proof of Scott-Wiegold conjecture
Suppose the conjecture were false. Then we have some w∈Cp*Cq*Cr with N(w)=Cp*Cq*Cr. Let a, b, c denote the of w onto Cp, Cq, Cr respectively. Then a, b, c are all non-trivial as otherwise N(w) would be contained in the kernel of one of the .
For 0∘<θ<360∘ we say that a spin through
θ consists of a unit vector, →u∈ℝ3 together with the
rotation of ℝ3 through the angle θ anticlockwise about →u.
In we have a single spin through the angle 0∘ and
a single spin through 360∘. Thus the set of spins
(usually denoted Spin(3)) naturally has the topology of a
3-sphere.
The spin through θ about a unit vector →u has the same underlying rotation as the spin through 360∘-θ about -→u. Hence there are precisely two spins corresponding to each rotation of ℝ3 about the origin.
is well defined on spins as you can compose the underlying rotations and continuity determines which of the two spins is the correct result. For example a 350∘ spin about →u composed with a 20∘ spin about →u is a 350∘ spin about -→u (not a 10∘ spin about →u which would be at the other end of the 3-sphere).
Let →n denote the unit vector (0,0,1). Fix an arc, I,
on the unit sphere connecting →n and -→n. Let
→t be a vector on this arc. Let →u be an arbitrary
unit vector. We may define a homomorphism
ϕ→t,→u:F{a,b,c}→Spin(3)
by:
ϕ→t,→u:a↦ the spin through (p-12)360∘p (or 180∘ if p=2) about →n
ϕ→t,→u:b↦ the spin through (q-12)360∘q (or 180∘ if q=2) about →t
ϕ→t,→u:c↦ the spin through (r-12)360∘r (or 180∘ if r=2) about →u
(Here F{a,b,c} denotes the free group on a,b,c).
So ϕ→t,→u(a), ϕ→t,→u(b) and ϕ→t,→u(c) are spins of between 120∘ and 180∘, all having non-trivial underlying rotations.
Let ˜w be a word in F{a,b,c} representing w, such that a,b,c occur in it 1 Mod (2p) times, 1 Mod 2q times and 1 Mod (2r) times, respectively.
We have a homomorphism ϕ′:Cp*Cq*Cr→SO(3) induced by ϕ. If ϕ→t,→u(˜w) has a trivial underlying rotation for some →t and →u, then N(w) will only contain elements in the kernel of ϕ′. In particular, we would have a,b,c∉N(w). So we may assume we have a map:
h:I×S2→S2 |
which maps (→t,→u) to the unit vector corresponding to ϕ→t,→u(˜w).
By we have h(→n,R→u)=Rh(→n,→u) for any rotation R about →n. Thus h(→n,_):S2→S2 maps latitudes to latitudes (possibly rotating them and / or moving them up or down).
Also h(→n,→n)=-→n, as
ϕ→n,→n(a), ϕ→n,→n(b) and
ϕ→n,→n(c) are spins of between 120∘ and
180∘ anticlockwise about →n, so the sum of the
angles will be greater than 360∘. Similarly one may
that h(→n,-→n)=→n. Thus, as h(n,_) maps latitudes to latitudes, it must be homotopic to a
reflection of S2.
Again by we have h(-→n,R→u)=Rh(-→n,→u) for all rotations R about →n. Hence h(-→n,_):S2→S2 also maps latitudes to latitudes.
Further, h(-→n,→n)=→n and h(-→n,-→n)=-→n. Thus h(-→n,_) is homotopic to the .
But h gives a homotopy from h(→n,_) to h(-→n,_), yielding the desired contradiction
.
Title | proof of Scott-Wiegold conjecture |
---|---|
Canonical name | ProofOfScottWiegoldConjecture |
Date of creation | 2013-03-22 18:30:31 |
Last modified on | 2013-03-22 18:30:31 |
Owner | whm22 (2009) |
Last modified by | whm22 (2009) |
Numerical id | 5 |
Author | whm22 (2009) |
Entry type | Proof |
Classification | msc 20E06 |