arXiv:1009.2746v3 [math.SG] 5 Feb 2013
AHIERARCHYOFLOCALSYMPLECTICFILLINGOBSTRUCTIONS
FOR CONTACT3-MANIFOLDS
CHRISWENDL
Abstrat.WegeneralizethefamiliarnotionsofovertwistednessandGirouxtorsionin
3-dimensionalontatmanifolds,deninganinnitehierarhyofloalllingobstrutions
alledplanartorsion,whoseinteger-valuedorderk0anbeinterpretedasmeasuringa
gradationin\degreesoftightness"ofontatmanifolds. Weshowinpartiularthatany
ontatmanifoldwithplanartorsionadmitsnoontattypeembeddingsintoanylosed
sympleti4-manifold,andhasvanishingontatinvariantinEmbeddedContatHomology,
andwegiveexamplesofontatmanifoldsthathaveplanark-torsionforanyk2but
noGirouxtorsion.Wealsoshowthattheomplementofthebindingofasupportingopen
bookneverhasplanartorsion.Theunifyingideainthebakgroundisadeompositionof
ontatmanifoldsintermsofontatbersumsofopenbooksalongtheirbinding.Asthe
tehnialbasisoftheseresults,weestablishexistene,uniquenessandompatnesstheorems
forertainlassesofJ-holomorphiurvesinblownupsummedopenbooks;thesealsoimply
algebraiobstrutionstoplanarityandembeddingsofpartiallyplanardomains.
Contents
1. Introdution 2
1.1. Obstrutionstosympletillings 5
1.2. Obstrutionstonon-separatingembeddingsandplanarity 12
1.3. Holomorphiurvesandopenbookdeompositions 13
1.4. Openquestionsandreentprogress 15
2. Thedenitionofplanartorsion 16
2.1. Blownupsummedopenbooks 16
2.2. Partiallyplanardomainsandplanartorsion 22
3. Holomorphisummedopenbooks 27
3.1. Tehnialbakground 27
3.2. Anexisteneanduniquenesstheorem 33
3.3. Deformationandompatness 47
4. Proofsofthemainresults 54
4.1. Non-llability 54
4.2. EmbeddedContatHomology 56
Aknowledgments 62
Referenes 62
2010MathematisSubjetClassiation.Primary57R17;Seondary53D10,32Q65,53D42.
ResearhsupportedbyanAlexandervonHumboldtFoundationFellowship.
1.Introdution
Contatstruturesforodd-dimensionalmanifoldsarisenaturallyonboundariesofsym-
pletimanifoldsviathenotionofonvexity. Asympletimanifold(W;!)issaidtohave
onvexboundaryif,onaneighborhoodofW,thereexistsavetoreldY thatpoints
transverselyoutwardatW andwhoseowisasympletidilation,i.e.LY!=!.Writing
M=W,theo-orientedhyperplaneeld=ker(
Y
!j
TM
)TM thensatisesaertain
\maximalnonintegrability"onditionwhihmakesitaontatstruture,anduptoisotopy,
itdependsonlyonthesympletistrutureof(W;!)nearM,notonthehoieofvetor
eldY.
Giventheaboverelationship,itisinterestingtoaskwhihisomorphismlassesofontat
manifolds(M;)donotariseasboundariesofompatsympletimanifolds,i.e.whihones
arenotsympletiallyllable.Avarietyofobstrutionstosympletillingareknown,and
thefollowingtwoexamplesgivesomehintastothediversityofsuhresults:
Lisa[Lis98,Lis99℄usedtheSeiberg-WittenmonopoleinvariantsofKronheimerand
Mrowka [KM97 ℄ together withDonaldson's theoremon theintersetionformsof
smooth4-manifolds[Don86 ℄tondexamplesoforiented3-manifoldsthatadmitno
sympletiallyllableontatstrutures.
Theauthor[Wen10b℄usedpunturedholomorphiurvetehniquestoshowthata
ontat3-manifoldhasnosympletillingifitissupportedbyaplanaropenbook
whosemonodromyisnotaprodutofright-handedDehntwists.(See[PV10 ,Pla12 ℄
forsomeappliationsofthisresult.)
Oneommonfeatureoftheaboveexamplesisthattheydependfundamentallyontheglobal
propertiesofthemanifoldsinvolved. Inontrast,oneanalsoonsiderllingobstrutions
whihareloal,inthesensethattheyanswerthefollowingquestion:
Whatkindsofontatsubdomainsanneverexistintheonvexboundaryof
aompatsympletimanifold?
Therstknownexampleofasympletillingobstrutionwasessentiallyloalinthissense:
Gromov[Gro85℄andEliashberg[Eli90℄establishedthatontattypeboundariesofsympleti
4-manifoldsanneverontainanovertwisteddisk,andsigniantly,therelateddistintionbe-
tweenso-alled\overtwisted"and\tight"ontatstrutures,disoveredbyEliashberg[Eli89℄,
hasplayedapivotalroleinlassiationquestionsforontatstruturesindimensionthree.
Thisnon-llabilityresultanberephrasedintermsofaertain3-dimensionalontatdomain
withboundarythatweallaLutztube:thisisasolidtorusS 1
D witharadiallysymmet-
riontatstruturethatmakesahalf-twistalongradiifromtheentertotheboundary
(seeFigure1andDenition2.17). Oneanshow(e.g.using[Eli89℄)thatalosedontat
3-manifoldontainsanovertwisteddiskifandonlyifitontainsaLutztube,thusthelatter
mayberegardedastheprototypialexampleofaloalllingobstrution.
Amoregeneralloalllingobstrutionisfurnishedbytheso-alledGirouxtorsiondomain,
athikenedtorus[0;1℄T 2
withaT 2
-invariantontatstruturethatmakesonefulltwist
fromoneendoftheintervaltotheother(seeFigure2andDenition2.18).Contatmanifolds
ontainingsuhanobjetaresaidtohaveGirouxtorsion,andthefatthattheyarenotllable
ingeneralisaomparativelyreentresult,duetoGay[Gay06℄.Girouxtorsiondomainshave
alsoplayedanimportantroleinthelassiationofontatstrutures,mostnotablythrough
theworkofColin,GirouxandHonda[CGH03 ,CGH09 ℄.
AHIERARCHYOFFILLINGOBSTRUCTIONSFORCONTACTMANIFOLDS 3
S 1 f
g
0
0
1+
1
2
=0
jslopej= 1
+
0
=3
2
3
1
r Æ 0
2r=3
0
r=3
(1 0)
'
R
T
0
T
0
M
B
M
0
u
;
T
1
T2
e
1
h
1
e
2
h
2
v +
1
v
1
v +
2
v
2
u
0
B
I
S 1
D
(T 3
=Z
2 )nN(K)
1
2
3
2
1
22
2
v
k
v 1
v 2
Figure1. Contatplanestwistaroundtheradiiemergingfromtheentral
axisofaLutztube.ThepiturealsoshowsanembeddedJ-holomorphiplane
asymptotitoaReeborbit ofsmallperiodinaMorse-Bottfamily(arrows
indiatetheReebvetoreld);everyLutztubeontainssuhplanes,whih
arethereasonwhytheontathomologyofanovertwistedontatmanifold
vanishes.
PSfragreplaements
S 1
S 1 f
g
0
0
1+
1
2
=0
jslopej= 1
+
0
=3
2
3
1
r Æ 0
2r=3
0
r=3
(1
0 )
'
R
T
0
T
0
M
B
M
0
u
;
T
1
T2
e
1
h
1
e
2
h
2
v +
1
v
1
v +
2
v
2
u
0
B
I
S 1
D
(T 3
=Z
2 )nN(K)
1
2
3
2
1
22
2
v
k
v 1
v 2
Figure2. InaGirouxtorsiondomain[0;1℄T 2
,ontatplanestwistaround
segmentsinthe[0;1℄-diretion. SuhdomainsarefoliatedbyJ-holomorphi
ylindersasymptotitoMorse-BottReeborbits.
4 CHRISWENDL
Thesetwoexamplesofloalllingobstrutionsreatetheintuitiveimpressionthatontat
manifoldstendtobeomenon-llablewhenevertheyontainregionswheretheontatplanes
exhibitsomethresholdamountoftwisting.Inthispaperweshallintrodueageometrifor-
malismthatmakesthisnotionpreise,andinsodoing,greatlyexpandstheknownrepertoire
ofloalllingobstrutions.Wewilldemonstrateinpartiularthattheexamplesaboveoupy
thersttwolevelsinaninnitehierarhy:foreahintegerk0,weshalldeneaspeial
lassofompatontat3-manifolds,possiblywithboundary,whihweallplanark-torsion
domains,suhthattheLutztubeandGirouxtorsiondomainarespeialaseswithk=0
and1respetively.Ouruseoftheword\hierarhy"isnotinidental,asitturnsoutthata
planartorsiondomainyieldsquantiablystriterorlessstritllingobstrutionsdepending
onitsorder,i.e.theintegerk.Inpartiular,theovertwistedontatmanifoldsarepreisely
thosewhihhaveplanar0-torsion,andtheseanbethoughtofasthe\mostnon-llable"
amongallontat3-manifolds,whilethellableontatmanifoldsarethe\tightest," and
thosewhihhaveonlyhigherordersofplanartorsionarenon-llablebutareinsomesense
\tighter"thantheirlowerorderounterparts.
Thedenitionofplanartorsion,whihwillbegiveninapreiseforminx2 ,ombinesthe
fundamentalontattopologialnotionofasupportingopenbookdeomposition,asintrodued
byGiroux[Gir℄,withasimpletopologialoperationknownastheontatbersumalong
odimension2ontatsubmanifolds,originallyduetoGromov[Gro86 ℄andGeiges[Gei97 ℄.
Roughlyspeaking,aplanark-torsiondomainisaompatontat3-manifold(M;),possibly
withboundary,thatontainsanon-emptysetofdisjointpre-Lagrangiantoridividingitinto
twopiees:
AplanarpieeM P
,whihisdisjointfromMandlookslikeaonnetedopenbook
withsomebindingomponentsblownupand/orattahedtoeahotherbyontat
bersums.Thepagesmusthavegenuszeroandk+1boundaryomponents.
ThepaddingMnM P
,whihontainsMandonsistsofoneormorearbitraryopen
books,againwithsomebindingomponentsblownuporbersummedtogether.
Planartorsiondomainsare thusexamplesofwhatarealledpartiallyplanar domains,a
notionthatwasrsthintedatin[ABW10℄.TheinteriorofsuhadomainMalwaysontains
aspeialsetIMofpre-Lagrangiantoriwhiharisebyblowingupbindingomponents
ofopenbooks:werefertothesetorialltogetherastheinterfaeof(M;).Postponingthe
exatdenitionsuntilx2 ,letusfornowmerelypointoutthatinaLutztubeM=S 1
D
(Figure1 ),theplanarpieeissomesmallersolidtorusM P
=S 1
D
r
for0 <r <1,
andthepagesoftheblownupopenbookinM P
arethedisksfgD
r
. Likewise,the
planarpieeinaGirouxtorsiondomainM =[0;1℄T 2
(Figure2 )isasmallerthikened
torusM P
= [r
1
;r
2
℄T 2
for0< r
1
<r
2
<1,foliated byylindrialpagesoftheform
[r
1
;r
2
℄S 1
fg,andforbothexamplesI=M P
. Wewillseethatinthemoregeneral
denition,thetopologyoftheplanarpieeandthewholedomainmaydierfromeahother
onsiderably,andinterfaetorimayalsobefoundintheinterioroftheplanarpieeorthe
padding.SomesimpleexamplesoftheformS 1
areshowninFigure3. Weshouldalso
mentionthattheideaofdeomposingontatmanifoldsinthiswayviabersumsofopen
bookshasfurtherappliationsbeyondllingobstrutions,e.g.itisusedin[Wen ℄todene
a\blownup"versionofEliashberg'sappingonstrution[Eli04℄,produingawiderangeof
existeneresultsfornon-exatsympletiobordisms.
Letusnowreallsomebasidenitionsinpreparationforstatingthemainresults. A
AHIERARCHYOFFILLINGOBSTRUCTIONSFORCONTACTMANIFOLDS 5
thatanbewrittenloallyasthekernelofasmooth1-formwith^d6=0. Weall
positiveif^d>0.Everyontatstrutureinthispaperwillbeassumedtobepositive
andtoarryao-orientation,whihanbedenedviaaglobalhoieof1-form;any
withker=thatisompatiblewiththehoseno-orientationisalledaontatformfor
(M;). Notethatao-orientedontatstruturealsoinheritsanaturalorientation. Given
twoontat3-manifolds(M0;0)and(M;),aontatembeddingof(M0;0)into(M;)
isanorientationpreservingembedding:M
0
,!M suhthat
:TM
0
,!TMdenesan
orientationpreservingmapof
0 to.
Suppose(W;!)isaompat4-dimensionalsympletimanifold(orientedby!^!)and
(M;)isalosedontat3-manifold. Aweakontattypeembeddingof(M;)into
(W;!)isanembedding:M,!Wforwhih
!j>0.Itisalleda(strong)ontattype
embeddingifaneighborhoodof(M)W admitsa1-formsuhthatd=!and
denesaontatformfor(M;);notethatinthisase,thevetoreld!-dualtodenes
asympletidilationpositivelytransverseto(M).Theimageofa(weakorstrong)ontat
typeembeddingisalleda(weakorstrong)ontattypehypersurfaein(W;!). Ifthe
imageisWandmapstheorientationofMtothenaturalboundaryorientation,thenwe
say(W;!)isa(weakorstrong)sympletillingof(M;).
1.1.Obstrutionstosympletillings.Giventhenotionofaplanark-torsiondomain
whihwasskethedaboveandwillbeexplainedfullyinx2 ,itisnaturaltodenethefollowing.
Denition1.1.Aontat3-manifoldissaidtohaveplanartorsionoforderk(orplanar
k-torsion)ifitadmitsaontatembeddingofaplanark-torsiondomain(seeDenition2.13 ).
Theorem1.If(M;)isalosedontat3-manifoldwithplanartorsionofanyorder,thenit
doesnotadmitaontattypeembeddingintoanylosedsympleti4-manifold.Inpartiular,
itisnotstronglyllable.
Thoughourproofofnon-llabilitywillnotdependonit,theimpliationthat(M;)isnot
stronglyllablefollowsfromtheabovestatementduetoaresultofEtnyreandHonda[EH02 ℄,
thateveryontat3-manifoldisonavellable:thismeansthatstrongllingsanalwaysbe
appedotoproduelosedsympleti4-manifoldsontainingontattypehypersurfaes.
WewillalsoproveanalgebraiounterparttotheaboveresultintermsofEmbedded
ContatHomology,or\ECH" forshort(seee.g.[Hut10 ℄). ThedenitionofECHwillbe
reviewedinx4.2;fornowitsuÆestoreallthatgivenalosedontat3-manifold(M;)
withnondegenerateontatformandgeneriompatibleomplexstrutureJ:!,one
andeneahainomplexgeneratedbyso-alledorbitsets,
=((1;m1);:::;(n;mn));
where
1
;:::;
n
aredistintsimplyoveredperiodiReeborbitsandm
1
;:::;m
n
arepositive
integers,alledmultipliities. Adierentialoperatoristhendenedbyountingaertain
lassofembeddedrigidJ-holomorphiurvesinthesympletizationof(M;),whihanbe
viewedasobordismsbetweenorbitsets.Thehomologyoftheresultinghainomplexisthe
EmbeddedContatHomologyECH(M;;J).Thoughtheomplexobviouslydependson
andJ,Taubeshasshown[Tau10a ,Tau10b℄thatECH
(M;;J)isisomorphitoaversionof
Seiberg-WittenFloerhomology,andthusatuallyonlydepends(uptonaturalisomorphisms)
ontheontatmanifold(M;),soweanwrite
ECH(M;):=ECH(M;;J):
6 CHRISWENDL
3 1
0
2
S 1
f
g
0
0
1+
1
2
=0
jslopej= 1
+
0
=3
2
3
1
r Æ 0
2r=3
0
r=3
(1
0 )
'
R
T
0
T
0
M
B
M
0
u
;
T
1
T2
e
1
h
1
e
2
h
2
v +
1
v
1
v +
2
v
2
u
0
B
I
S 1
D
(T 3
=Z
2 )nN(K)
1
2
3
2
1
22
2
vk
v 1
v 2
Figure3. Variousplanark-torsiondomains,withtheorderk0indiated
withintheplanarpiee.Eahpitureshowsasurfaethatdenesamanifold
S 1
withanS 1
-invariantontatstruture.Themultiurvesthatdivide
arethesetsofallpointsz2atwhihS 1
fzgisLegendrian. Seealso
Example2.15andFigure6.
Theasen=0isalsoallowedamongthegenerators,i.e.the\empty"orbitset;:=(),whih
isalwaysayleinthehomology,thusdeningadistinguishedlass
():=[; ℄2ECH(M;);
whihwealltheECHontatinvariant.ItorrespondsunderTaubes'sisomorphismto
asimilarontatinvariantinSeiberg-Wittentheory,andonjeturally 1
alsototheOzsvath-
SzaboontatinvariantinHeegaardFloerhomology.
Theorem2. If(M;)isalosedontat3-manifoldwithplanartorsionofanyorder,then
itsECHontatinvariant()vanishes.
Thisalulationisinsomesenseageneralizationofthewell-knownfatthatovertwisted
ontatmanifoldshavetrivialontathomology(f.Figure1 ),andourproofofithassome
1
ReentprogressonthisonjeturehasbeenmadeinparallelprojetsbyColin-Ghiggini-Honda[CGHa ℄
andKutluhan-Lee-Taubes[KLTa,KLTb℄.
ommonalitieswiththeproofofthelatterskethedbyEliashbergintheappendixof[Yau06 ℄.
Theresultimpliesanotherproofthatplanartorsionisallingobstrution,albeitaveryindi-
retone:undertheisomorphismofTaubes[Tau10b℄,theECHontatinvariantorresponds
toasimilarinvariantinSeiberg-Wittentheory,whosevanishinggivesallingobstrutiondue
toresultsofKronheimerandMrowka[KM97 ℄.WewillhowevergiveaproofofTheorem1that
usesonlyholomorphiurvemethods,requiringnoassistanefromSeiberg-Wittentheory.
Remark1.2.AsidefromthediretholomorphiurveproofofTheorem1thatwewillgive
inx4.1,thereareatleasttwoalternativeapproahes/generalizationsoneanimagine:
(a)Algebrai:ndaontatinvariantwhosevanishingontraditssympletilling,and
whihmustalwaysvanishinthepreseneofplanartorsion.
(b)Topologial:given(M;)withplanartorsion,ndasympletiobordismwithneg-
ativeboundary(M;)whosepositiveboundaryisalreadyknowntobenotllable.
Therstapproahispursuedinthepresentartileandintherelatedpaper[LW11℄,however
theseondapproahalsoworks.Indeed,aftertherstversionofthispaperwasompleted,the
authordenedin[Wen ℄ageneralizedhandleattahingonstrutionwhihyieldssympleti
obordismsfromanyontatmanifoldwithplanartorsiontoanotherthatisovertwisted.The
deompositionofontatmanifoldsviablownupsummedopenbooksthatwewillexplain
inx2.1isa ruialingredientinthisonstrution,whihalsoyields alternativeproofsof
Theorem5andtheweakllingobstrutionsof[NW11℄mentionedbelow.
UnderstrongergeometriassumptionsonealsoobtainsstrongerresultsintermsofECH
withtwistedoeÆients,whihgivesorrespondinglystriterobstrutionstosympletill-
ings. Aswewillreviewinx4.2,atwistedversionoftheECHhainomplexanbedened
asamoduleoverthegroupringZ[H2(M;R) ℄,sothatthedierentialkeepstrakofthe2-
dimensionalrelativehomologylassesoftheholomorphiurvesitounts. Weshalldenote
thistwistedversionofECHby
℄
ECH
(M;). Italsoontainsa preferredhomologylass
~ ()2
℄
ECH
(M;)representedbytheemptyorbitset,alledthetwistedECHontat
invariant.
Denition1.3.Aontat3-manifoldissaidtohavefullyseparatingplanark-torsion
ifitontainsaplanark-torsiondomainwithaplanarpieeM P
Mthathasthefollowing
properties:
(1)TherearenointerfaetoriintheinteriorofM P
.
(2)EveryonnetedomponentofM P
separatesM.
Wewillseethatthefullyseparatingonditionisalwayssatisedifk=0,andforthease
ofaGirouxtorsiondomain,itissatisedifandonlyifthedomainseparatesM.
Theorem2 0
. If(M;)isalosedontat3-manifoldwithfullyseparatingplanartorsion,
thenitstwistedECHontatinvariant~ ()vanishes.
Appealingagaintotheisomorphismof[Tau10b ℄togetherwithresultsfromSeiberg-Witten
theory[KM97 ℄onweaksympletillings,weobtainthefollowingonsequene,whihisalso
provedbyamorediretholomorphiurveargumentinjointworkoftheauthorwithKlaus
Niederkruger[NW11℄.
Corollary1. If(M;)isalosedontat3-manifoldwithfullyseparatingplanartorsion,
Aswewillshowshortly,Theorem1andCorollary1yieldmanypreviouslyunknownexam-
plesofnon-llableontatmanifolds.ObservethatthefullyseparatingonditioninCorol-
lary1annotberemovedingeneral,asforinstane,thereareinnitelymanytight3-tori
whihhavenon-separatingGirouxtorsion(andheneplanar1-torsionbyTheorem3be-
low)butareweaklyllablebyaonstrutionofGiroux[Gir94℄. Furtherexamplesofthis
phenomenonareonstrutedin[NW11℄forplanark-torsionwithanyk1.
Remark1.4.OneanrenetheabovevanishingresultwithtwistedoeÆientsasfollows:for
agivenlosed2-formonM,dene(M;)tohave-separatingplanartorsionifitontains
aplanartorsiondomainsuhthateveryinterfaetorusTlyingintheplanarpieesatises
R
T
=0(f.Denition2.12 ).Underthisondition,ouromputationimpliesasimilarvanish-
ingresultfortheECHontatinvariantwithtwistedoeÆientsinZ[H
2
(M;R)=ke r℄,with
theonsequenethat(M;)admitsnoweaklling(W;!)forwhih!jTMisohomologous
to.Adiretproofofthelatterisgivenin[NW11℄.
Wenowonsiderexamplesofontatmanifoldswithplanartorsion.Wewillshowinx2.2
thatthepreviouslyknownloalllingobstrutionstintothersttwolevelsofthehierarhy,
i.e.k=0and1.
Theorem3.Alosedontat3-manifoldhasplanar0-torsionifandonlyifitisovertwisted,
andeverylosedontatmanifoldwithGirouxtorsionalsohasplanar1-torsion.
Forthisreason,Theorems2and2 0
implyECHversionsofthevanishingresultsofGhiggini,
HondaandVanHorn-Morris[GHV ,GH ℄fortheOzsvath-Szaboontatinvariantinthepres-
eneofGirouxtorsion. We'llseebelowthatitisalsoeasytoonstrutexamplesofontat
manifoldsthathaveplanartorsionofanyordergreaterthan1butnoGirouxtorsion. Itis
notlearwhetherthereexistontatmanifoldswithplanar1-torsionbutnoGirouxtorsion.
Tondexamplesfork2,supposeisalosedorientedsurfaeontaininganon-empty
multiurve thatdividesitintotwo(possiblydisonneted)piees+and . We
denetheontatmanifold(M ; ),where
M :=S 1
and isthe(uptoisotopy)uniqueS 1
-invariantontatstruturethatmakesfonst ginto
aonvexsurfaewithdividingset .Theexisteneanduniquenessofsuhaontatstruture
followsfromaresultofLutz[Lut77 ℄. WewillseeinExamples2.10and2.15that(M ; )
isapartiallyplanardomainwheneveranyonnetedomponent
0
ofn hasgenuszero:
indeed,thesurfaesfg0arethenthepagesofablownupplanaropenbook.Moreover,
(M ; )isthenaplanartorsiondomainunlessn hasexatlytwoonnetedomponents
andtheyaredieomorphi,anditisfullyseparatingifeveryonnetedomponentof
0
separates.
Corollary2.Supposen hasaonnetedomponent
0
ofgenuszero,andeithern has
morethantwoonnetedomponentsorn
0
isnotdieomorphito
0
. Then(M ; )
hasvanishing (untwisted)ECHontatinvariantandisnotstronglyllable. Moreover,if
everyonnetedomponentof
0
separates,thentheinvariantwithtwistedoeÆients
alsovanishesand(M ;)isnotweaklyllable.
Notethat(M ; )isalwaysuniversallytightwhenever ontainsnoontratibleon-
netedomponents. Thisfollowsfrom[Gir01,Prop.4.1(b)℄,andanalsobededued(via
AHIERARCHYOFFILLINGOBSTRUCTIONSFORCONTACTMANIFOLDS 9
Reeborbits(e.g.anyGirouxforminthesenseofDenition2.8willhavethisproperty).
Wheneverthisistrue,anargumentduetoGiroux(see[Mas12,Theorem3℄)impliesthat
(M ; )alsohasnoGirouxtorsionifnotwoonnetedomponentsof areisotopi. We
thusobtaininnitelymanyexamplesofontatmanifoldsthathaveplanartorsionofany
ordergreaterthan1butnoGirouxtorsion:
Corollary3. Foranyintegersgk1,let(V
g
;
k
)denotetheS 1
-invariantontatman-
ifold(M;)desribed abovefortheasewhere hask onneted omponentsand
dividesinto twoonneted omponents, one withgenuszero andtheotherwith genus
g k+1>0.Then(Vg;
k
)hasnoGirouxtorsionifk3,butforanyk1ithasplanar
torsionoforderk 1.Inpartiular(V
g
;
k
)alwayshasvanishingECHontatinvariantand
isnotstronglyllable.
SomemoreexamplesofplanartorsionwithoutGirouxtorsionareshowninFigure4.
Remark1.5.Inmanyases,oneaneasilygeneralizetheaboveresultsfromprodutsS 1
togeneralSeifertbrationsover. Inpartiular,wheneverhasgenusatleastfour,one
annddividingsetson suhthat(S 1
;)has noGirouxtorsionbutontainsa
propersubsetthatisaplanartorsiondomain(seeFigure4 ). Thenmodiationsoutsideof
thetorsiondomainanhangethetrivialbrationintoarbitrarynontrivialSeifertbrations
withplanartorsionbutnoGirouxtorsion. Thistrikreproduesmany(thoughnotall)of
theSeifertbered3-manifoldsforwhih[Mas12℄provesthevanishingoftheOzsvath-Szabo
ontatinvariant.
Remark1.6.ThereisasigniantoverlapbetweenourECHvanishingresultsandtheHee-
gaardvanishingresultsprovedbyMassotin[Mas12 ℄(seealso[HKM,Mat11℄),butneither
setofresultsontainstheother. Inpartiular,theexamples(Vg;k)inCorollary3with
planartorsionofordergreaterthan1seemthusfartobebeyondthereahofHeegaardFloer
homology.
ByareentresultofEtnyreandVela-Vik[EVV10 ℄,theomplementofthebindingof
asupportingopenbookneverontainsaGirouxtorsiondomain. Wewillproveanatural
generalizationofthis:
Theorem4.Suppose(M;)isaontat3-manifoldsupportedbyanopenbook:MnB!
S 1
.Thenanyplanartorsiondomainin(M;)mustintersetthebindingB.
Inordertoexplainourhoieofterminologyandtheuseoftheword\hierarhy,"wenow
mentionsomerelatedjointresultswithJankoLatshevwhihareprovedin[LW11 ℄. These
aremosteasilyexpressedbydeningaontatinvariant
PT(M;):=sup
k0
(M;)hasnoplanar`-torsionforany`<k ;
whihtakesvaluesinN[f0;1gandisinniteifandonlyif(M;)hasnoplanartorsion.
ThentheresultsstatedaboveshowthatPT(M;)<1alwaysimplies(M;)isnotstrongly
llable;moreoverPT(M;)1whenever(M;)hasGirouxtorsion,PT(M;)=0ifand
onlyif(M;)isovertwisted,andthereexistontatmanifoldswithoutGirouxtorsionsuh
thatPT(M;)<1. WelaimnowthatontatmanifoldswithlargervaluesofPT(M;)
notonlyexistbutare,insomequantiablesense,\loser"tobeingllable.Thisstatement
anbemadepreisebyonsideringtheexisteneornon-existeneofsympletiobordisms
10 CHRISWENDL
S 1
f
g
0
0
1+
1
2
=0
jslopej= 1
+0
=3
2
3
1
r Æ 0
2r=3
0
r=3
(1
0 )
'
R
T
0
T0
M
B
M
0
u;
T1
T
2
e
1
h
1
e
2
h
2
v +
1
v
1
v +
2
v
2
u
0
B
I
S 1
D
(T 3
=Z2)nN(K)
1
2
3
21
2
2
2
v
k
v 1
v 2
Figure4. SomeontatmanifoldsoftheformS 1
thathavenoGiroux
torsionbuthaveplanartorsionoforders2,2,3and2respetively. Ineah
asetheontatstrutureisS 1
-invariantandinduesthedividingsetshown
oninthepiture. Fortheexampleattheupperright,Theorem2 0
implies
thatthetwistedECHontatinvariantalsovanishes,sothisoneisnotweakly
llable.Inthebottomexample,theplanartorsiondomainisapropersubset,
thusoneanmakemodiationsoutsideofthissubsettoproduearbitrary
nontrivialSeifertbrations(seeRemark1.5).
Theorem([LW11 ℄).Fortheontatmanifold(Vg;k)inCorollary3 ,PT(Vg;k)=k 1.
Moreover,if(M;)isanyontatmanifoldthatappearsasthepositiveboundaryofanexat
sympletiobordismwhosenegativeboundaryis(V
g
;
k
),thenPT(M;)k 1.
Sineaontat3-manifold(M;)istightifandonlyifPT(M;)1,theaboveresult
anberegardedasdemonstratinga\higherorder"variantofthewell-knownonjeturethat
ontat( 1)-surgeryonaLegendrian inalosedtightontatmanifoldalwaysprodues
somethingtight. Indeed,sineontatsurgerygivesrisetoaSteinobordism,theabove
impliesthatontatsurgery(orforthatmatter,ontatonnetedsums)on(Vg;k)always
Remark1.7.ItshouldbeemphasizedherethatthesaledenedbytheinvariantPT(M;)
measuressomethingompletely dierentfromthestandardquantitativemeasurementof
Girouxtorsion;thelatterountsthemaximumnumberofadjaentGirouxtorsiondomains
thatanbeembeddedin(M;),andantakearbitrarilylargevalueswhilePT(M;)1.
Likewise,(M;)hasGirouxtorsionzerowheneverPT(M;)2.
Thetheoremabovefollowsfromsomeresultsprovedin[LW11 ℄usingnotionsfromSym-
pletiFieldTheory,whihalsolieinthebakgroundofourhoieofterminology. Reall
thatSFTisageneralizationofontathomologyintroduedbyEliashberg,Giventaland
Hofer[EGH00℄(seealso[CL09 ℄forthereformulationdisussedhere),thatdenesontat
invariantsbyountingJ-holomorphiurveswitharbitrarygenusandpositiveandnegative
endsinsympletizationsofarbitrarydimension.ThehainomplexofSFTisagradedalge-
braoftheformA[[~℄℄,where~isanevenvariableandAisagradedunitalalgebragenerated
bysymbolsq
orrespondingtolosedReeborbits. Thereisthenadierentialoperator
D
SFT
:A[[~℄℄!A[[~℄℄whihountsholomorphiurvesandvanishesbydenitiononthe
\onstant"elementsR[[~ ℄℄A[[~℄℄,henedeningpreferedhomologylassesin
H SFT
(M;):=H(A[[~℄℄;DSFT):
Onethendenes(M;)tohavealgebraik-torsionifthehomologysatisestherelation
[~
k
℄=02H SFT
(M;):
Fork =0,thismeans[1℄=0andoinideswiththenotionofalgebraiovertwistedness
(f.[BN10℄).Itfollowseasilyfromtheformalism 2
ofSFTthatalgebraitorsionofanyorder
givesanobstrutiontostrongsympletilling,butinfatitisstronger,asitalsoimplies
obstrutionstotheexisteneofexatsympletiobordismsbetweenertainontatmani-
folds.Tostatethissuintly,oneandeneanalgebraiousinoftheinvariantPT(M;)
by
AT (M;):=sup
k0
(M;)hasnoalgebrai`-torsionforany`<k :
Theaboveresultisthenaonsequeneofthefollowingsetofresults,whihserveasourmain
motivationforkeepingtrakoftheintegerk0inplanark-torsion.
Theorem([LW11℄). TheinvariantAT (M;)hasthefollowingproperties.
(1)Anyontatmanifold(M;)withAT(M;)<1isnotstronglyllable.
(2)Ifthereisanexatsympletiobordismwithpositiveboundary(M
+
;
+
)andnegative
boundary(M ; ),thenAT(M ; )AT(M
+
;
+ ).
(3)Everyontat3-manifold(M;)satisesAT(M;)PT(M;).
(4)Fortheexamples(V
g
;
k
)inCorollary3 ,AT (V
g
;
k )=k 1.
Inpartiular,theomputationAT(M;)PT(M;)followsfromavariationonourproof
ofTheorems2and2 0
,andthusmakesessentialuseoftheholomorphiurveresultsinthe
presentartile.
2
ForthisinformaldisussionwearetakingitforgrantedthatSFTiswelldened,whihwasnotproved
in[EGH00℄andisquitefarfromobvious.TherigorousdenitionofSFT,inludingtheneessaryabstrat
perturbationstoahievetransversality,isalargeprojetinprogressbyHofer-Wysoki-Zehnder,seeforexample
[Hof06℄. Theappliationstatedabovehoweverdoesnotdependonthis,asitanalsobeprovedusingthe
1.2.Obstrutions tonon-separatingembeddings andplanarity.Wenowdisussa
parallelstreamofresultsthatapplytoawiderlassofontatmanifolds,someofwhih
arellable. Observethatinadditiontorulingoutsympletillings,Theorem1implies
thatontatmanifoldswithplanartorsionanneverappearasnon-separatingontattype
hypersurfaesinanylosedsympleti4-manifold. Thisisatuallyaonsequene ofthe
followinggeneralizationofaresultprovedin[ABW10℄:
Theorem5.Suppose(M;)isalosedontat3-manifoldthatontainsapartiallyplanar
domain(seeDenition2.11 )andadmitsaontattypeembedding:(M;),!(W;!)into
somelosedsympleti4-manifold(W;!).ThenseparatesW.
Corollary4.If(M;)isalosedontat3-manifoldontainingapartiallyplanardomain,
thenitdoesnotadmitanystrongsympletisemillingwithdisonnetedboundary.
Reallthatasemillingofaontatmanifold(M;)isdenedtobeallingof(M;)t
(M 0
; 0
)forany(perhapsempty)losedontatmanifold(M 0
; 0
).Theorollaryfollowsfrom
anobservationduetoEtnyre(f.[ABW10,Example1.3℄),thatgivenallingof(M;)t
(M 0
; 0
)withM 0
non-empty,oneanattahasympleti1-handletoonnetMandM 0
and
thenapotheresultingboundaryinordertorealize(M;)asanon-separatingontat
typehypersurfae.Corollary4alsogeneralizessimilarresultsprovedbyMDuforthetight
3-sphere[MD91℄andEtnyreforallplanarontatmanifolds[Etn04 ℄.
ThealgebraiounterparttoCorollary4involvestheso-alledU-mapinEmbeddedCon-
tatHomology.Thisisanaturalendomorphism
U:ECH
(M;)!ECH
2 (M;)
denedatthehainlevelbyountingembeddedindex2holomorphiurvesthroughageneri
pointinthesympletization. ThesamedenitionalsogivesamaponECHwithtwisted
oeÆients,
e
U:
℄
ECH
(M;)!
℄
ECH
2 (M;):
Theorem6.If(M;)isalosedontat3-manifoldontainingapartiallyplanardomain,
thenforallintegersd1,theimageofU d
:ECH
(M;)!ECH
(M;)ontains().
ThisimpliesCorollary4duetosomereentresultsinvolvingmapsonECHinduedby
obordisms(f.[HT℄),thoughagain,thoseresultsdependonSeiberg-Wittentheory,andour
proofofTheorem5willnot.
Theorem6appliesinpartiulartoallplanarontatmanifoldsandanthusbeviewedas
anobstrutiontoplanarity. TheorrespondingobstrutioninHeegaardFloerhomologyis
aknownresultofOzsvath,StipsizandSzabo[OSS05℄. Ourversionoftheobstrutionan
easilybestrengthenedbyobservingthataplanaropenbookisalsoafullyseparatingpartially
planardomain,soanalogouslytoTheorem2 0
,ityieldsaresultwithtwistedoeÆients|the
HeegaardFloertheoretianalogueofthisresultisapparentlynotknown.
Theorem6 0
.If(M;)isaplanarontatmanifold,thenforallintegersd1,theimage
of e
U d
:
℄
ECH(M;)!
℄
ECH(M;)ontains~().
Remark 1.8.SimilarlytoRemark1.4 ,oneangeneralizetheabovebydening(f.Deni-
tion2.12)thenotionofan-separatingembeddingofapartiallyplanardomain,whereisa
losed2-formonM.ThensuhanembeddingproduesaversionofTheorem6 0
forECHwith
oeÆientsinZ[H2(M;R)=ker℄,andimpliesorrespondinggeneralizationsofCorollary4.
Remark 1.9.NotethatbyTheorem6above,therearealsomanynon-planarexamplesfor
whih()isintheimageofU d
,buttheorrespondingstatementwithtwistedoeÆientsis
nottrue.ThemostobviousexampleisthestandardT 3
,whihisapartiallyplanardomain
(seeExample2.5 )butalsoadmitsweaksemillingswithdisonnetedboundary(dueto
Giroux[Gir94 ℄).
1.3.Holomorphiurvesandopenbookdeompositions. Thetehnialworkinthe
bakgroundoftheaboveresultsisasetoftheoremsthatwewillproveinx3relatingholomor-
phiurvesandasuitablygeneralizednotionofopenbookdeompositions.Forillustration
purposes,wenowstatesomesimpliedversionsoftheseresults.
ReallthatifMisalosedandoriented3-manifold,anopenbookdeompositionisa
bration
:MnB!S 1
;
whereBMisanorientedlinkalledthebinding,andthelosuresofthebersarealled
pages: theseareompat,orientedandembeddedsurfaeswithorientedboundaryequal
toB.Anopenbookisalledplanarifthepagesareonnetedandhavegenuszero,andit
issaidtosupportaontatstrutureifthelatteranbewrittenaskerforsomeontat
form(alledaGirouxform)whoseinduedReebvetoreldX
ispositivelytransverse
totheinteriorsofthepagesandpositivelytangenttothebinding. Thelatterdenitionis
duetoGiroux[Gir℄,whoestablishedagroundbreakingone-to-oneorrespondenebetween
isomorphismlassesofontatmanifoldsandtheirsupportingopenbooksuptoright-handed
stabilization.
Werefertox3.1forallthetehnialdenitionsneededtounderstandthefollowingstate-
ment.Asubstantialgeneralizationwillappearinx3.2asTheorem7.
Proposition1.10.Suppose(M;)isalosedonnetedontat3-manifoldwithasupporting
openbookdeomposition:MnB!S 1
whosepageshavegenusg0.Thenforanynumbers
0
>0andm
0
2N,(M;)admitsanondegenerateGirouxformandgeneriompatible
almostomplexstrutureJonitssympletizationsuhthatthefollowingonditionshold:
(1)TheReeborbitsinBhaveminimalperiodlessthan0,andtheiroversuptomulti-
pliitym
0
allhaveConley-Zehnderindex1withrespettotheframingdeterminedby
theopenbook.AllReeborbitsinMnBhaveperiodatleast1.
(2)Ifg=0,thenafter asmallisotopyofxingthebinding,thereisan(RS 1
)-
parametrizedfamilyofembeddedniteenergypunturedJ-holomorphiurves
u
(;) :
_
!RM; (;)2RS 1
whihareFredholmregularandhaveindex2andhaveonlypositiveends,suhthatfor
eah(;)2RS 1
,theprojetionofu
(;)
toMisanembeddingthatparametrizes
1
().
(3)Ifg=0,theneverysomewhereinjetiveniteenergypunturedJ-holomorphiurve
inRM whosepositiveends allapproahorbitsinB ofoveringmultipliityup
tom0ispartofthe(RS 1
)-familydesribedabove.
(4)Ifg >0,thenthereisnoJ-holomorphiurveinRM whosepositive endsall
approahdistintsimplyoveredorbitsinB.
The(RS 1
)-parametrizedfamilyofJ-holomorphiurvesinthistheoremisalleda
holomorphiopenbook;suhobjetshaveappearedpreviouslyintheworkofHofer-Wysoki-
alreadyestablishedin[Wen10℄andgeneralizedin[Abb11℄,andliesinthebakgroundof
variousontattopologialresultsonplanarontatmanifolds,suhastheproofoftheWe-
insteinonjeturebyAbbas-Cieliebak-Hofer[ACH05 ℄andtheauthor'sproofthatstrongand
Steinllabilityareequivalent[Wen10b ℄. Givenexistene,theuniquenessstatementforthe
g=0asefollowsfromastraightforwardbutsurprisinglypowerfulintersetiontheoretiar-
gument,usingthehomotopyinvariantintersetionnumberforpunturedholomorphiurves
developedbySiefring[Sie11℄.Thenon-existeneresultforg>0reliesonthissameargument
butismuhsubtler,beauseforanalytialreasons,theexistenepartoftheabovetheorem
failsintheaseg>0.
3
Thesituationissavedbytheobservation,explainedin[Wen10℄,that
oneanndahighlynon-generihoieofdataforwhihhighergenusholomorphiopen
booksexist,andthisdataisompatiblewithanexatstableHamiltonianstruture,whih
admitsawellbehavedperturbationtoasuitableontatform.
Inx3.2,wewillstateandproveageneralizationofProposition1.10intheontextofblown
upandsummedopenbooks,whihgivesusexisteneanduniquenessforertainholomorphi
urvesinpartiallyplanardomainsthathaveonlypositiveends. Suhresultsmakeiteasy
tondorbitsetsintheECHhainomplexthatsatisfy=;orU d
=;,thusproving
Theorems2,2 0
,6and6 0
.
Asalreadymentioned,ourmainresultsonllabilityandembeddability(Theorems1,4
and5)analsobeprovedwithoutreoursetoECHandSeiberg-Wittentheory,andweshall
dothisinx4.1 .Themainideabehindsuhargumentsappearedalreadyin[Wen10b℄:given
astrongllingwhoseboundaryontainsaplanartorsiondomain,weanattahaylindrial
endandusetheaboveorrespondenebetweenopenbooksandholomorphiurvestond
aregionnearinnitythatisfoliatedbyastable2-dimensionalfamilyofholomorphiurves.
Thisfamilyanthenbeexpandedintothellingand,duetotheanalytialpropertiesofthe
holomorphiurvesinquestion,mustfoliateit. Butthelatterproduesaontradition,as
oneanthenfollowthefamilybakintoadierentregionoftheylindrialendwhereour
uniquenessstatementinfatexludestheexisteneofsuhholomorphiurves.
Tomakethistypeofargumentwork,weneedompatnessanddeformationresultsfor
familiesofurvesinasympletillingthatarisefromthepagesofaholomorphiopen
book. Anexampleofsuharesultis thefollowing. Suppose(M;)issupportedbya
planaropenbook:MnB!S 1
,andandJ
+
aretheontatformandalmostomplex
struturerespetivelyprovidedbyProposition1.10.Assumealsothat(M;)istheontat
typeboundaryofaompatsympletimanifold(W;!)suhthatnearW,!= dfor
a1-formthatmathesatM =W. Weanthenomplete(W;!)toanonompat
sympletimanifoldbyattahingaylindrialend
(W 1
;!):=(W;!)[
M
[0;1)M;d(e t
)
:
Letu
+ :
_
!RMdenoteoneoftheholomorphiplanarpagesprovidedbyProposition1.10;
applyingasuitableR-translationtou
+
,wemayassumewithoutlossofgeneralitythatitlies
in[0;1)MW 1
.NowhooseanopenneighborhoodN(B)MofthebindingBand
3
Holomorphiopenbookswithpagesofpositivegenusannotbeexpetedtoexistingeneralbeause
theneessarymodulispaesofholomorphiurveshavenegativevirtualdimension.Hofer[Hof00 ℄suggested
thatthisproblemmightbesolvedbyintroduinga\ohomologialperturbation"intothenonlinearCauhy-
RiemannequationinordertoraisetheFredholmindex.ThisprogramhasreentlybeenarriedoutbyCasim
Abbas[Abb11 ℄(seealso[vB ℄),thoughappliationstoproblemssuhastheWeinsteinonjetureareasyet
anopensubsetUMsuhthat
u
+ (
_
)[0;1)U:
Finally,hooseanysetofdata 0
,! 0
,J 0
+ andJ
0
withthefollowingproperties:
0
isanondegenerateontatformonMthatmathesinU[N(B)andhasonly
Reeborbitsofperiodatleast1outsideofN(B)
! 0
isasympletiformonW 1
thatmathesd(e t
0
)on[0;1)M
J 0
+
isagenerialmostomplexstrutureonRMompatiblewith 0
thatmathes
J+onR(U[N(B))
J 0
isan! 0
-ompatiblealmostomplexstrutureonW 1
whihisgeneriinW and
mathesJ 0
+
in[0;1)M
WethendenotebyM(J 0
)themodulispaeofallunparametrizedniteenergyJ 0
-holomorphi
urvesinW 1
,andletM0(J 0
)denotetheonnetedomponentofthisspaeontainingu+.
Astandardappliationoftheimpliitfuntiontheorem(seee.g.[ABW10,Theorem4.7℄)
showsthatM0(J 0
)isasmooth2-dimensionalmanifoldwhoseelementsareallembeddedand
donotinterseteahother;inpartiulartheyfoliateanopensubsetofW 1
.Thekeytothe
proofsinx4.1aswellasvariousotherappliationsin[NW11,LVW ℄istoshowthattheurves
inM0(J 0
)alsollalosedsubsetoutsideofsomeharmlesssubvarietyofodimensiontwo.
Thatisthemainpointofthefollowingresult,whihisasimpliedversionofTheorem8
provedinx3.3 .
Proposition1.11.M
0 (J
0
)isompatexeptforonvergeneinthesenseof[BEH +
03℄to
holomorphibuildingsofthefollowingtypes:
(1)Buildingswithemptymainlevelandasinglenon-emptyupperlevelurveinRM
whoseprojetiontoMisembedded,
(2)FinitelymanynodalurvesinW 1
onsistingoftwoembeddedindex0omponents
thatinterseteahothertransversely.
ItisinstrutiveperhapstoomparethiswiththeresultsofMDu[MD90℄:inpartiular,
theroleofMDu'ssympletispherewithnonnegativeself-intersetionisplayedbyour
holomorphiurveu+,whihgeneratesasmooth2-dimensionalfamilyofurvesthat,dueto
theaboveompatnessresultandtheaforementionedimpliitfuntiontheorem,mustllthe
entiretyofW 1
. Intheformstatedabove,thisresultfollowsfrom[ABW10,Theorem4.8℄.
Theversionwewillproveinx3.3forageneralpartiallyplanardomainismoreompliated
beauseoneannotgenerallyavoidholomorphibuildingswithmultiplyoveredomponents,
nonethelessoneanstillshowthatonlynitelymanysuhbuildingsanappear.
1.4.Openquestionsandreentprogress. Letusnowdisussafewquestionsthatarise
fromtheaboveresults,someofwhihhavebeenpartiallyansweredsinetherstversion
ofthispaperappeared. InlightoftheequivalenebetweentheECHandOzsvath-Szabo
ontatinvariants,reentlyestablishedinindependentworkofColin-Ghiggini-Honda[CGHb℄
andKutluhan-Lee-Taubes[KLT℄,ourvanishingresultsfortheECHontatinvariantsimply
orrespondingresultsinHeegaardFloerhomology. Someofthesewerealreadyknownfrom
theworkofvariousauthors[GHV ,GH,HKM,Mas12 ,Mat11℄,buttheirresultsappearthus
fartoreognizeplanartorsiononlyuptoorder1.
Question.CanoneprovewithintheontextofHeegaardFloerhomology(i.e.withoutusing
ECH)thattheontatinvariantvanishesinthepreseneofplanark-torsionfork2?
Asweskethedintheabovedisussionofrelatedresultsin[LW11 ℄,thehierarhialstru-
tureenodedbytheorderk0ofplanark-torsionanbedetetedalgebraiallyviaSym-
pletiFieldTheory,anditalsoanbedetetedbyarenementoftheECHontatinvariant
explainedinHuthings'sappendixto[LW11 ℄.Thelatterraisesthequestionofwhatstruture
inHeegaardFloerhomologymightalsobeabletoseethishierarhy,butapparentlynothing
isyetknownaboutthis.
Question.CanHeegaard Floerhomologydistinguish betweentwoontatmanifoldswith
vanishingOzsvath-Szaboinvariantbutdieringminimalordersofplanartorsion?Doesthis
implyobstrutionstotheexisteneofexatorSteinobordisms?
Itshouldbementionedthatinpresentingthisintrodutiontoplanartorsion,weneither
laimnorbelieveittobethemostgeneralsoureofvanishingresultsforthevariousinvari-
antsunderdisussion. FortheOzsvath-Szaboinvariant,[Mas12℄produesvanishingresults
onsomeSeifertbered3-manifoldsthatfallundertheumbrellaofourCorollary2andRe-
mark1.5 ,butalsosomethatdonotsinethereisnoonditionrequiringtheexisteneofa
planarpiee. Thisphenomenonappearstoberelatedtoageneralizationofplanartorsion
thathasreentlyemergedfromjointworkoftheauthorwithLisiandVanHorn-Morris:the
ideaistoreplaetheontatbersumwithamoregeneral\plumbing"onstrutionthat
produesanotionof\highergenusbinding."Amongitsappliations,thisallowsasubstantial
generalizationofCorollary2thatenompassesalloftheexamplesin[Mas12℄andmanymore;
detailsofthiswillappearintheforthomingpaper[LVW ℄.
Andnowtheobviousquestion:whatanbedoneinhigherdimensions? Therehasbeen
signiantativityinthisareainthelastfewyears.AtsuhideMori[Mor℄showedthatertain
blownupopenbooksindimension5produeallingobstrutionthatstronglyresembles
theLutztubeandisrelatedtoNiederkruger'sspeulativenotionofhigher-dimensionalover-
twistedness[Nie06 ℄. Afterthepreprintversionofthepresentartilerstappeared,Mori's
onstrutionwasgeneralizedtoalldimensionsinajointpaperoftheauthorwithMassot
andNiederkruger[MNW ℄whihalsodenedahigher-dimensionalnotionofGirouxtorsion,
givingtherstexamplesofnon-llableontatmanifoldsinalldimensionsthatannotbe
alled\overtwisted"inanyreasonablesense. Theonstrutionsin[MNW ℄alsogivesome
hintsastohowonemightdenesomethinganalogoustohigher-orderplanartorsionthat
ouldbedetetedalgebraiallyviaSFTinalldimensions.Thissubjetisstillinitsinfany,
butitnowatleastseemssafetostatethefollowingonjeture:
Conjeture.Foralln1andk0,thereexist(2n+1)-dimensionalontatmanifolds
(M;)withAT(M;)=k. Inpartiular,thereexistsineverydimensiongreaterthanone
asequeneofnon-llableontatmanifoldsf(Mk;k)gk0suh that(Mk;k)admitsexat
sympletiobordismsto(M
`
;
`
)ifandonlyifk`.
2.Thedefinitionofplanartorsion
2.1.Blownupsummed open books.Wenowexplainthedeompositionofaontat
manifoldinto\bindingsums"ofsupportingopenbooks, whihunderliesthenotion ofa
planartorsiondomain.
AssumeMisanorientedsmoothmanifoldontainingtwodisjointorientedsubmanifolds
N
1
;N
2
Mofrealodimension2,whihadmitanorientationpreservingdieomorphism
':N1!N2overedbyanorientationreversingisomorphism:N1!N2oftheirnormal
bundles.ThenweandeneanewsmoothmanifoldM ,thenormalsumofMalong,by
removingneighborhoodsN(N
1
)andN(N
2 )ofN
1 andN
2
respetively,thengluingtogether
theresultingmanifoldswithboundaryalonganorientationreversingdieomorphism
N(N
1 )!N(N
2 )
determinedby.ThisoperationdeterminesM
uptodieomorphism,andisalsowelldened
intheontatateogory:if(M;)isaontatmanifoldandN1;N2areontatsubmanifolds
with': N
1
!N
2
a ontatomorphism, thenM
admits aontat struture
,whih
agreeswithawayfromN
1 andN
2
(f.[Gei08 ,x7.4℄). Althoughtheissueofuniquenessis
notdisussedin[Gei08 ,x7.4℄,oneanshowthattheonstrutionof
explainedthereis
anonialuptoisotopy;inthespeisettingthatwewillbeonernedwithbelow,thisisan
obviousonsequeneoftheuniquenessof\supported"ontatstrutures(f.Denition2.8
andtheensuingdisussion).
WewillonsiderthespeialaseoftheontatbersumwhereN1andN2aredisjoint
omponents 4
ofthebindingofanopenbookdeomposition
:MnB!S 1
thatsupports. ThenN1andN2areautomatiallyontatsubmanifolds,whosenormal
bundlesomewithdistinguishedtrivializationsdeterminedbytheopenbook.Inthefollow-
ing,weshallalwaysassumethatM isorientedandthepagesandbindingareassignedthe
naturalorientationsdeterminedbytheopenbook,soinpartiularthebindingistheoriented
boundaryofthepages.
Denition2.1.Assume:MnB!S 1
isanopenbookdeompositiononM.Byabinding
sumoftheopenbook,wemeananynormalsumM
alonganorientationreversingbundle
isomorphism:N
1
!N
2
overingadieomorphism':N
1
!N
2 ,whereN
1
;N
2 B
aredisjointomponentsofthebindingandisonstantwithrespettothedistinguished
trivializationdeterminedby.Theresultingsmoothmanifoldwillbedenotedby
M
(;') :=M
;
andwedenotebyI
(;')
M
(;')
thelosedhypersurfaeobtainedbytheidentiationof
N(N1)withN(N2),whihwe'llalsoalltheinterfae. Wewillthenrefertothedata
(;')asasummedopenbookdeompositionofM
(;')
,whosebindingisthe(possibly
empty)odimension2submanifold
B':=Bn(N1[N2)M
(;') :
Thepagesof(;')aretheonnetedomponentsofthebersofthenaturallyindued
bration
':M
(;') n(B'[I
(;') )!S
1
;
ifdimM =3,thenthesearenaturallyorientedopensurfaeswhoselosuresaregenerally
immersed(distintboundaryomponentsmaysometimesoinide).
If isaontatstruture onM supportedby,wewilldenotetheinduedontat
strutureonM
(;') by
(;') :=
andsaythat
(;')
issupportedbythesummedopenbook(;').
4
Weusethewordomponentthroughouttomeananyopenandlosedsubset,i.e.adisjointunionof
Itfollowsfromtheorrespondingfatforordinaryopenbooksthateverysummedopen
bookdeompositionsupportsaontatstruture,whihisuniqueuptoisotopy:infatit
dependsonlyontheisotopylassoftheopenbook:MnB!S 1
,thehoieofbinding
omponentsN1;N2Bandisotopylassofdieomorphism':N1!N2.
Throughoutthisdisussion,M,N
1 ,N
2
andthepagesofareallallowedtobedisonneted
(notethat:MnB!S 1
willhavedisonnetedpagesifMitselfisdisonneted).Inthis
way,weaninorporatethenotionofabindingsumofmultiple,separate(perhapssummed)
openbooks,e.g.given(M
i
;
i
)supportedby
i :M
i nB
i
!S 1
withomponentsN
i B
i for
i=1;2,andadieomorphism':N1!N2,abindingsumof(M1;1)with(M2;2)anbe
denedbyapplyingtheaboveonstrutiontothedisjointunionM
1 tM
2
.Wewillgenerally
usetheshorthandnotation
M1M2
toindiatemanifoldsonstrutedbybindingsumsofthistype,whereitisunderstoodthatM1
andM
2
bothomewithontatstruturesandsupportingsummedopenbooks,whihom-
binetodetermineasummedopenbookandsupportedontatstrutureonM
1
M
2 .
Example2.2.ConsiderthetightontatstrutureonM :=S 1
S 2
withitssupporting
openbookdeomposition
:Mn(
0 [
1 )!S
1
:(t;z)7!z=jzj;
whereS 2
=C[f1g,0:=S 1
f0g,1:=S 1
f1gandS 1
isidentiedwiththeunit
irleinC.Thisopenbookhasylindrialpagesandtrivialmonodromy.NowletM 0
denote
aseondopyofthesamemanifoldand
0
:M 0
n( 0
0 [
0
1 )!S
1
thesameopenbook.DeningthebindingsumMM 0
bypairing
0 with
0
0 and
1 with
0
1
,weobtainthestandardontatT 3
.Infat,eahofthetightontattori(T 3
;
n ),where
n
=ker[os (2n)dx+sin(2n)dy℄
inoordinates(x;y;)2S 1
S 1
S 1
,anbeobtainedasabindingsumof2nopiesofthe
tightS 1
S 2
;seeFigure5.
Example2.3.UsingthesameopenbookdeompositiononthetightS 1
S 2
asinExam-
ple2.2 ,oneantakeonlyasingleopyandperformabindingsumalongthetwobinding
omponents0and1.Theontatmanifoldproduedbythisoperationisthequotientof
(T 3
;
1
)bytheontatinvolution(x;y;)7!( x; y;+1=2),andisthusthetorusbundle
overS 1
withmonodromy 1. TheresultingsummedopenbookonT 3
=Z2hasonneted
ylindrialpages,emptybindingandasingleinterfaetorusoftheformI
(;')
=f2=0g,
induingabration
' :(T
3
=Z
2 )nI
(;')
!S 1
:[(x;y;)℄7!
(
y if2(0;1=2),
y if2(1=2;1).
Thefollowingtwospeialasesofsummedopenbooksareofruialimportane.
Example2.4.Anordinaryopenbookanalsoberegardedasasummedopenbook: we
simplytakeN andN tobeempty.
AHIERARCHYOFFILLINGOBSTRUCTIONSFORCONTACTMANIFOLDS 19 S
1
f
g
0
0
1+
1
2
=0
jslopej= 1
+
0
=3
2
3
1
r Æ 0
2r=3
0
r=3
(1 0)
'
R
T
0
T
0
M
B
M
0
u
;
T
1
T2
e
1
h
1
e
2
h
2
v +
1
v
1
v +
2
v
2
u
0
B
I
S 1
D
(T 3
=Z
2 )nN(K)
1
2
3
2
1
22
2
v
k
v 1
v 2
Figure5. Twowaysofproduingtightontattorifrom2nopiesofthe
tight S 1
S 2
. Atleft, opiesofS 1
S 2
arerepresentedbyopenbooks
withtwobindingomponents(depitedherethroughthepage)andylindrial
pages.Foreahdottedovalsurroundingtwobindingomponents,weonstrut
thebindingsumtoproduethemanifoldatright,ontaining2nspeialpre-
Lagrangiantori(theblaklinesegments)that separateregionsfoliated by
ylinders.Theresultsare(T 3
;n)forn=1;2.
Example2.5.Suppose(Mi;i)fori=1;2arelosedonnetedontat3-manifoldswith
supportingopenbooks
i
whosepagesaredieomorphi.ThenweansetN
1
=B
1 andN
2
=
B2,hooseadieomorphismB1!B2anddeneM=M1M2aordingly.Theresulting
summedopenbookisalledsymmetri;observethat ithas emptybinding,sineevery
bindingomponentof1and2hasbeensummed. Asimpleexampleofthisonstrution
is(T 3
;
1
)asexplainedinExample2.2 ,andforanevensimplerexample,summingtwoopen
bookswithdisk-likepagesproduesthetightS 1
S 2
.
Remark2.6.Thereisaloserelationshipbetweensummedopenbooksandthenotionofopen
bookswithquasi-ompatibleontatstrutures,introduedbyEtnyreandVanHorn-Morris
[EV11 ℄. Aontatstrutureissaidtobequasi-ompatiblewithanopenbookifitadmits
aontatvetoreldthatispositivelytransversetothepagesandpositivelytangenttothe
20 CHRISWENDL
thesupportingondition,butquasi-ompatibilityisquiteabitmoregeneral,andanallow
e.g.openbookswithemptybinding.Asummedopenbookona3-manifoldgivesrisetoan
openbookwithquasi-ompatibleontatstruturewheneveraertainorientationondition
issatised: thisistheresultinpartiularwheneverweonstrutbindingsumsofseparate
openbooksthatarelabeledwithsignsinsuhawaythateveryinterfaetorusseparates
apositivepieefromanegativepiee. Thusthetight3-toriinFigure5areexamples,in
thisaseproduinganopenbookwithemptybinding(i.e.abrationoverS 1
)thatisquasi-
ompatiblewithalloftheontatstrutures
n
. However,itiseasytoonstrutbinding
sumsforwhihthisisnotpossible,e.g.Example2.3 .
Wenowgeneralizethedisussiontoinludemanifoldswithboundary.SupposeM
(;') isa
losed3-manifoldwithsummedopenbook(;'),whihhasbindingB
'
andinterfaeI
(;') ,
andNB
'
isaomponentofitsbinding.ForeahonnetedomponentN,identifya
tubularneighborhoodN()ofwithasolidtorusS 1
D,deningoordinates(;;)2S 1
D,where(;)denotepolaroordinates 5
onthediskD andisthesubsetS 1
f0g=f=0g.
Assumealsothattheseoordinatesareadaptedtothesummedopenbook,inthesensethat
theorientationofasabindingomponentagreeswiththenaturalorientationofS 1
f0g,
andtheintersetionsofthepageswithN()areoftheformf=onst g. Thisondition
determinestheoordinatesuptoisotopy.ThenwedenetheblownupmanifoldM
(;';) from
M
(;')
byreplaingN()=S 1
D withS 1
[0;1℄S 1
,usingthesameoordinates(;;)on
thelatter,i.e.thebindingirleisreplaedbya2-torus,whihnowformstheboundaryof
M
(;';) .If
(;')
isaontatstrutureonM
(;')
supportedby(;'),thenweandenean
appropriateontatstruture
(;';) onM
(;';)
asfollows.Sineisapositivelytransverse
knot,theontatneighborhoodtheoremallowsustohoosetheoordinates(;;)sothat
(;')
=ker d+ 2
d
inaneighborhoodof. ThisformulaalsogivesawelldeneddistributiononM
(;';) ,but
theontatonditionfailsattheboundaryf=0g.WexthisbymakingaC 0
-smallhange
in
(;')
todeneaontatstrutureoftheform
(;';)
=ker[d+g()d℄;
whereg()= 2
foroutsideaneighborhoodofzero,g 0
()>0everywhereandg(0)=0.
PerformingtheaboveoperationatallonnetedomponentsNB'yieldsaom-
patmanifoldM
(;';N)
,generallywithboundary,arryingastillmoregeneraldeomposition
determinedbythedata(;';N),whihwe'llallablownupsummedopenbook. We
deneitsinterfaetobetheoriginalinterfaeI
(;')
,anditsbindingis
B
(';N)
=B
' nN:
Thereisanaturaldieomorphism
M
(;') nB'=M
(;';N) n B
(';N) [M
(;';N)
;
sothebration
' :M
(;') n B
' [I
(;')
!S 1
arriesovertoM
(;';N) n(B
(';N) [I
(;') [
M
(;';N)
),andanthenbeextendedsmoothlytotheboundarytodeneabration
(';N) :M
(;';N) n B
(';N) [I
(;')
!S 1
:
5
Throughoutthispaper,weusepolaroordinates(;)onsubdomainsofCwiththeangularoordinate
1
Wewillagainreferto theonnetedomponentsofthebersof
(';N)
asthepagesof
(;';N),andorienttheminaordanewiththeo-orientationsinduedbythebration.
Theirlosuresareimmersedsurfaeswhihoasionallymayhavepairsofboundaryompo-
nentsthatoinideasoriented1-manifolds,e.g.thisanhappenwhenevertwobindingirles
withinthesameonnetedopenbookaresummedtoeahother.
Notethatthebration
(';N) :M
(;';N) n B
(';N) [I
(;')
!S 1
isnotenoughinformation
tofullydeterminetheblownupopenbook(;';N),asitdoesnotuniquelydeterminethe
\blowndown"manifoldM
(;')
. Indeed,M
(;')
determinesoneahboundarytorusT
M
(;';N)
adistinguishedbasis
fmT;`TgH1(T);
where`
T
isa boundaryomponentofapageandm
T
is determinedbythemeridianon
asmalltorusaroundthebindingirle tobeblownup. TwodierentmanifoldsM
(;')
maysometimesproduedieomorphiblownupmanifoldsM
(;';N)
,whihwillhoweverhave
dierentmeridiansmTontheirboundaries.Similarly,eahinterfaetorusTI
(;') inherits
adistinguishedbasis
fm
T
;`
T gH
1 (T)
fromthebindingsumoperation,withthedierenethatthemeridianm
T
isonlywelldened
uptoasign.
Thebindingsumofanopenbook:MnB!S 1
alongomponentsN1[N2Ban
nowalsobeunderstoodasatwostepoperation,wheretherststepistoblowupN
1 andN
2 ,
andtheseondistoattahtheresultingboundarytoritoeahotherviaadieomorphism
determinedby:N
1
!N
2
.Oneanhooseasupportedontatstrutureontheblownup
openbookwhihtstogethersmoothlyunderthisattahmenttoreproduetheonstrution
of
(;';N)
desribedabove.
Denition2.7.Ablownupsummedopenbook(;';N)isalledirreduibleifthebers
oftheinduedbration
(';N)
areonneted.
Intheirreduiblease,thepagesanbeparametrizedinasingleS 1
-family,e.g.anordinary
onnetedopenbookisirreduible,butasymmetrisummedopenbookisnot.Anyblown
upsummedopenbookanhoweverbedeomposeduniquelyintoirreduiblesubdomains
M
(;';N)
=M 1
(;';N) [:::[M
`
(;';N)
;
whereeahpieeM i
(;';N)
fori=1;:::;`isaompatmanifold,possiblywithboundary,
denedasthelosureinM
(;';N)
oftheregionlledbysomesmoothS 1
-familyofpages.
ThusM i
(;';N)
arriesanaturalblownupsummedopenbookofitsown,whosebindingand
interfaearesubsetsofB
' andI
(;')
respetively,andM i
(;';N) I
(;') [M
(;';N) .One
analsowrite
M
(;';N)
=
M 1
(;';N) :::
M
`
(;';N)
;
wherethemanifolds
M i
(;';N)
alsonaturallyarryblownupsummedopenbooksandanbe
obtainedfromM i
(;';N)
byblowingdownM i
(;';N)
\I
(;') :
Denition2.8.Givenablownupsummedopenbook(;';N)onamanifoldM
(;';N) with
boundary,aGirouxformfor(;';N)isaontatformonM
(;';N)
withReebvetor
eldX
satisfyingthefollowingonditions:
(1)X ispositivelytransversetotheinteriorsofthepages,
(2)X
ispositivelytangenttotheboundariesofthelosuresofthepages,
(3)keroneahinterfaeorboundarytorusTI
(;') [M
(;';N)
induesaharater-
istifoliationwithlosedleaveshomologoustothemeridianm
T .
WewillsaythataontatstrutureonM
(;';N)
issupportedby(;';N)wheneveritis
thekernelofaGirouxform.Bytheproeduredesribedabove,oneaneasilytakeaGiroux
formfortheunderlyingopenbook:MnB!S 1
andmodifyitnearBtoprodueaGiroux
formfortheblownupsummedopenbookonM
(;';N)
. Moreover,thesameargumentthat
provesuniquenessofontatstruturessupportedbyopenbooks(f.[Etn06,Prop.3.18℄)
showsthatanytwoGirouxformsarehomotopitoeahotherthroughafamilyofGiroux
forms.Wethusobtainthefollowinguniquenessresultforsupportedontatstrutures.
Proposition2.9.SupposeM
(;';N)
isaompat3-manifoldwithboundary,withaontat
struture
(;';N)
supportedbytheblownupsummedopenbook(;';N),and(M
(;';N)
;
(;';N) )
admitsaontatembeddingintosomelosedontat3-manifold(M 0
; 0
). Ifisaontat
formonM 0
suhthat
(1)denesaGirouxformonM
(;';N)
M
0
,and
(2)ker= 0
onM 0
nM
(;';N) ,
thenkerisisotopito 0
.
Example 2.10. Supposeis aompat,orientedandonnetedsurfae, possiblywith
boundary,ontaininganon-emptymultiurve suhthat and dividesinto
two(possiblydisonneted)piees
=+[ :
ByLutz[Lut77 ℄,S 1
admitsanS 1
-invariantontatstruture whihisdetermined
uniquelyuptoisotopybytheonditionthattheloopsS 1
fzg bepositively/negatively
transverseto forz2intandLegendrianforz2 .Then(S 1
;)issupportedbya
blownupsummedopenbookwithemptybinding,interfaeI=S 1
( n)andbration
:(S 1
)nI!S 1
:(;z)7!
(
forz2+;
forz2 :
Indeed,oneanwrite asthekernelofaontatformwhoseReebvetoreldisposi-
tively/negativelytransversetotheinterioroffg
andadmitslosedorbitsoftheform
fgforeahdividingurve .(Anexpliitonstrutionofsuhaontatformmay
befounde.g.in[LW11 ℄.) ThedistinguishedmeridiansatIand(S 1
)aregeneratedby
theLegendriansS 1
fg.
2.2.Partiallyplanardomainsandplanartorsion. Wearenowreadytostatethemost
importantdenitionsinthispaper.
Denition2.11.AblownupsummedopenbookonaompatmanifoldMisalledpar-
tiallyplanarifMnMontainsaplanarpage. Apartiallyplanardomainisthenany
ontat3-manifold(M;)withasupportingblownupsummedopenbookthatispartially
planar.Anirreduiblesubdomain
M P
M
thatontainsplanarpagesanddoesn'ttouhMisalledaplanarpiee,andwewillrefer
totheomplementarysubdomainMnM P
asthepadding.
AHIERARCHYOFFILLINGOBSTRUCTIONSFORCONTACTMANIFOLDS 23
Bythisdenition,everyplanarontatmanifoldisapartiallyplanardomain(withempty
padding),asisthesymmetrisummedopenbookobtainedbysummingtogethertwoplanar
openbookswiththesamenumberofbindingomponents(hereoneanalleithersidethe
planarpiee,andtheothersidethepadding). Aswe'llsoonsee,oneanalsousepartially
planardomainstoharaterizethesolidtorusthatappearsinaLutztwist,orthethikened
torusinthedenitionofGirouxtorsion,aswellasmanymoregeneralobjets.
Denition2.12.Wesaythataontat3-manifold(M;)withalosed2-formontains
an-separatingpartiallyplanardomainifthereexistsapartiallyplanardomain(M
0
;
0 )
withplanarpieeM P
0
M
0
andaontatembedding:(M
0
;
0
),!(M;)suhthatfor
everyinterfaetorusT ofM
0
lyinginM P
0 ,
R
T
=0. Wesaythatthedomainisfully
separatingifthisistrueforallhoiesof.
Notethatingeneral,a2-torusT embeddedinalosedoriented3-manifoldM satises
R
T
=0foralllosed2-formsonMifandonlyifT separatesM. Inapartiallyplanar
domain,anyinterfaetorusintheinterioroftheplanarpieeisneessarilynon-separating,
thusthefullyseparatingonditionimpliesthattherearenosuhinterfaetori, andeah
omponentoftheboundaryoftheplanarpieealsoseparates(f.Denition1.3 ).
Wenowometothedenitionofanewsympletillingobstrution.
Denition2.13.Foranyintegerk0,aontatmanifold(M;),possiblywithboundary,
isalledaplanartorsiondomainoforderk (orbrieyaplanark-torsiondomain)
ifitissupportedbyapartiallyplanarblownupsummedopenbook(;';N)withaplanar
pieeM P
Msatisfyingthefollowingonditions:
(1)ThepagesinM P
havek+1boundaryomponents.
(2)ThepaddingMnM P
isnotempty.
(3)(;';N)isnotasymmetrisummedopenbook(f.Example2.5 ).
Wesaythataontat3-manifold(M;)has(perhaps-separatingorfullyseparating)
planark-torsionifitadmitsa(perhaps-separatingorfullyseparating)ontatembedding
ofaplanark-torsiondomain.
Remark 2.14.Theplanarpieeofaplanar0-torsiondomainhasnointeriorinterfaetori
andonlyoneboundaryomponent,thusplanar0-torsionisalwaysfullyseparating. Itis
easytoseefromexamples(f.Example2.15 )thatthisisnottruefork1. Observealso
thatwhenever(M;)islosedandonnetedandontainsafullyseparatingpartiallyplanar
domainM
0
M,oneofthefollowingmustbetrue:
(i)(M
0
;)isaplanartorsiondomain,
(ii)M0=M andtheinterfaeisempty,i.e.(M;)issupportedbyanordinaryplanar
openbook,
(iii)M0=Manditarriesasymmetrisummedopenbookwithdisk-likepages.
Inthelastase,(M;)isontatomorphitothetightS 1
S 2
(seeExample2.5 ),whih
isplanar. Wethusonludethatundertheseassumptions,(M;)alwayseitherhasplanar
torsionorisplanar.
Example 2.15.The S 1
-invariantontat manifold(S 1
;)fromExample2.10isa
partiallyplanardomainwhenevern hasaonnetedomponent0ofgenuszerowith
0\=;.InthisaseS 1
0istheplanarpiee,andS 1
isalsoaplanartorsiondomain
24 CHRISWENDL
1
2
S 1
f
g
0
0
1+
1
2
=0
jslopej= 1
+
0
=3
2
3
1
r Æ 0
2r=3
0
r=3
(1 0)
'
R
T
0
T0
M
B
M
0
u;
T
1
T
2
e
1
h
1
e
2
h
2
v +
1
v
1
v +
2
v
2
u
0
B
I
I I
S 1
D
(T 3
=Z
2 )nN(K) 1
2
3
2
1
2
2
2
v
k
v 1
v 2
Figure6. Shematirepresentationsoftwoplanartorsiondomainsasde-
sribedinExample2.16 .
=;andn hasexatlytwoonnetedomponents,whiharedieomorphitoeah
other.SomespeialasesareshowninFigures3and4 .
Example2.16.MoregenerallythantheS 1
-invariantexamplesdesribedabove,blownup
summedopenbooksanalwaysberepresentedbyshematipituresasinFigure6,whih
showstwoexamplesofplanartorsiondomains,eahwiththeorderlabeledwithinthepla-
narpiee. Hereeahpitureshowsasurfaeontainingamultiurve : eahonneted
omponent
0
n thenrepresentsanirreduiblesubdomainwithpagesdieomorphi
to
0
,andtheomponentsof representinterfaetori(labeledinthepiturebyI). Eah
irreduiblesubdomainmayadditionallyhavebindingirles,showninthepitureasirles
withthelabelB. Theinformationinthesepitures,togetherwithaspeiedmonodromy
mapforeahomponentofn ,determineablownupsummedopenbookandsupported
ontatstrutureuniquelyuptoontatomorphism.Ifwetakethesepartiularpitureswith
theassumptionthatallmonodromymapsaretrivial,thentherstshowsasolidtorusS 1
D
withanovertwistedontatstruturethatmakesonefulltwistalongarayfromtheenter
(thebindingB)totheboundary.Theotherpitureshowstheomplementofasolidtorusin
thetorusbundleT 3
=Z2fromExample2.3 . Morepreisely,oneanonstrutitbytakinga
loopKT 3
=Z
2
transversetothepagesinthatexample,modifyingtheontatstruture
nearKbyafullLutztwist,andthenremovingasmallerneighborhoodN(K)ofKonwhih
makesaquartertwist.Notethattheappearaneofgenusinthispitureisabitmisleading;
duetotheinterfaetorusintheinteriorofthebottompiee,ithasplanarpageswiththree
boundaryomponents.
WeannowproeedtowardtheproofofTheorem3 .
Denition2.17.ALutztubeisthesolidtorusS 1
D withoordinates(;;),where(;)
arepolaroordinatesonthelosedunitdiskD C,togetherwiththeontatstruture
denedasthehyperplaneeld
(2.1) =ker[f()d+g()d℄
forsomepairofsmoothfuntionsf;gsuhthatthepath
2
