DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:2008.06921V3 [Math.GT] 17 Feb 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:2008.06921V3 [Math.GT] 17 Feb 2021 SLICE-TORUS LINK INVARIANTS, COMBINATORIAL INVARIANTS, AND POSITIVITY CONDITIONS. CARLO COLLARI ABSTRACT. We prove some necessary conditions for a link to be either concordant to a quasi-positive link, quasi-positive, positive, or the closure of a positive braid. The main applications of our results are a characterisation of positive links with unlinking number 1 and 2, and a combinatorial criterion to test if a positive link is the closure of a positive braid. Finally, we compile a table of all positive and positive-braid prime links with less than 8 crossings. 1. INTRODUCTION In this note we study slice-torus and combinatorial invariants of multi-component links – as opposed to knots – in S3 satisfying various positivity conditions. The aim of this note is dual; the first goal is to provide a necessary condition for a link to be concordant to a quasi-positive link, and compare it to other known obstructions. The second goal is to investigate certain combinatorial invariants of quasi-positive, positive and positive-braid links, providing obstructions for a link to fall in one of the aforementioned classes. As applications we give a characterisation of positive links with unlinking number 1 and 2, and a combinatorial criterion to test if a positive link is the closure of a positive braid. Finally, we compile a table of all positive and positive-braid prime links with less than 8 crossings. In what follows all manifolds and sub-manifolds are smooth and oriented, and bound- aries are endowed with the induced orientation. 1.1. Concordance to quasi-positive links. A link is a 1-dimensional closed sub-manifold of the 3-sphere S3, and a knot is a connected link. The letter L will be reserved for links, whereas the letter K will be reserved for knots. Two links are equivalent up to orientation- preserving ambient isotopy. As customary in the literature, we shall abuse the notation and make no difference between a link and its equivalence class. Quasi-positive links are a special family of links which sits in the intersection between knot theory and the theory of complex curves in C2. More precisely, quasi-positive link arXiv:2008.06921v3 [math.GT] 17 Feb 2021 are those links obtained as the transverse intersection of a complex curve in C2 with S3 = f(w; z) 2 C2 j jwj2 +jzj2 = 1g – see [4, 37]. This hints to the fact that quasi-positive links should have special properties with respect to concordance. Definition 1.1. Let L0 and L1 be two `-component links. Then, L0 and L1 are concordant 3 if there exists properly embedded disjoint annuli A1 t ::: t A` ⊂ S × [0; 1], such that both 3 3 Ai \ S × f0g and Ai \ S × f1g are non-empty for each i, and 3 3 ∗ (A1 [ ::: [ A`) \ S × f0g = L0; and (A1 [ ::: [ A`) \ S × f1g = rL1; where rL denotes the link L with its orientation reversed, and L∗ denotes the image of L under an orientation reversing diffeomorphism of S3. A link concordant to an unlink is called (strongly) slice. 1 2 CARLO COLLARI If one considers topologically locally flat embeddings instead of smooth embeddings, quasi-positive links do not present any special properties; in fact, every link is topologically locally flat concordant to a (strongly) quasi-positive link [8]. It follows that all concordance invariants which are also invariant under topological locally flat concordance cannot detect quasi-positive links. In particular, the linking matrix and, more generally, all classical con- cordance invariants obtained from the Seifert form, such as the Levine-Tristram signatures, fail to distinguish these links – cf. [38, 39]. The situation is different if one looks from the smooth perspective. First, we recall that slice-torus link invariants are a special class of R-valued concordance invariants of links, which vanish on unlinks – see [13] for the precise definition. Prominent examples of slice-torus link invariants are the Ozsváth-Szabó-Rasmussen τ-invariant [11, 33, 36], and (a re-scaling of) the Rasmussen s-invariant [5, 35]. It is known that the slice-torus link invariants provide an obstruction to being concordant to a quasi-positive link; indeed, it follows from [13, Theorem 3.2] (see [10, 27], and references therein, for knots, and special slice-torus link invariants) that: if L is an `-component link concordant to a quasi-positive link, and ν is a slice-torus invariant, then (1.1) 2ν(L) − ` = −χ4(L); where χ4 is the (smooth) slice Euler characteristic, that is 4 4 χ4(L) = maxfχ(Σ) j Σ ⊂ D compact surface with no closed components;@Σ = Σ\@D = Lg: An immediate consequence of (1.1) is that there are links which are not concordant to any quasi-positive link, eg. the figure-eight knot 41 is such that ν(41) = 0, and −χ4(41) = 1 [25]. While there are some results for special classes of links including knots, to the best of the author’s knowledge (1.1) is the only known general obstruction to being concordant to a quasi-positive link. Remark 1.2. To be fair, there is another general obstruction to being concordant to a quasi-positive link. This obstruction is stated in terms of the Hom-Wu invariant ν+ [12, 23] – which is not a slice-torus link invariant. Concretely, it follows from [12, Proposition 1.6] (cf. [23, Proposition 3] for knots) that if L is concordant to a quasi-positive link, then + 2ν (L) − ` = −χ4(L) However, this obstruction is strictly weaker than Equation (1.1) specialised to the case ν = τ [12, 23]. In this note we provide a new obstruction to being concordant to a quasi-positive link based on the slice-torus link invariants and linking numbers. Theorem 1.3. Let L be a link, and let ν be a slice-torus link invariant. If L is concordant to a quasi-positive link, then k X X (1.2) ν(L) − ν(Li) ≤ `k(Li;Lj); i=1 i<j for each partition of L into sub-links L1; :::; Lk. Note that Theorem 1.3 poses constraints on the linking matrix of a quasi-positive link in terms of its sub-links. This is slightly surprising for two reasons; first, as we mentioned above, all linking matrices can be realised by quasi-positive links. Second, all links arise as sub-links of a quasi-positive link by adding a single unknotted component. Since we SLICE-TORUS INVARIANTS, COMBINATORIAL INVARIANTS AND POSITIVITY 3 were unable to find a proof of this fact, which is well-known two experts, we included one in Appendix A. Going back to our result, we note that the obstructions provided by Theorem 1.3 and by (1.1) are independent. First, we give an example where (1.1) provides a stronger obstruction than Theorem 1.3. Recall that L is the split union of L1; :::; Lk, we write L = L1 t · · · t Lk, if L = L1 [ :::: [ Lk and the Li’s are separated by embedded copies of S2. Example 1.4. Slice-torus link invariants are additive under split union [13, Definition 2.1 (B)]. Thus, the split union of a figure-eight knot and an unlink does not satisfy (1.1), but satisfies (1.2). On the other hand, we use Theorem 1.3 to prove the following result. Theorem 1.5. Denote by L(k) the two-bridge link in Figure 1. For all k 2 N, and any slice-torus link invariant ν, we have 2ν(L(k)) − 2 = −χ4(L(k)) = 2k − 2: However, L(k) is not concordant to any quasi-positive link for all k ≥ 1. In particular, the Whitehead link L(1) is not concordant to any quasi-positive link. Proof. Using the diagram D(k) in Figure 1, and [13, Theorem 1.3] (cf. Proposition 2.4), one can compute ν(L(k)) = k. Now, a quick inspection of D(k) shows that L(k) can be unlinked with k crossing changes on a single component (cf. [14, Proposition 2.7]), therefore −χ4(L(k)) ≤ 2k −2. Since 2ν(L)−` ≤ −χ4(L), by [13, Proposition 2.11], we obtain the desired equality. Finally, L(k) has two trivial components with linking number zero. The result follows directly from Theorem 1.3. k k FIGURE 1. The diagram D(k) for the link L(k). The boxes denote k positive full-twists. We conclude the first part of the paper by studying the concordance self-linking num- ber slc. We shall be more precise in Section 2, but we briefly recall the definitions and some properties of slmax and slc. Each link can be represented non-uniquely as a closed braid [2], and to each braid β is associated its self-linking number sl(β) 2 Z. However, this number depends on the braid used to represent the given link. To obtain a link invariant and a concordance invariant, respectively, one can define slmax(L) = maxfsl(β) j the closure of β is Lg; and slc(L) = maxfsl(β) j the closure of β is concordant to Lg: Rudolph’s slice-Bennequin inequality [41] tells us that, for each braid β representing a link L, we have sl(β) ≤ −χ4(L): 4 CARLO COLLARI It follows that both slmax and slc are finite numbers. Furthermore, the slice-Bennequin inequality is sharp for quasi-positive braids [41, Section 3]. Hence, if L is either a quasi- positive link, or is concordant to a quasi-positive link, then slmax(L) = −χ4(L), or slc(L) = −χ4(L), respectively. The slice-Bennequin inequality can be refined to a slice-torus Bennequin inequality; that is, for each `-component link L, and each slice-torus link invariant ν, we have slmax(L) ≤ slc(L) ≤ 2ν(L) − ` ≤ −χ4(L): The first inequality is trivial.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jones Polynomial for Graphs of Twist Knots
    Available at Applications and Applied http://pvamu.edu/aam Mathematics: Appl. Appl. Math. An International Journal ISSN: 1932-9466 (AAM) Vol. 14, Issue 2 (December 2019), pp. 1269 – 1278 Jones Polynomial for Graphs of Twist Knots 1Abdulgani ¸Sahinand 2Bünyamin ¸Sahin 1Faculty of Science and Letters 2Faculty of Science Department Department of Mathematics of Mathematics Agrı˘ Ibrahim˙ Çeçen University Selçuk University Postcode 04100 Postcode 42130 Agrı,˘ Turkey Konya, Turkey [email protected] [email protected] Received: January 1, 2019; Accepted: March 16, 2019 Abstract We frequently encounter knots in the flow of our daily life. Either we knot a tie or we tie a knot on our shoes. We can even see a fisherman knotting the rope of his boat. Of course, the knot as a mathematical model is not that simple. These are the reflections of knots embedded in three- dimensional space in our daily lives. In fact, the studies on knots are meant to create a complete classification of them. This has been achieved for a large number of knots today. But we cannot say that it has been terminated yet. There are various effective instruments while carrying out all these studies. One of these effective tools is graphs. Graphs are have made a great contribution to the development of algebraic topology. Along with this support, knot theory has taken an important place in low dimensional manifold topology. In 1984, Jones introduced a new polynomial for knots. The discovery of that polynomial opened a new era in knot theory. In a short time, this polynomial was defined by algebraic arguments and its combinatorial definition was made.
    [Show full text]
  • Splitting Numbers of Links
    Splitting numbers of links Jae Choon Cha, Stefan Friedl, and Mark Powell Department of Mathematics, POSTECH, Pohang 790{784, Republic of Korea, and School of Mathematics, Korea Institute for Advanced Study, Seoul 130{722, Republic of Korea E-mail address: [email protected] Mathematisches Institut, Universit¨atzu K¨oln,50931 K¨oln,Germany E-mail address: [email protected] D´epartement de Math´ematiques,Universit´edu Qu´ebec `aMontr´eal,Montr´eal,QC, Canada E-mail address: [email protected] Abstract. The splitting number of a link is the minimal number of crossing changes between different components required, on any diagram, to convert it to a split link. We introduce new techniques to compute the splitting number, involving covering links and Alexander invariants. As an application, we completely determine the splitting numbers of links with 9 or fewer crossings. Also, with these techniques, we either reprove or improve upon the lower bounds for splitting numbers of links computed by J. Batson and C. Seed using Khovanov homology. 1. Introduction Any link in S3 can be converted to the split union of its component knots by a sequence of crossing changes between different components. Following J. Batson and C. Seed [BS13], we define the splitting number of a link L, denoted by sp(L), as the minimal number of crossing changes in such a sequence. We present two new techniques for obtaining lower bounds for the splitting number. The first approach uses covering links, and the second method arises from the multivariable Alexander polynomial of a link. Our general covering link theorem is stated as Theorem 3.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Transverse Unknotting Number and Family Trees
    Transverse Unknotting Number and Family Trees Blossom Jeong Senior Thesis in Mathematics Bryn Mawr College Lisa Traynor, Advisor May 8th, 2020 1 Abstract The unknotting number is a classical invariant for smooth knots, [1]. More recently, the concept of knot ancestry has been defined and explored, [3]. In my research, I explore how these concepts can be adapted to study trans- verse knots, which are smooth knots that satisfy an additional geometric condition imposed by a contact structure. 1. Introduction Smooth knots are well-studied objects in topology. A smooth knot is a closed curve in 3-dimensional space that does not intersect itself anywhere. Figure 1 shows a diagram of the unknot and a diagram of the positive trefoil knot. Figure 1. A diagram of the unknot and a diagram of the positive trefoil knot. Two knots are equivalent if one can be deformed to the other. It is well-known that two diagrams represent the same smooth knot if and only if their diagrams are equivalent through Reidemeister moves. On the other hand, to show that two knots are different, we need to construct an invariant that can distinguish them. For example, tricolorability shows that the trefoil is different from the unknot. Unknotting number is another invariant: it is known that every smooth knot diagram can be converted to the diagram of the unknot by changing crossings. This is used to define the smooth unknotting number, which measures the minimal number of times a knot must cross through itself in order to become the unknot. This thesis will focus on transverse knots, which are smooth knots that satisfy an ad- ditional geometric condition imposed by a contact structure.
    [Show full text]
  • Jones Polynomial of Knots
    KNOTS AND THE JONES POLYNOMIAL MATH 180, SPRING 2020 Your task as a group, is to research the topics and questions below, write up clear notes as a group explaining these topics and the answers to the questions, and then make a video presenting your findings. Your video and notes will be presented to the class to teach them your findings. Make sure that in your notes and video you give examples and intuition, along with formal definitions, theorems, proofs, or calculations. Make sure that you point out what the is most important take away message, and what aspects may be tricky or confusing to understand at first. You will need to work together as a group. You should all work on Problem 1. Each member of the group must be responsible for one full example from problem 2. Then you can split up problem 3-7 as you wish. 1. Resources The primary resource for this project is The Knot Book by Colin Adams, Chapter 6.1 (page 147-155). An Introduction to Knot Theory by Raymond Lickorish Chapter 3, could also be helpful. You may also look at other resources online about knot theory and the Jones polynomial. Make sure to cite the sources you use. If you find it useful and you are comfortable, you can try to write some code to help you with computations. 2. Topics and Questions As you research, you may find more examples, definitions, and questions, which you defi- nitely should feel free to include in your notes and/or video, but make sure you at least go through the following discussion and questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Knots of Genus One Or on the Number of Alternating Knots of Given Genus
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 129, Number 7, Pages 2141{2156 S 0002-9939(01)05823-3 Article electronically published on February 23, 2001 KNOTS OF GENUS ONE OR ON THE NUMBER OF ALTERNATING KNOTS OF GIVEN GENUS A. STOIMENOW (Communicated by Ronald A. Fintushel) Abstract. We prove that any non-hyperbolic genus one knot except the tre- foil does not have a minimal canonical Seifert surface and that there are only polynomially many in the crossing number positive knots of given genus or given unknotting number. 1. Introduction The motivation for the present paper came out of considerations of Gauß di- agrams recently introduced by Polyak and Viro [23] and Fiedler [12] and their applications to positive knots [29]. For the definition of a positive crossing, positive knot, Gauß diagram, linked pair p; q of crossings (denoted by p \ q)see[29]. Among others, the Polyak-Viro-Fiedler formulas gave a new elegant proof that any positive diagram of the unknot has only reducible crossings. A \classical" argument rewritten in terms of Gauß diagrams is as follows: Let D be such a diagram. Then the Seifert algorithm must give a disc on D (see [9, 29]). Hence n(D)=c(D)+1, where c(D) is the number of crossings of D and n(D)thenumber of its Seifert circles. Therefore, smoothing out each crossing in D must augment the number of components. If there were a linked pair in D (that is, a pair of crossings, such that smoothing them both out according to the usual skein rule, we obtain again a knot rather than a three component link diagram) we could choose it to be smoothed out at the beginning (since the result of smoothing out all crossings in D obviously is independent of the order of smoothings) and smoothing out the second crossing in the linked pair would reduce the number of components.
    [Show full text]
  • MATH 309 - Solution to Homework 2 by Mihai Marian February 9, 2019
    MATH 309 - Solution to Homework 2 By Mihai Marian February 9, 2019 1. The rational tangle associated with [2 1 a1a2 : : : an] is equivalent to the rational tangle associated with [−2 2 a1 : : : an]. Proof. First, let's compute the two continued fractions. We have 1 1 a1 + 1 = a1 + 1 ; 1 + 2 2 + −2 so the continued fraction associated to the sequence [2 1 a1a2 : : : an] is the same as the one associated to [−2 2 a1 : : : an]. Second, we can relate the two tangles by a sequence of Reidemeister moves: Figure 1: Reidemeister moves to relate [2 1 a1a2 : : : an] to [−2 2 a1 : : : an] 2. 2-bridge knots are alternating. (a) Every rational knot is alternating. Proof. We can prove this by showing that every rational knot has a description [a1a2 : : : an] where each ai ≥ 0 or each ai ≤ 0. Check that such rational links are alternating. To see that we can take any continued fraction and turn it into another one where all the integers have the same sign, let's warm up with an example: consider [4 − 3 2]. The continued fraction is 1 2 + 1 : −3 + 4 This fractional number is obtained by subtracting something from 2. Let's try to get the same fraction by adding something to 1 instead: 1 1 −3 + 4 1 2 + 1 = 1 + 1 + 1 −3 + 4 −3 + 4 −3 + 4 1 −3 + 4 + 1 = 1 + 1 −3 + 4 1 = 1 + 1 −3+ 4 1 −3+1+ 4 1 = 1 + 1 1 − 1 −3+1+ 4 1 = 1 + 1 1 + 1 −(−3+1+ 4 ) 1 = 1 + 1 1 + 1 2− 4 1 = 1 + 1 1 + 1+ 1 1+ 1 3 So the tangle labeled [4 − 3 2] is equivalent to the one labeled [3 1 1 1 1].
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2010.04188V1 [Math.GT] 8 Oct 2020 Knot Has Been “Pulled Tight”, Minimizing the Folded Ribbonlength
    RIBBONLENGTH OF FAMILIES OF FOLDED RIBBON KNOTS ELIZABETH DENNE, JOHN CARR HADEN, TROY LARSEN, AND EMILY MEEHAN ABSTRACT. We study Kauffman’s model of folded ribbon knots: knots made of a thin strip of paper folded flat in the plane. The folded ribbonlength is the length to width ratio of such a ribbon knot. We give upper bounds on the folded ribbonlength of 2-bridge, (2; p) torus, twist, and pretzel knots, and these upper bounds turn out to be linear in crossing number. We give a new way to fold (p; q) torus knots, and show that their folded ribbonlength is bounded above by p + q. This means, for example, that the trefoil knot can be constructed with a folded ribbonlength of 5. We then show that any (p; q) torus knot K has a constant c > 0, such that the folded ribbonlength is bounded above by c · Cr(K)1=2, providing an example of an upper bound on folded ribbonlength that is sub-linear in crossing number. 1. INTRODUCTION Take a long thin strip of paper, tie a trefoil knot in it then gently tighten and flatten it. As can be seen in Figure 1, the boundary of the knot is in the shape of a pentagon. This observation is well known in recreational mathematics [4, 21, 34]. L. Kauffman [27] introduced a mathematical model of such a folded ribbon knot. Kauffman viewed the ribbon as a set of rays parallel to a polygo- nal knot diagram with the folds acting as mirrors, and the over-under information appropriately preserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Unlinking Via Simultaneous Crossing Changes
    TRANSACTIONSOF THE AMERICANMATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 336, Number 2, April 1993 UNLINKING VIA SIMULTANEOUS CROSSING CHANGES MARTIN SCHARLEMANN Abstract. Given two distinct crossings of a knot or link projection, we consider the question: Under what conditions can we obtain the unlink by changing both crossings simultaneously? More generally, for which simultaneous twistings at the crossings is the genus reduced? Though several examples show that the answer must be complicated, they also suggest the correct necessary conditions on the twisting numbers. Let L be an oriented link in S3 with a generic projection onto the plane R2. Let a be a short arc in R2 transverse to both strands of L at a crossing, so that the strands pass through a in opposite directions. Then the inverse image of a contains a disk punctured twice, with opposite orientation, by L. Define a crossing disk D for a link L in S3 to be a disk which intersects L in precisely two points, of opposite orientation. It is easy to see that any crossing disk arises in the manner described. Twisting the link q times as it passes through D is equivalent to doing l/q surgery on dD in S3 and adds 2q crossings to this projection of L. We say that this new link L(q) is obtained by adding q twists at D. Call dD a crossing circle for L. A crossing disk D, and its boundary dD, are essential if dD bounds no disk disjoint from L. This is equivalent to the requirement that L cannot be isotoped off D in S3 - dD.
    [Show full text]
  • Recurrence Relations for Knot Polynomials of Twist Knots
    Fundamental Journal of Mathematics and Applications, 4 (1) (2021) 59-66 Research Article Fundamental Journal of Mathematics and Applications Journal Homepage: www.dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/fujma ISSN: 2645-8845 doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.33401/fujma.856647 Recurrence Relations for Knot Polynomials of Twist Knots Kemal Tas¸kopr¨ u¨ 1* and Zekiye S¸evval Sinan1 1Department of Mathematics, Bilecik S¸eyh Edebali University, Bilecik, Turkey *Corresponding author Article Info Abstract Keywords: Knot polynomial, Oriented This paper gives HOMFLY polynomials and Kauffman polynomials L and F of twist knots knot, Unoriented knot, Twist knot as recurrence relations, respectively, and also provides some recursive properties of them. 2010 AMS: 57M25, 57M27 Received: 08 January 2021 Accepted: 17 March 2021 Available online: 20 March 2021 1. Introduction The knot polynomials are the most practical knot invariants for distinguishing knots from each other, where the coefficients of polynomials represent some properties of the knot. The first of the polynomial invariants is the Alexander polynomial [1] with one variable for oriented knots and links. There are generalizations of the Alexander polynomial and its Conway version [2], see [3]- [5]. Another important knot polynomial with one variable for oriented knots and links is the Jones polynomial [6]. Both the Jones polynomial was defined with new methods [7,8] and studies were conducted on generalizations of the Jones polynomial [9]- [11]. One of the most important generalized polynomials is the HOMFLY polynomial [11]- [13] with two variable. The Alexander and Jones polynomials are special cases of the HOMFLY polynomial. For unoriented knots and links, there are the polynomials such as the BLM/Ho polynomial [14,15] with one variable and the Kauffman polynomial F [16] with two variable whose primary version Kauffman polynomial L is an invariant of regular isotopy for unoriented knots and links.
    [Show full text]
  • Second Twist Number of 2-Bridge Knots
    Second Twist Number of 2-Bridge Knots Jessica Ceniceros∗ Abstract In this paper we take a look at the Jones polynomial and the Tutte polynomial for alternating knots as well as the first and second twist number. We then examine the second twist number and extend it to 2-bridge knots and try to compute the second twist number in terms of things we can compute strictly from tangles that correspond to the given knot. The goal at the end of this paper is to be able to get a list of numbers(tangles) and be able to compute its second twist number. Keywords: Jones Polynomial, Tutte Polynomial, twist number, second twist number, 2-bridge knots 1 Introduction A knot is defined as a simple closed curve in R3.A knot diagram is the projection of a knot onto a plane with over and under crossings. A link is made up of one or more components, a knot is a link with one component. In the late 1920's Kurt Reidemeister showed that knots can be equivalent up to isotopy with a combination of moves that are now refered to as Reidemeister Moves. These three moves are illustrated in Figure 1. In knot theory we want to be able to distinguish between different knots. To make this distinction we have what are called knot invariants. A knot invariant is a quantity that is defined for each knot and which is the same if the knots are equivalent up to ambient isotopy. The knot invariant can range from a number up to something like a polynomial.
    [Show full text]
  • MAT115 Final (Spring 2012)
    MAT115 Final (Spring 2012) Name: Directions: Show your work! Answers without justification will likely result in few points. Your written work also allows me the option of giving you partial credit in the event of an incorrect final answer (but good reasoning). Indicate clearly your answer to each problem (e.g., put a box around it). You may skip up to 12 points without penalty – write “skip” CLEARLY on each skipped problem. Good luck! Problem 1: (10 pts) Put the following terms into one-to-one correspondence with the first nine natural numbers, by the order in which they occurred in history (“1” is earliest): Mathematical Event Order of historical introduction Fractals Pascal’s Triangle Discovery of zero Pythagoreans’s discovery of √2 Ishango Bone Fibonacci Numbers Ramanujan’s 1729 Bridges of Konigsberg problem Egyptian Multiplication Problem 2: (10 pts) Bases: a. Write the number 201210 in base 7. b. Write the number 20123 in base 10. Problem 3: (6 pts) FYI: 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 You and I are playing a game of Fibonacci Nim with coins. In each of the three cases below, we start with the number of coins specified, and you are to a. explain whether you would prefer to go first or second (and why), and then b. Give your first move assuming that you’re in your preferred position. You may have to first say what I would do, assuming that I always use the strategies described in class (including the slow-down defensive strategy).
    [Show full text]
  • Chirally Cosmetic Surgeries and Casson Invariants 3
    CHIRALLY COSMETIC SURGERIES AND CASSON INVARIANTS KAZUHIRO ICHIHARA, TETSUYA ITO, AND TOSHIO SAITO Abstract. We study chirally cosmetic surgeries, that is, a pair of Dehn surg- eries on a knot producing homeomorphic 3-manifolds with opposite orienta- tions. Several constraints on knots and surgery slopes to admit such surgeries are given. Our main ingredients are the original and the SL(2, C) version of Casson invariants. As applications, we give a complete classification of chirally cosmetic surgeries on alternating knots of genus one. 1. Introduction Given a knot, one can produce by Dehn surgeries a wide variety of 3-manifolds. Generically ‘distinct’ surgeries on a knot, meaning that surgeries along inequivalent slopes, can give distinct 3-manifolds. In fact, Gordon and Luecke proved in [11] that, on a non-trivial knot in the 3-sphere S3, any Dehn surgery along a non-meridional slope never yields S3, while the surgery along the meridional slope always gives S3. However, it sometimes happens that ‘distinct’ surgeries on a knot K give rise to homeomorphic 3-manifolds: (i) When K is amphicheiral, for every non-meridional, non-longitudinal slope r, the r-surgery and the (−r)-surgery always produce 3-manifolds which are orientation-reversingly homeomorphic to each other. (ii) When K is the (2,n)-torus knot, there is a family of pairs of Dehn surgeries that yield orientation-reversingly homeomorphic 3-manifolds, first pointed out by Mathieu in [22, 23]. For example, (18k + 9)/(3k + 1)- and (18k + 9)/(3k + 2)-surgeries on the right-handed trefoil in S3 yield orientation- reversingly homeomorphic 3-manifolds for any non-negative integer k.
    [Show full text]