody)

Then-dimensional handle of indexqor brieflyq-handleis Dq×Dn−q.

ItscoreisDq× {0}. Theboundary of the coreisSq−1× {0}.

Itscocoreis{0} ×Dn−q and itstransverse sphereis{0} ×Sn−q−1.

(27)

Figure (Handlebody)

D0×D3 D1×D2

D2×D1 D3×D0

(28)

Definition (Attaching a handle)

Consider ann-dimensional manifoldMwith boundary∂M. If φq:Sq−1×Dn−q →∂M is an embedding, then we say that the manifold

M+ (φq):=M∪φq Dq×Dn−q

is obtained fromM byattaching a handleof indexqbyφq.

One should think of a handleDq×Dn−qas aq-cellDq× {0}

which is thickened toDq×Dn−q.

Attaching aq-handleDq×Dn−q alongφq:Sq−1×Dn−q →∂M correspond to attaching aq-cellDq× {0}alongφq|Sq−1×{0}

(29)

LetW be a compact manifold whose boundary∂W is the disjoint sum∂0W`

1W. Then we want to constructW from∂0W ×[0,1]

by attaching handles as follows.

Ifφq:Sq−1×Dn−q→∂0W × {1}is an embedding, we get by attaching a handle the compact manifoldW1=∂0W×[0,1] + (φq).

Notice we have not change∂0W =∂0W × {0}.

Now we can iterate this process and we obtain a compact manifold with boundary

W =∂0W ×[0,1] + (φq11) + (φq22) +· · ·+ (φqrr),

We call a description ofW as above ahandlebody decomposition ofW relative∂0W.

FromMorse theory, see [4, Chapter 6], [8, part I] we obtain the following lemma.

(30)

Lemma

Let W be a compact manifold whose boundary∂W is the disjoint sum

0W `

1W .

Then W possesses a handlebody decomposition relative∂0W , i.e., W is up to diffeomorphism relative∂0W =∂0W × {0}of the form

W =∂0W ×[0,1] + (φq11) + (φq22) +· · ·+ (φqrr).

(31)

Figure (Handlebody decomposition)

∂W ×[0,1]

2-handle

0-handle 1-handle

(32)

Lemma (Isotopy Lemma)

Let W be an n-dimensional compact manifold, whose boundary∂W is the disjoint sum∂0W`

1W . Letφq, ψq:Sq−1×Dn−q→∂1W be isotopic embeddings.

Then there is a diffeomorphism

W + (φq)−=→W + (ψq) relative∂0W .

(33)

Lemma (Diffeomorphism Lemma)

Let W resp. W0 be a compact manifold whose boundary∂W is the disjoint sum∂0W `

1W resp. ∂0W0`

1W0. Let F:W →W0be a diffeomorphism which induces a diffeomorphism f0:∂0W →∂0W0. Let φq:Sq−1×Dn−q →∂1W be an embedding.

Then there is an embeddingφq:Sq−1×Dn−q→∂1W0 and a diffeomorphism

F0:W + (φq)→W0+ (φq) which induces f0on∂0W .

(34)

Lemma (Cancellation Lemma)

Let W be an n-dimensional compact manifold whose boundary∂W is the disjoint sum∂0W`

1W . Letφq:Sq−1×Dn−q →∂1W be an embedding. Letψq+1:Sq×Dn−1−q →∂1(W+ (φq))be an embedding.

Suppose thatψq+1(Sq× {0})is transversal to the transverse sphere of the handle(φq)and meets the transverse sphere in exactly one point.

Then there is a diffeomorphism

W −→= W + (φq) + (ψq+1) relative∂0W .

(35)

Figure (Handle cancellation)

1-handle

S×[0,1]

2-handle

(36)

Lemma

Let W be an n-dimensional manifold for n≥6whose boundary is the disjoint union∂W =∂0W`

1W . Then the following statements are equivalent

1 The inclusion∂0W →W is1-connected;

2 We can find a diffeomorphism relative∂0W

W ∼= ∂0W ×[0,1] +

p2

X

i=1

2i) +

p3

X

i=1

3i) +· · ·+

pn

X

i=1

ni).

(37)

Lemma (Normal Form Lemma)

Let(W;∂0W, ∂1W)be a compact h-cobordism of dimension n ≥6. Let q be an integer with2≤q ≤n−3.

Then there is a handlebody decomposition which has only handles of index q and(q+1), i.e., there is a diffeomorphism relative∂0W

W ∼= ∂0W ×[0,1] +

pq

X

i=1

qi) +

pq+1

X

i=1

q+1i ).

(38)

Suppose thatW is in normal form.

LetC(fW,∂]0W)be theZπ-chain complex of the pair of universal coverings ofW and∂0W. SinceW is anh-cobordism, it is acyclic.

The two non-trivialZπ chain modules comes withZπ-bases determined by the handles.

Thus the only non-trivial differential is aZπ-isomorphism and is described by an invertible matrixAoverZπ.

IfAis the empty matrix, thenW is diffeomorphic relative∂0W to

0W ×[0,1].

(39)

Next we define an abelian groupWh(π)as follows.

It is the set of equivalence classes of invertible matrices of arbitrary size with entries inZπ, where we call an invertible (m,m)-matrixAand an invertible(n,n)-matrixBoverZπ equivalent, if we can pass fromAtoB by a sequence of the following operations:

1 Bis obtained fromAby adding thek-th row multiplied withx from the left to thel-th row forx Zπandk 6=l;

2 Bis obtained by taking the direct sum ofAand the(1,1)-matrix I1= (1), i.e.,Blooks like the block matrix

A 0

0 1

;

3 Ais the direct sum ofBandI1;

4 Bis obtained fromAby multiplying thei-th row from the left with a trivial unit , i.e., with an element of the shape±γforγπ;

5 Bis obtained fromAby interchanging two rows or two columns.

The sum is given by the block sum, the neutral element is

represented by the empty matrix, inverses are given by taking the inverse of a matrix.

(40)

Lemma

1 Let(W, ∂0W, ∂1W)be an n-dimensional compact h-cobordism for n≥6and A be the matrix defined above. If[A] =0inWh(π), then the h-cobordism W is trivial relative∂0W ;

2 Consider an element u∈Wh(π), a closed manifold M of

dimension n−1≥5with fundamental groupπand an integer q with2≤q ≤n−3. Then we can find an h-cobordism of the shape

W =M×[0,1] +

pq

X

i=1

qi) +

pq+1

X

i=1

q+1i )

such that[A] =u.

(41)

The idea of proof of the lemma above is to realize any of the operations onAgeometrically by modifying the handle body decomposition geometrically. These are

1 handle slides;

2 Adding trivially a pair ofq-handle and aq+1-handle.

3 Deleting a pair of aq-handle and aq+1-handle using the Elimination Lemma.

4 Changing the orientation of a handle and the lift of it to the universal coverings.

5 Changing the enumeration of the handles.

(42)

The handle slide is possible and has the desired effect due to the following lemma which we state without further explanations.

Lemma (Modification Lemma)

Let f:Sq→∂1Wqbe an embedding and let xj ∈Zπ be elements for j =1,2. . . ,pq+1. Then there is an embedding g:Sq →∂1Wqwith the following properties:

1 f and g are isotopic in∂1Wq+1;

2 For a given liftef:Sq→Wfqof f one can find a lifteg:Sq →Wfq of g such that we get in Cq(Wf)

[eg] = [ef] +

pq+1

X

j=1

xj·dq+1q+1j ],

where dq+1is the(q+1)-th differential in C(Wf,∂]0W).

(43)

We give a different more conceptual definition of the abelian group Wh(π)later.

By definition the matrixAfrom above determines an element in Wh(π), which turns out independent of the choice of the normal form and hence gives a well-defined element in Wh(π)depending only the diffeomorphism type ofW relative∂0W.

Actually, this element can be described intrinsically by the so calledWhitehead torsion.

Putting these statements together, finishes the proof of the s-Cobordism Theorem.

(44)

The Whitehead group

Definition (K1-groupK1(R)) Define theK1-group of a ringR

K1(R)

to be the abelian group whose generators are conjugacy classes[f]of automorphismsf:P→P of finitely generated projectiveR-modules with the following relations:

Given an exact sequence 0→(P0,f0)→(P1,f1)→(P2,f2)→0 of automorphisms of finitely generated projectiveR-modules, we get [f0] + [f2] = [f1];

[g◦f] = [f] + [g].

(45)

K1(R)is isomorphic toGL(R)/[GL(R),GL(R)].

An invertible matrixA∈GL(R)can be reduced byelementary row and column operationsand(de-)stabilizationto the trivial empty matrix if and only if[A] =0 holds in thereducedK1-group

Ke1(R):=K1(R)/{±1}=cok(K1(Z)→K1(R)). IfRis commutative, the determinant induces an epimorphism

det:K1(R)→R×, which in general is not bijective.

The assignmentA7→[A]∈K1(R)can be thought of theuniversal determinant forR.

(46)

Definition (Whitehead group)

TheWhitehead groupof a groupGis defined to be Wh(G)=K1(ZG)/{±g|g ∈G}.

Lemma

We haveWh({1}) ={0}.

Proof.

The ringZpossesses anEuclidean algorithm.

Hence every invertible matrix overZcan be reduced via elementary row and column operations and destabilization to a (1,1)-matrix(±1).

This implies that any element inK1(Z)is represented by±1.

(47)

LetGbe a finite group. LetF beQ,RorC.

DefinerF(G)to be the number of irreducibleF-representations of G.

The Whitehead group Wh(G)is a finitely generated abelian group of rankrR(G)−rQ(G).

The torsion subgroup of Wh(G)is the kernel of the map K1(ZG)→K1(QG).

In contrast toKe0(ZG)the Whitehead group Wh(G)is computable.

(48)

Exercise (Non-vanishing of Wh(Z/5))

Using the ring homomorphism f:Z[Z/5]→Cwhich sends the generator ofZ/5toexp(2πi/5)and the norm of a complex number, define a homomorphism of abelian groups

φ: Wh(Z/5)→R>0.

Show that the class of the unit1−t−t−1inWh(Z/5)is an element of infinite order.

(49)

D. Barden.

The structure of manifolds.

Ph. D. thesis, Cambridge, 1963.

T. Bröcker and T. tom Dieck.

Kobordismentheorie.

Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1970.

D. Crowley, W. Lück, and T. Macko.

Surgery Theory: Foundations.

book, in preparation, 2019.

M. W. Hirsch.

Differential topology.

Springer-Verlag, New York, 1976.

Graduate Texts in Mathematics, No. 33.

M. A. Kervaire.

Le théorème de Barden-Mazur-Stallings.

Comment. Math. Helv., 40:31–42, 1965.

(50)

R. C. Kirby and L. C. Siebenmann.

Foundational essays on topological manifolds, smoothings, and triangulations.

Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1977.

With notes by J. Milnor and M. F. Atiyah, Annals of Mathematics Studies, No. 88.

B. Mazur.

Relative neighborhoods and the theorems of Smale.

Ann. of Math. (2), 77:232–249, 1963.

J. Milnor.

Morse theory.

Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1963.

J. Milnor.

Lectures on the h-cobordism theorem.

Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1965.

C. P. Rourke and B. J. Sanderson.

Introduction to piecewise-linear topology.

(51)

Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1982.

Reprint.

Referenzen

ÄHNLICHE DOKUMENTE

The fact is rather that there is much variation, even within Bavarian but that within this variation there is a very strong ten- dency of the following sort: While

The complex is a monomer and the Hg atom has an unsymmetrical six-coordinate geometry, formed by two nitrogen atoms of the bpy ligand and four oxygen atoms of the two nitrite

The aim of this experiment was to study how the significance of crime related items influences the amplitude of the N200 and the P300 components in a mock crime

In the case of intensive assimilation, the well-being of the natives will not be lowered when ARD N N ( | )  ARD N M ( | ) , namely, when the aggregate relative deprivation of

Successfully implementing industrial policies requires a careful balancing of market forces and state intervention to achieve optimal results in terms of economic efficiency,

Show that separability implies that subsets are actually sets..

any observable (incident photon beam energy, cm-angle, etc ...) the detection efficiency can be re-calculated from the ratio of the observed counts and the ef- ficiency

This follows from the fact that in order to calculate optimal effluent charges, i t is sufficient to know the aggregate volume of waste flows from the different pollution sources,