Question whether 2 spaces are diffeomorphic

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wofsy
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether the complements of two embeddings of the circle into the 3-sphere are diffeomorphic. It touches on concepts from knot theory and the properties of fundamental groups related to these embeddings.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that the complements of two embeddings of the circle into the 3-sphere are not diffeomorphic, referencing knot theory concepts.
  • Another participant suggests comparing the fundamental groups of the complements of an unknot and a trefoil knot to explore this question.
  • A participant mentions that the first homology group is Z, using Alexander duality or a Meyer-Vietoris sequence argument as justification.
  • There is a discussion about the fundamental group of the complement of a non-trivial knot being a bouquet of circles, with some participants discussing generators and relations within this context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as there are competing views regarding the diffeomorphism of the complements and the properties of the fundamental groups involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific knot types and their properties, but the discussion includes unresolved assumptions about the embeddings and their implications for diffeomorphism.

wofsy
Messages
724
Reaction score
0
Suppose I have two embeddings of the circle into the 3 sphere. Is S3-minus the first image diffeomorphic to S3 - the image of the second?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The answer is no. This is actually a knot theory concept... an embedding of S1 in R3 is a knot, which are all homeomorphic to each other (generally taken that a knot is a homeomorphic image of S1 in R3. But in R3, there may not be a homeomorphism of R3 to itself that maps one to the other. There are some classic examples of knots that are not equivalent (knots tend to be embeddings) but I don't remember any off the top of my head, I'm sure a google search will reveal them
 
Look at an unknot and a trefoil knot and compare the fundamental group of the complement.
 
zhentil said:
Look at an unknot and a trefoil knot and compare the fundamental group of the complement.

Thanks I will do tyhat.

It is interesting because the first homology is just Z - by Alexander duality or a Meyer-Vietoris sequence argument.
 
Last edited:
If I'm getting this right, the fundamental group of the complement of a non-trivial knot should be a bouquet of circles-type situation; i.e. you have some generators with some anti-commutation relations, and the commutator kills all of it.
 
zhentil said:
If I'm getting this right, the fundamental group of the complement of a non-trivial knot should be a bouquet of circles-type situation; i.e. you have some generators with some anti-commutation relations, and the commutator kills all of it.

That has to right. And there is no torsion in the group mod its commutator subgroup.
Do you know the generqator and relations for one of these?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K