Arxiv:2103.10273V2 [Math.GT] 26 May 2021 Ru Fsm Lsd4-Manifold Closed Some of Group 57N13

Home , Euler characteristic

arXiv:2103.10273v2 [math.GT] 26 May 2021 ru fsm lsd4-manifold closed some of group 57N13. ic n ntl rsne group presented finitely any Since Characteristic. .Introduction 1. References 7. for 6. bound lower A of bound 5. upper An groups 3-manifold of 4. numbers Betti by 3-manifolds 3. of Decomposition 2. 2010 e od n phrases. and words Key h rtato sprilyspotdb iosClaoainGrant Collaboration Simons by supported partially is author first The -AIOD IH3MNFL GROUPS 3-MANIFOLD WITH 4-MANIFOLDS q p rm factor prime q χ n ila epciey o eti ls fcmat3-manifolds compact of class M certain For respectively. Hillman and χ Abstract. ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics ∗ ( IIA UE HRCEITC OF CHARACTERISTICS EULER MINIMAL ∗ 4 4 ( π ( , nldn l hs o otiigtwo-sided containing not those all including , ( π π = ) π p = ) ,adase usinrie yHillman. by raised question a answer and ), .W drs hndoes when address We ). and χ χ 4 q 4 ( ∗ ( OGI U N HNZ WANG ZHONGZI AND SUN HONGBIN π eteivrat fHumn-enegr Kotschick Hausmann-Weinberger, of invariants the be π Let o -aiod ihu lsdnon-orientable closed without 3-manifolds for ) o -aiodgop otiign 2-torsions no containing groups 3-manifold for ) π = -aiod,4mnfls udmna ru,Euler group, fundamental 4-manifolds, 3-manifolds, π χ 1. χ 1 4 ( ( 4 M Introduction π ( Contents π ) o opc 3-manifold compact a for ) ) X χ G 1 4 n ti mosbet lsiyfinite classify to impossible is it and ( a eraie stefundamental the as realized be can π = ) rmr 76;Scnay57M05, Secondary 57N65; Primary S p 2 ( π n two-sided and ,we does when ), RP 2 edetermine we , M n let and , χ 4 RP ( π = ) 2 615229. 26 24 21 14 11 7 5 1 2 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG presentable groups, it is impossible to classify closed 4-manifolds. Even just to classify 4-manifolds with fundamental groups in a special family of groups (that can be classified), in general it is still a very difficult problem. However, studying some basic topological invaraints of 4- manifolds with given fundamental group, e.g. Euler characteristics and signatures, is an interesting and important topic, see [HW], [JK], [Ko1], [Ec], [Hi], [KL], [KLPT] and the references therein.

For any finitely presented group G, denote βi(G) to be the real coefficient i-th betti number of K(G, 1), the classifying space of G. Denote χ(W ) to be the Euler characteristic of a finite CW complex W , and denote σ(X) to be the signature of a closed oriented 4-manifold X. In 1985 Hausmann and Weinberger [HW] introduced the 4-manifold Euler characteristic for a finitely presented group G, defined by ∼ χ4(G) = inf{χ(X)|X is a closed orientable 4-manifold and π1(X) = G}.

There are also some variations of χ4(G). In 1994 Kotschick [Ko1] introduced ∼ p(G) = inf{χ(X)−|σ(X)||X is a closed orientable 4-manifold and π1(X) = G}. In 2002 Hillman [Hi] introduced ∗ ∼ q (G) = inf{χ(X)|X is a closed 4-manifold and π1(X) = G}. It is known that ∗ χ4(G) ≥ p(G), χ4(G) ≥ q (G) (1.0).

∗ Note both χ4(G) and q (G) are denote as q(G) in their original def- initions, see [HW] and [Hi]. Moreover, q∗(G) is originally deﬁned for ∗ PD4-complexes in [Hi], and Theorem 1.4 is also valid when q is deﬁned for PD4-complexes, see Remark 7.3 (2). Kotschick made a useful observation to estimate the lower bound of χ4(G) and p(G) when β4(G) = 0 [Ko1, Theorems 2.8 and 4.2].

More variations and generalizations of χ4(G) can be found in [Hi], [Ko2], [BK], [KL], and [AH]. An important family of ﬁnitely presented groups which can be classiﬁed are groups of compact 3-manifolds, which include all cyclic groups, free groups, surface groups and knot groups. Many studies have been made for 4-manifolds with 3-manifold groups, see [JK], [Ko1], [Hi], [KL], [KLPT] and the references therein. We survey known results on these invariants of 3-manifold groups in the following theorem. EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS3

Theorem 1.0 Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold and π1(M)= π.

(1) χ4(π) = p(π)=2 when M is closed, orientable and aspherical, [Ko1, Proposition 5.6].

(2) χ4(π)=2 − 2q when M is closed and orientable, where q is the maximal rank of free group in the free product decomposition of π, [Hi, page 61-62], [KL, Theorem 3.3].

(3) χ4(π)=0, when π is the group of a knot complement in the 3-sphere S3, [Hi, Corollary 3.12.3], [KL, Theorem 3.4].

(4) Suppose M is a closed aspherical 3-manifold and π1(X) = π for a closed 4-manifold X. If X and M have the same orientablity, then χ(X) > 0 and 1 ≤ q∗(π) ≤ 2, [Hi, Theorem 3.13 and Corollary 3.13.1]. Hillman asked [Hi, page 63] whether results in (4) above can be ex- tended to all closed 3-manifold groups without torsion and without free Z-factors.

In this paper, we try to determine χ4(π) for fundamental groups of compact 3-manifolds in general. We also get some results related to p(π) and q∗(π). It turns out that, to deal with non-orientable 3-manifolds, the problem becomes more difficult and some new ap- proaches are needed. For the undefined terminologies, see [He] and [Ha2] about 3-manifolds, see [Kir] about 4-manifolds, see [Ha1] about algebraic topology. Conventions: (1) All homology and cohomology groups have real coefficients, and all Betti-numbers are taken with respect to real coefficient (co)homology groups, unless otherwise indicated. (2) Since each 3-manifold group can be realized by a 3-manifold without S2 boundary components, below we assume each 3-manifold contains no S2 boundary component unless otherwise indicated. This assumption does not affect the correctness of our results, see Remark 7.3 (3). The Kneser-Milnor theorem claims that each compact 3-manifold has a prime decomposition, whose prime factors are unique up to homeomorphism and permutation ([He]). Then M has a prime decomposition m n p q M = (#i=1Mi)#(#j=1Nj)#(#l=1Ql)#(#e=1Se) (1.1). Here each prime factor may or may not be orientable and belongs to one of the following categories (see Section 2 for more detail):

(i) each Mi is a closed prime 3-manifold with |π1(Mi)| = ∞ and is not an S2- or RP 2-bundle over S1; (ii) each Nj is a closed prime 3-manifold with |π1(Nj)| < ∞; 4 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

(iii) each Ql is a prime 3-manifold and ∂Ql is non-empty; 2 2 1 (iv) each Se is an S - or RP -bundle over S .

2 1 Note in (ii) each Nj is orientable, and in (iv) each RP -bundle over S is homeomorphic to RP 2 ×S1. Also each orientable 3-manifold contains no 2-sided RP 2, and each 3-manifold containing RP 2 has 2-torsion in its fundamental group. We made the following conjecture. Conjecture 1.1. Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold with prime decomposition described as in (1.1) and (i)-(iv). Let π = π1(M), then

χ4(π)= p(π)=2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M).

If Conjecture 1.1 is true, it implies that any closed orientable 4-manifold X realizing χ4(π) has zero signature.

We state our works on χ4(π) and related invariants in the following three theorems. Theorem 1.2 is more diﬃcult to prove and is the main result of this paper. Theorems 1.2 and 1.3 provide evident for Conjecture 1.1. Theorem 1.2. Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold with prime decomposition described as in (1.1) and (i)-(iv). Let π = π1(M), then

χ4(π)=2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M) (1.2) 2 if each Mi in (i) and each Ql in (iii) contains no two-sided RP . In particular, (1.2) holds when M contains no two-sided RP 2. Theorem 1.3. Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold with prime decomposition described as in (1.1) and (i)-(iv). Let π = π1(M), then

p(π)= χ4(π)=2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M) (1.3) if each closed 3-manifold Mi in (i) is orientable. In particular, (1.3) holds when M is orientable.

The third one conﬁrms the question asked by Hillman above, and in fact we prove a stronger result. Theorem 1.4. Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold with prime decomposition described as in (1.1) and (i)-(iv). Let π = π1(M), then ∗ q (π)= χ4(π)=2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M) (1.4) if π contains no 2-torsions. Furthermore if p = q =0, then q∗(π)=2. EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS5

∗ 4 ∗ Note q (Z2) = 1 is realized by RP . So the equality q (π) = χ4(π) in Theorem 1.4 is not true for 3-manifold groups in general. Remark 1.5. (1) Among those conditions posed on Theorems 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, no one is stronger than another except one case: the condition posed in Theorem 1.4 is stronger than that posed in Theorems 1.2.

Also note in Theorem 1.2, those Mi in (i) might be non-orientable and 2 Se in (iv) may contain two-sided RP ; in Theorem 1.3, those Ql in (iii) 2 and Se in (iv) may contain two-sided RP . (2) If M is closed and orientable, then (1.2) in Theorem 1.2 becomes χ4(π)=2 − 2q, since p = χ(∂M) = 0 in this case. If M is a knot 3 complement in S , then (1.2) becomes χ4(π) = 0, since p = 1 and q = χ(∂M) = 0. These cases are presented in Theorem 1.0 (2) and (3), proved by Hillman and by Kirk-Livingston. If M is closed, orientable and aspherical, then (1.3) in Theorem 1.3 becomes p(π) = χ4(π) = 2, which is presented in Theorem 1.0 (1), proved by Kotschick. ∗ (3) By Theorem 1.4, if π1(M) contains no 2-torsions, then q (π) can be realized by closed orientable 4-manifolds. The condition that π1(M) contains no 2-torsions implies that all prime factors of M with ﬁnite fundamental groups are lens spaces L(p, q) with odd p.

(4) There are (potentially) diﬀerent versions of χ4(π) by working in the categories of topological and smooth 4-manifolds, as discussed in [Ko1, page 91], and we work in the topological category in this paper. In particular, our lower bounds of χ4(π) in Sections 5, 6 and 7 work in the topological category. On the other hand, our construction in Section 4 produces smooth 4-manifolds, which provides upper bounds of χ4(π) in both topological and smooth categories. So if Conjecture 1.1 is true, then χ4(π) in the topological category and in the smooth category will be same for 3-manifold groups.

The content of the paper is as following: In Section 2, we will study decompositions of compact 3-manifolds by S2 and two-sided RP 2. In Section 3, we will compute the second and fourth Betti numbers of compact 3-manifold groups. In Section 4, Proposition 4.1 provides the upper bound of χ4(π). Theorems 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 are proved in Sections 5, 6 and 7 respectively.

2. Decomposition of 3-manifolds by S2 and two-sided RP 2

In this section, we first review the prime decomposition of 3-manifolds and a decomposition theorem of non-orientable prime 3-manifolds by 6 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG two-sided RP 2, then we study the topology of resulting pieces. The result for non-orientable prime 3-manifolds should be well-known, but we can not find it in literature. In this paper, we assume all 3-manifolds are compact and connected. The Kneser-Milnor decomposition (prime decomposition) of compact 3-manifolds is a fundamental result in 3-manifold topology. Although the result might be more well-known for orientable 3-manifolds, it also holds for non-orientable 3-manifolds (see Theorem 3.15 of [He]). Theorem 2.1. Let M be a compact connected 3-manifold, then M is a connected sum of finitely many prime 3-manifolds.

The following description of orientable prime 3-manifolds is well known: Any orientable prime 3-manifold either has finite fundamental group, or is homeomorphic to S2 ×S1, or is aspherical (by the sphere theorem). However, we can not find such a description of non-orientable prime 3-manifolds in literature, so we will prove a similar result here. At first, the only prime but reducible non-orientable 3-manifold is the twisted S2-bundle over S1. Since any irreducible non-orientable 3-manifold does not contain one-sided RP 2, we will decompose such manifolds by two-sided RP 2. The following theorem can be proved by the theory of normal surfaces, as the proof of the existence of prime decompositon, which appears as Exercise 1.4 of [Ha2]. Theorem 2.2. Let M be a non-orientable irreducible 3-manifold, then there is a finite collection P of embedded two-sided RP 2 in M, such that for any component N of M \ P, any embedded two-sided RP 2 in N is parallel to its boundary.

For any component N of M \ P in the above decomposition, we prove the following lemma. Lemma 2.3. Suppose N is a non-orientable 3 manifold satisfying (i) any 2-sphere in N bounds a 3-ball; (ii) any projective plane in N is boundary parallel.

˜ ˆ ˜ 3 Let N → N be the orientable double cover of N, and let N = N ∪(∪Bi ), where each S2 boundary component of N˜ is capped with a 3-ball. Then Nˆ is irreducible.

Proof. Let τ : N˜ → N˜ be the nontrivial deck transformation of the double cover p : N˜ → N, and letτ ˆ : Nˆ → Nˆ be an extension of τ to Nˆ EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS7

Z ˆ ˜ 3 as a 2-action. Then each 3-ball in the decomposition N = N ∪ (∪Bi ) gives a unique ﬁxed point ofτ ˆ. We prove the statement by contradiction and suppose that Nˆ is not irreducible. Sinceτ ˆ acts on Nˆ, by Meeks-Simon-Yau’s equivariant sphere theorem [MSY], there exists aτ ˆ-invariant essential 2-sphere or aτ ˆ- invariant pair of essential 2-spheres S ⊂ Nˆ. Then there are two cases: (1) S ∩ F ix(ˆτ)= ∅ or (2) S ∩ F ix(ˆτ) =6 ∅. Case (1): Suppose ﬁrst S ∩ F ix(ˆτ) = ∅. Then we may assume that S ⊂ N˜. Clearly, S is τ-equivariant and essential in N˜. There are two cases: p(S) is a 2-sphere (if S is a pair of 2-spheres) or p(S) is a projective plane (if S is a 2-sphere). If p(S) is a 2-sphere, then it contradicts with assumption (i). If p(S) is a projective plane, by assumption (ii), p(S) must be boundary parallel. Thus, S is boundary parallel in N˜, which cannot be essential in Nˆ.

Case (2): Then we suppose S ∩ F ix(ˆτ) =6 ∅. We first prove thatτ ˆ|S is orientation preserving. Otherwise,τ ˆ|S is orientation reversing and is not fixed-point free. Then F ix(ˆτ) ∩ S is one-dimensional, which is impossible. Let U be aτ ˆ-equivariant regular neighborhood of S such that F ix(ˆτ) ∩ (U \ S) = ∅. Since both S and Nˆ are orientable, ∂U has two 2-sphere components, say S+ and S−. Sinceτ ˆ is orientation reversing on Nˆ and is orientation preserving on S, it reverses the normal vector field of S. Thus,τ ˆ exchanges two components of U \ S, and τˆ(S+) = S−, soτ ˆ(S+) ∩ S+ = ∅ holds. Let S± = S+ ∪ S−, then we have that S± ∩ F ix(ˆτ)= ∅. Clearly S± is also essential. Applying the argument of case (1) to S±, we reach a contradiction.

3. Betti numbers of 3-manifold groups

In this section, we prove the following result on Betti numbers of 3- manifold groups. Proposition 3.1. Let M be a compact 3-manifold, and let its prime decomposition be m n p q M = (#i=1Mi)#(#j=1Nj)#(#l=1Ql)#(#e=1Se) as in (1.1). Here each Mi is a closed prime 3-manifold with |π(Mi)| = 2 2 ∞ and is not an S - or RP -bundle, each Nj is closed and has ﬁnite fundamental group, each Ql is prime and has non-empty ∂Ql, each Se is an S2- or RP 2-bundle over S1. Then we have

(1) β4(K(π, 1)) = 0; 8 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

m p (2) β2(K(π, 1)) = Σi=1β2(Mi) + Σl=1β2(Ql).

To prove Proposition 3.1, we will ﬁrst work on each prime factor of M and prove the following proposition. It turns out that it is more diﬃcult to prove this proposition for non-orientable 3-manifolds.

Proposition 3.2. Let M be a prime 3-manifold that is not an S2- or 2 1 RP -bundle over S , and let π = π1(M). Then we have

(1) β4(K(π, 1)) = 0; (2) β2(K(π, 1)) = β2(M).

Proof. Case I. M is an orientable 3-manifold. If M has finite fundamental group, since no boundary component of 2 M is S , M must be closed. Then the result holds since β2(M)=0 (by Poincare duality) and any finite group has zero betti numbers in all positive dimensions (for example, see Theorem 6.5.8 of [We]). If M has infinite fundamental group, since M is not an S2-bundle, it is an irreducible 3-manifold. By the sphere theorem and the Hurewicz theorem, M is aspherical and it is a model of K(π, 1). So β4(K(π, 1)) = β4(M) = 0 and β2(K(π, 1)) = β2(M). Case II. M is a non-orientable 3-manifold. If M has finite fundamental group, let M˜ be the orientable double cover of M, and let Mˆ be obtained by capping off all S2 boundary components of M˜ . Since π1(Mˆ ) is finite, Mˆ must be a closed man- 2 ifold with H2(Mˆ ) = 0. Let S1, ··· ,Sk be all oriented S boundary components of M˜ , then H2(M˜ ) is generated by [S1], ··· , [Sk], modulo relation [S1]+ ··· + [Sk] = 0. Let τ : M˜ → M˜ be the nontrivial deck transformation, since no boundary component of M is S2, we have τ∗[Si]= −[Si] for each i. Since τ is an orientation reversing fixed-point free homeomorphism on M˜ , by the Lefschetz fixed-point theorem, we ˜ χ(∂M˜ ) χ(M˜ ) must have k =2. So χ(M)= 2 = 2 and χ(M)= 2 = 1. Then we have b2(M) = 0, and the result holds as in Case I. 2 If M does not contain any embedded RP and has infinite π1, then by Lemma 2.3, the orientable double cover M˜ of M is irreducible. So both M˜ and M are aspherical, thus β4(K(π, 1)) = β4(M) = 0 and β2(K(π, 1)) = β2(M) hold. Now we assume that M contains embedded RP 2 and has infinite fundamental group. We can also assume that all embedded RP 2 in M are EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS9 two-sided. Otherwise, if M contains a one-sided RP 2, the primeness of M implies that M is homeomorphic to RP 3, which is orientable. So it remains to consider the following two cases. Case II.1. Any embedded RP 2 in M is boundary parallel, thus M satisfies the assumption of Lemma 2.3. We denote this manifold by N so that we can use the notations in Lemma 2.3. 2 k 2 Let the RP -boundary components of N be denoted by ∪i=1RPi . Note 2 2 that all of these RP ’s are π1-injective in N. For each RPi , we attach ∞ 2 ∞ an RPi to N via the standard embedding RPi → RPi (to the 2- skeleton), and get k ∞ k 2 K = N ∪∪i=1RPi (∪i=1RPi ).

We claim that K is a model of K(π1(N), 1).

By Van Kampen theorem, π1(K) is isomorphic to π1(N), so we only need to prove that higher homotopy groups of K are trivial. We use notations N˜ and Nˆ as in Lemma 2.3, which are the orientable double cover of N and the capping off of N˜, respectively. Then the double cover K˜ of K corresponding to π1(N˜) < π1(N) is homeomorphic to k ∞ ˜ k 2 N ∪∪i=1Si (∪i=1Si ), 2 ˜ ∞ where each sphere boundary component Si of N is pasted with an Si 2 ∞ via the standard embedding Si → Si (to the 2-skeleton). We can rewrite K˜ as k ∞ ˆ k 3 N ∪∪i=1Bi (∪i=1Si ), 3 ˆ ˜ ∞ where each Bi in N (used to cap off N) is pasted with Si via an 3 ∞ ∞ 3 ˜ embedding Bi → Si . Since both S and B are contractible, K is homotopic equivalent to Nˆ. By Lemma 2.3, Nˆ is irreducible. Since π1(Nˆ) is infinite, Nˆ is an aspherical manifold. So both K˜ and K are aspherical, thus K is a model of K(π1(N), 1). Then we use the following M-V sequence to compute the second and fourth betti numbers of K: k 2 k ∞ ···→⊕i=1Hn(RPi ) → Hn(N) ⊕ (⊕i=1Hn(RPi )) → Hn(K) →··· . 2 Recall that all homology groups have real coefficients. Since βn(RP )= ∞ βn(RP ) = 0 for all n > 0, we have βn(π1(N)) = βn(K)= βn(N) for all n ≥ 1. In particular, β4(π1(N)) = 0 and β2(π1(N)) = β2(N) hold. Case II.2. M contains embedded two-sided RP 2 that is not boundary parallel. By Theorem 2.2, there is a finite collection P of two-sided RP 2’s in M, such that any RP 2 in M \ P is boundary parallel. 10 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

Then M has a space of graph structure and π1(M) has a space of group structure. Under this graph of space structure of M, the vertex spaces are components of M \ P, denoted by N1, ··· , Nk; the edge spaces are 2 2 components of P, denoted by RP1 , ··· ,RPl .

Then we can construct a K(π1(M), 1) space as following. For each vertex space Ni, we take a K(π1(Ni), 1) space of π1(Ni). For each 2 ∞ ∞ edge space RPj , we take a copy of RP and denote it by RPj . For 2 any RPj , it is adjacent to two vertex spaces Nj1, Nj2 of M. Then we ∞ ∞ take maps RPj → K(π1(Nj1), 1) and RPj → K(π1(Nj2), 1) induced 2 2 by π1(RPj ) → π1(Nj1) and π1(RPj ) → π1(Nj2) respectively. These pasting maps between K(G, 1)’s together give rise to a space K. By Theorem 1B.11 of [Ha1], K is a K(π1(M), 1) space. So we can use the following M-V sequences to compute betti numbers of M and K respectively: l 2 k ···→⊕j=1Hn(RPj ) → ⊕i=1Hn(Ni) → Hn(M) →··· , l ∞ k ···→⊕j=1Hn(RPj ) → ⊕i=1Hn(K(π1(Ni), 1)) → Hn(K) →··· . 2 ∞ We have the fact that βn(RP ) = βn(RP ) = 0 for all n > 0. The results in Case II.1 and the ﬁnite fundamental group case imply that βn(Ni)= βn(K(π1(Ni), 1)) for all n. So for any n ≥ 2, we have k k

βn(π1(M)) = βn(K)= βn(K(π1(Ni), 1)) = βn(Ni)= βn(M). Xi=1 Xi=1

In particular, β4(π1(M)) =0 and β2(π1(M)) = β2(M) hold.

Now we are ready to prove Proposition 3.1.

Proof of Proposition 3.1. Suppose the 3-manifold M has prime decomposition m n p q M = (#i=1Mi)#(#j=1Nj)#(#l=1Ql)#(#e=1Se) as in (1.1). Here each Mi is a closed prime 3-manifold with |π1(Mi)| = 2 2 ∞ and is not an S - or RP -bundle, each Nj is closed and has ﬁnite fundamental group, each Ql is prime and has non-empty ∂Ql, each Se is an S2- or RP 2-bundle over S1. Among the q prime factors of M that are S2- or RP 2-bundles, we 2 2 suppose q1 of them are S -bundles and q2 of them are RP -bundles. Then a K(π1(M), 1) space can be taken to be m n p (∨i=1K(π1(Mi), 1)) ∨ (∨j=1K(π1(Nj), 1)) ∨ (∨l=1K(π1(Ql), 1))∨ (∨q1 S1) ∨ (∨q2 RP ∞ × S1). EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS11

So we have m n p

β4(π1(M)) = β4(π1(Mi)) + β4(π1(Nj)) + β4(π1(Ql))=0. Xi=1 Xj=1 Xl=1

Here the last equality follows from Proposition 3.2 (1). We also have m n p

β2(π1(M)) = β2(π1(Mi)) + β2(π1(Nj)) + β2(π1(Ql)) Xi=1 Xj=1 Xl=1 m n p m p

= β2(Mi)+ β2(Nj)+ β2(Ql)= β2(Mi)+ β2(Ql). Xi=1 Xj=1 Xl=1 Xi=1 Xl=1 Here the second equality follows from Proposition 3.2 (2) and the third equality follows from the fact that π1(Nj) is ﬁnite. Corollary 3.3. Let M be a compact 3-manifold whose fundamental group π contains no 2-torsions. Then

(1) β4(K(π, 1),Z2)=0; m p (2) β2(K(π, 1),Z2) = Σi=1β2(Mi,Z2) + Σl=1β2(Ql,Z2).

Proof. Still we have m n p q M = (#i=1Mi)#(#j=1Nj)#(#l=1Ql)#(#e=1Se) as in (1.1) (i)-(iv). Since π contains no 2-torsions, we conclude that 2 each Mi and Qi contains no 2-sided projective plane, each Se is an S - 1 bundle over S , and the fundamental group of each Nj has odd order. As we discussed in the proof of Proposition 3.2, each Mi and Ql is aspherical and m n p q 1 K(π1(M), 1)=(∨i=1Mi) ∨ (∨j=1K(π1(Nj), 1)) ∨ (∨l=1Ql) ∨ (∨ S ).

Since π1(Nj) is odd, βk(K(π1(Nj), 1),Z2) = 0 for all k ≥ 1 (for example, see Theorem 6.5.8 of [We]). Then the conclusion follows.

4. An upper bound of χ4(π)

We prove the following proposition in this section, which gives the upper bound of χ4(π) in Theorems 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4. Proposition 4.1. Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold with a prime decomposition described as in (1.1) and (i)-(iv). Let π = π1(M), then

χ4(π) ≤ 2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M). 12 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

Proof. For a compact 3-manifold M associated with decomposition (1.1) and (i)-(iv), to prove Proposition 4.1, we need only to construct ∗ ∗ a closed orientable 4-manifold M with π1(M )= π1(M) and χ(M ∗)=2+ χ(∂M) − 2(p + q).

Construction of M ∗: Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold and ∂M has k components {S1, ..., Sk}. Case 1: M is orientable and ∂M =6 ∅. Let

∗ 1 2 M =(M × S ) ∪ (∪iSi × D ),

1 1 where each component Si × S of ∂(M × S ) is identified with ∂(Si × 2 1 D ) = Si × S canonically. By Van Kampen theorem, we can verify ∗ that π1(M )= π1(M). Case 2: M is non-orientable and ∂M =6 ∅. Let p : M˜ → M be the orientable double cover of M with a fixed-point free orientation reversing involution τ : M˜ → M˜ such that M/τ˜ = M. Let r : S1 → S1 be the orientation reversing involution on S1. Now we have an orientation preserving fixed-point free involution τ × r : M˜ × S1 → M˜ × S1. Then M˜ × S1/τ × r is an orientable 4-manifold, which indeed is a twisted product M×˜ S1. Each boundary component of M×˜ S1 is 1 1 either Sj × S if Sj is orientable, or Sj×˜ S otherwise. Then we close 2 2 these components canonically by Sj × D or Sj×˜ D , depending on Sj is orientable or not. So we still get a closed orientable 4-manifold M ∗ ∗ with π1(M )= π1(M). Case 3: M is closed. let B3 be a 3-ball in M, we denote by M˘ = M \ intB3. Then ∂M˘ = S2, and M˘ ∗ is defined. Final Construction: For the compact 3-manifold M with prime decomposition given in (1.1), denote the connected sum of closed 3-manifold m n pieces by P = (#i=1Mi)#(#j=1Nj). We suppose that there are q1 2 prime factors that are S -bundles and there are q2 prime factors that 2 are RP -bundles, with q1 + q2 = q. Then we define

∗ ˘∗ p ∗ q1 3 1 q2 3 1 M = P #(#l=1Ql )#(#e=1(S × S ))#(#f=1(RP × S )) (4.1). Then M ∗ is a closed orientable 4-manifold, and we check the desired conditions in the following. Lemma 4.2. ∗ ∼ π1(M ) = π1(M). EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS13

∼ 3 1 ∼ 2 1 ∼ 2 1 ∼ Proof. Since π1(P ) = π1(P˘), π1(S ×S ) = π1(S ×S ) = π1(S ×˜ S ) = 2 1 ∼ 3 1 ∼ Z, and π1(RP × S ) = π1(RP × S ) = Z ⊕ Z2, we have ∗ ∼ ˘∗ p ∗ q1 3 1 q2 3 1 π1(M ) = π1(P )∗(∗i=1π1(Qi ))∗(∗e=1π1(S × S ))∗(∗f=1π1(RP × S )) ∼ p q1 Z q2 Z Z ∼ = π1(P ) ∗ (∗i=1π1(Qi)) ∗ (∗e=1 ) ∗ (∗f=1 ⊕ 2) = π1(M).

To calculate χ, we list the following elementary facts. Lemma 4.3. [Ha1, Exercises 20, 21, 22, p157] (i) If X and Y are ﬁnite CW complexes, then χ(X×Y )= χ(X)×χ(Y ). (ii) If a ﬁnite CW complex X is a union of sub-complexes A and B, then χ(X)= χ(A)+ χ(B) − χ(A ∩ B). (iii) If p : M˜ → M is a covering map of degree p, then χ(M˜ )= pχ(M).

We compute the Euler characteristic of M ∗ in the following lemma. Lemma 4.4. χ(M ∗)=2+ χ(∂M) − 2(p + q).

Proof. First note by Lemma 4.3 (ii), for any 4-manifolds N1 and N2 we have χ(N1#N2)= χ(N1)+ χ(N2) − 2, and inductively we have ∗ ˘∗ p ∗ 3 1 3 1 χ(M )= χ(P )+Σl=1χ(Ql )+q1χ(S ×S )+q2χ(RP ×S )−2(p+q) (4.2). Since χ(S3 × S1)= χ(RP 3 × S1) = 0 (by Lemma 4.3 (i)), we have ∗ ˘∗ p ∗ χ(M )= χ(P ) + Σl=1χ(Ql ) − 2(p + q) (4.3).

Let Q be either P˘ or some Ql. If Q is orientable, by Lemma 4.3 (ii) we have ∗ 1 2 1 χ(Q )= χ(Q × S )+ χ(Si × D ) − χ(Si × S ) X X =0+ χ(Si) − 0= χ(Si)= χ(∂Q). X X 1 If Q is non-orientable, and some Si is non-orientable, since Q×˜ S and 1 1 1 Si×˜ S are doubly covered by M × S and Si × S respectively, we 1 1 still have χ(Q×˜ S ) = 0 and χ(Si×˜ S ) = 0 by Lemma 4.3 (iii). Since 2 χ(Si×˜ D )= χ(Si), so we still have χ(Q∗)= χ(∂Q).

∗ ˘ 2 p Since χ(Q ) = χ(∂Q), we get χ(P ) = χ(S ) = 2 and Σl=1χ(∂Ql) = χ(∂M). By plugging into (4.3), we have χ(M ∗)=2+ χ(∂M) − 2(p + q). 14 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

In the proof above (especially equation (4.2)), we assumed that P is not empty. If P is empty, then the −(p + q) term in (4.2) should be −(p + q − 1), and the result is still valid. Alternatively, if P is empty, we can also take P = S3 and the result follows.

The proof of Proposition 4.1 is done.

5. A lower bound for χ4(π)

We ﬁrst prove the following result on χ4(G) for a general group G. Proposition 5.1. Let G be a ﬁnitely presented group, and let G

χ4(G) ≥ 1 − b1(G˜)+ b2(G˜)+ |2(b1(G) − b2(G)) − (b1(G˜) − b2(G˜)) − 1|. ∼ Proof. Let X be a closed orientable 4-manifold with π1(X) = G, then we have a map i : X → K(G, 1) that induces an isomorphism on π1. Let p : X˜ → X and q : K(G,˜ 1) → K(G, 1) be the double covers of X and K(G, 1) corresponding to GK(G,˜ 1)

p q ∨ ∨ i X >K(G, 1) ∼ Since π1(X˜) = G˜, we have b1(X˜) = b1(G˜). By Poincare duality, we have b3(X˜)= b1(X˜)= b1(G˜). So we get 1 χ(X˜)=2 − 2b (G˜)+ b (X˜), χ(X)=1 − b (G˜)+ b (X˜) (5.1). 1 2 1 2 2

Then we need to bound b2(X˜) from below to prove this proposition. ∗ 1 Since j : X˜ → K(G,˜ 1) induces an isomorphism on π1, j : H (K(G,˜ 1)) → H1(X˜) is an isomorphism. Since K(G,˜ 1) can be obtained by attaching cells to X˜ with dimension at least 3 (up to homotopy equivalence), j∗ : H2(K(G,˜ 1)) → H2(X˜) is injective.

Let τX : X˜ → X˜ and τK : K(X,˜ 1) → K(X,˜ 1) be the nontrivial deck transformations of p : X˜ → X and q : K(G,˜ 1) → K(G, 1) respectively. Since q : K(G,˜ 1) → K(G, 1) is a double cover, for each n, q∗ : Hn(K(G, 1)) → Hn(K(G,˜ 1)) is injective, and we have ∗ ∗ q (Hn(K(G, 1))) = (Hn(K(G,˜ 1)))τK EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS15

∗ (by [Ha1, Proposition 3G.1]). Here (Hn(K(G,˜ 1)))τK denotes the sub- n ˜ ∗ n ˜ space of H (K(G, 1)) consisting of elements ﬁxed by τK : H (K(G, 1)) → Hn(K(G,˜ 1)). ∗ n ˜ n ˜ Z Since τK : H (K(G, 1)) → H (K(G, 1)) gives a 2-action, we have n n n H (K(G,˜ 1)) = H (K(G,˜ 1))+ ⊕ H (K(G,˜ 1))−, n ˜ n ˜ ∗ where H (K(G, 1))+ and H (K(G, 1))− denote the eigenspaces of τK corresponding to eigenvalues 1 and −1 respectively. Similarly, by con- Z n ˜ ∗ sidering the 2-action on H (X) given by τX and the eigenspaces corresponding to 1 and −1, we have n n n H (X˜)= H (X˜)+ ⊕ H (X˜)−.

Then we have ∗ n n τK ∗ n H (K(G,˜ 1))+ = H (K(G,˜ 1)) = q (H (K(G, 1))). Since q∗ : Hn(K(G, 1)) → Hn(K(G,˜ 1)) is injective, we have n ∗ n n dim H (K(G,˜ 1))+ = dim q (H (K(G, 1))) = dim H (K(G, 1) = bn(G) and n n n dim H (K(G,˜ 1))− = dim H (K(G,˜ 1))−dim H (K(G,˜ 1))+ = bn(G˜)−bn(G).

Since j∗ : H1(K(G,˜ 1)) → H1(X˜) is an isomorphism, we have 1 ∗ 1 1 dim H (X˜)+ = dim j (H (K(G,˜ 1))+) = dim H (K(G,˜ 1))+ = b1(G) and 1 ∗ 1 1 dim H (X˜)− = dim j (H (K(G,˜ 1))−) = dim H (K(G,˜ 1))− = b1(G˜)−b1(G). So we get ∗ 1 ˜ 1 ˜ ˜ tr(τX : H (X) → H (X))=2b1(G) − b1(G) (5.2).

Since τX : X˜ → X˜ is an orientation preserving homeomorphism, for any 1 ˜ 3 ˜ ∗ ∗ 4 ˜ ∼ α ∈ H (X) and β ∈ H (X), we have α∪β = τX (α)∪τX (β) ∈ H (X) = 3 1 R. By Poincare duality, we have dim H (X˜)+ = dim H (X˜)+ = b1(G) 3 1 and dim H (X˜)− = dim H (X˜)− = b1(G˜) − b1(G), so we get ∗ 3 ˜ 3 ˜ ˜ tr(τX : H (X) → H (X))=2b1(G) − b1(G) (5.3).

By the assumption that β4(G˜) = 0, the restrictions of the cup product ∗ 2 2 2 of H (K(G,˜ 1)) on H (K(G,˜ 1))+ ×H (K(G,˜ 1))+ and H (K(G,˜ 1))− × 2 2 ∗ 2 2 H (K(G,˜ 1))+ are trivial. In H , we have j (H (K(G,˜ 1))+) ⊂ H (X˜)+ 16 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

∗ 2 2 and j (H (K(G,˜ 1))−) ⊂ H (X˜)−. So the restrictions of the cup prod- ∗ ∗ 2 ∗ 2 uct of H (X˜) on j (H (K(G,˜ 1))+) × j (H (K(G,˜ 1))+) and ∗ 2 ∗ 2 j (H (K(G,˜ 1))−) × j (H (K(G,˜ 1))−) are also trivial. By Poincare duality, the cup product H2(X) × H2(X) → H4(X) ∼= R is a non-singular bilinear form. Now we state two lemmas. Lemma 5.2. The restrictions of the cup product of H∗(X˜) on both 2 2 2 2 H (X˜)+ × H (X˜)+ and H (X˜)− × H (X˜)− are non-degenerate.

2 2 Proof. For any non-zero elements α ∈ H (X˜)+ and β ∈ H (X˜)−, then ∗ ∗ τX (α)= α and τX (β)= −β, hence ∗ τX (α ∪ β)= −α ∪ β.

However since τX is orientation preserving, we have ∗ τX (α ∪ β)= α ∪ β which implies that α ∪ β = 0. Since the cup product H2(X˜)×H2(X˜) → H4(X˜) ∼= R is a non-singular 2 bilinear form, for any nonzero α ∈ H (X˜)+, there must be an non-zero 2 element γ ∈ H (X˜)+ such that γ ∪ α =6 0. So the restriction of the cup ∗ 2 2 product of H (X˜) on H (X˜)+ × H (X˜)+ is non-degenerate. The same 2 argument works for the case H (X˜)−.

The next one is well-known. Lemma 5.3. Let V be a vector space of dimension n over a ﬁeld F and let q be a non-degenerated quadratic form on V . If q vanishes on a sub-space W of dimension m, then n ≥ 2m.

Proof. Choose a basis of v1, ..., vm of the W , then extend it to a basis v1, ..., vm, vm+1, ..., vn of V , then q has representative matrix

0m×m Bm×(n−m) A = T B C n×n For an n × n matrix with nonzero determinant, if its upper left m × m sub-matrix is 0, then n ≥ 2m must hold.

Since j∗ : H2(K(G,˜ 1)) → H2(X˜) is injective, by Lemma 5.2 and Lemma 5.3 we have 2 ∗ 2 2 dim H (X˜)+ ≥ 2 dim j (H (K(G,˜ 1))+) = 2 dim H (K(G,˜ 1))+ =2b2(G) EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS17 and 2 2 dim H (X˜)− ≥ 2 dim H (K(G,˜ 1))− =2b2(G˜) − 2b2(G). The above inequalities imply that 2 2 dim H (X˜)+ =2b2(G)+∆+, dim H (X˜)− =2b2(G˜)−2b2(G)+∆− (5.4) for some non-negative integers ∆+, ∆−. So we have ∗ 2 ˜ 2 ˜ ˜ tr(τX : H (X) → H (X))=4b2(G) − 2b2(G)+(∆+ − ∆−) (5.5).

Since τX : X˜ → X˜ has no ﬁxed-point, by the Lefschetz ﬁxed-point theorem and equations (5.2), (5.3), (5.5), we have

4 i ∗ i ˜ i ˜ 0= (−1) · tr(τX : H (X) → H (X)) Xi=0

= 1 − (2b1(G) − b1(G˜))+(4b2(G) − 2b2(G˜)+(∆+ − ∆−)) − (2b1(G) − b1(G˜))+1

= 2 − 4(b1(G) − b2(G))+2(b1(G˜) − b2(G˜))+(∆+ − ∆−). Thus

∆+ − ∆− = 4(b1(G) − b2(G)) − 2(b1(G˜) − b2(G˜)) − 2 (5.6).

By equation (5.1), we have

1 2 2 χ(X)=1 − b (G˜)+ (dim H (X˜) + dim H (X˜)−) 1 2 + 1 = 1 − b (G˜)+ b (G˜)+ (∆ + ∆−) by (5.4) 1 2 2 + 1 ≥ 1 − b (G˜)+ b (G˜)+ |∆ − ∆−| 1 2 2 +

= 1 − b1(G˜)+ b2(G˜)+ |2(b1(G) − b2(G)) − (b1(G˜) − b2(G˜)) − 1| by (5.6).

Now we are ready to prove the lower bound of χ4(π) in Theorem 1.2. The case of orientable 3-manifolds will be covered in Section 6, so it suﬃces to prove the non-orientable 3-manifold case. Proposition 5.4. Suppose M is a non-orientable compact 3-manifold with prime decomposition described as in (1.1) and (i)-(iv). Let p and q be the number of prime factors of M in (iii) and (iv) respectively. If 2 each Mi in (i) and each Ql in (iii) contains no two-sided RP , then

χ4(π1(M)) ≥ 2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M). 18 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

Proof. We need a ﬁner description of the prime decomposition of M: a co∞ b cn∞ c cf d bo M = (#h=1Mh )#(#i=1Mi )#(#j=1Mj )#(#k=1Mk )# e bn f S2×S1 g nf (#l=1Ml )#(#m=1Mm )#(#n=1Mn ). Here the summands satisfy the following conditions:

co∞ (1) Each Mh is a closed orientable prime 3-manifold with |π1| = ∞ and is not an S2-bundle. cn∞ (2) Each Mi is a closed non-orientable prime 3-manifold with 2 2 |π1| = ∞ and is not an S - or RP -bundle. cf (3) Each Mj is a closed prime 3-manifold with |π1| < ∞ (which must be orientable). bo (4) Each Mk is an orientable prime 3-manifold with boundary. bn (5) Each Ml is a non-orientable prime 3-manifold with boundary. S2×S1 2 1 (6) Each Mm is homeomorphic to S × S . nf 2 2 1 (7) Each Mn is a non-orientable S - or RP -bundle over S . cn∞ bn Moreover, each Mi in (2) and each Ml in (5) contains no two-sided RP 2. Since M is non-orientable, we must have b + e + g ≥ 1. We also have d + e = p, f + g = q (5.7).

cf S2×S1 nf Let G = π1(M). Since b1(Mj ) = 0 and b1(Mm ) = b1(Mn ) = 1, we have a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn b1(G)= b1(Mh )+ b1(Mi )+ b1(Mk )+ b1(Ml )+f+g (5.8). Xh=1 Xi=1 Xk=1 Xl=1 By Proposition 3.1 (2), we have a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn b2(G)= b2(Mh )+ b2(Mi )+ b2(Mk )+ b2(Ml ) (5.9). Xh=1 Xi=1 Xk=1 Xl=1 Let M˜ be the orientable double cover of M, then we have ˜ a co∞ #2 b ˜ cn∞ c cf #2 d bo #2 M = (#h=1Mh ) #(#i=1Mi )#(#j=1Mj ) #(#k=1Mk ) # e ˜ bn f S2×S1 #2 g ˜ nf b+e+g−1 2 1 (#l=1Ml )#(#m=1Mm ) #(#n=1Mn )#(# S × S ). For any involved manifold N in the above, N #2 denotes N#N. For each involved non-orientable N, N˜ denotes its orientable double cover, then N˜ must be prime since either N contains no two-sided RP 2 (by Lemma 2.3) or N˜ = S2 × S1. When taking the orientable double cover M˜ of M, each orientable prime summand lifts to two copies of the same summand, and each non-orientable prime summand lifts to one copy EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS19 of its orientable double cover. There are (a + b + c + d + e + f + g − 1) decomposition spheres in the prime decomposition of M, and they lift two 2(a + b + c + d + e + f + g − 1) decomposition spheres in M˜ . In the above expression of M˜ , other than the last a few terms of S2 × S1, there are (2a + b +2c +2d + e +2f + g) pieces, so there must be

2(a+b+c+d+e+f +g−1)−(2a+b+2c+2d+e+2f +g−1) = b+e+g−1 extra copies of S2 × S1 in the prime decomposition of M˜ .

Let G˜ = π1(M˜ ), then it is an index-2 subgroup of G, and β4(G˜)=0 holds by Proposition 3.1 (1). Then we have

a b d ˜ co∞ ˜ cn∞ bo b1(G)=2 b1(Mh )+ b1(Mi )+2 b1(Mk ) Xh=1 Xi=1 Xk=1 e ˜ bn + b1(Ml )+ b + e +2f +2g − 1 (5.10). Xl=1 By Proposition 3.1 (2), we have

a b d e ˜ co∞ ˜ cn∞ bo ˜ bn b2(G)=2 b2(Mh )+ b2(Mi )+2 b2(Mk )+ b2(Ml ) (5.11). Xh=1 Xi=1 Xk=1 Xl=1

For any compact connected 3-manifold N, we denote b(N)= b2(N) − b1(N). Since χ(N)= b0(N) − b1(N)+ b2(N) − b3(N), we have χ(∂N) b(N)= b (N) − b (N)= χ(N) − b (N)+ b (N)= − 1+ b (N). 2 1 0 3 2 3 Then b(N) can be computed as in the following cases:

• If N is closed orientable, then b(N) = 0. • If N is closed non-orientable, then b(N)= −1. χ(∂N) • If N has boundary, then b(N)= 2 − 1. We also have

d e bo bn χ(∂M)= χ(∂Mk )+ χ(∂Me ), Xk=1 Xl=1 d e ˜ bo ˜ bn χ(∂M)=2 χ(∂Mk )+ χ(∂Me ) (5.12). Xk=1 Xl=1 20 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

Now we apply Proposition 5.1 to get

χ4(G) ≥ 1 − b1(G˜)+ b2(G˜)+ 2(b1(G) − b2(G)) − (b1(G˜) − b2(G˜)) − 1

a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn = 1 − (2 b1(Mh )+ b1(M˜ i )+2 b1(Mk )+ b1(M˜ l )+ b + e +2f +2g − 1) hX=1 Xi=1 Xk=1 Xl=1 a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn + (2 b2(Mh )+ b2(M˜ i )+2 b2(Mk )+ b2(M˜ l )) hX=1 Xi=1 Xk=1 Xl=1 a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn + 2( b1(Mh )+ b1(Mi )+ b1(Mk )+ b1(Ml )+ f + g) h=1 i=1 k=1 l=1 X X X X a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn − 2( b2(Mh )+ b2(Mi )+ b2(Mk )+ b2(Ml )) hX=1 Xi=1 kX=1 Xl=1 a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn − (2 b1(Mh )+ b1(M˜ i )+2 b1(Mk )+ b1(M˜ l )+ b + e +2f +2g − 1) hX=1 Xi=1 Xk=1 Xl=1 a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn + (2 b2(Mh )+ b2(M˜ i )+2 b2(Mk )+ b2(M˜ l )) − 1 h=1 i=1 k=1 l=1 X X X X a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn =1+2 b(Mh )+ b(M˜ i )+2 b(Mk )+ b(M˜ l ) − (b + e +2f +2g − 1) hX=1 Xi=1 Xk=1 Xl=1 a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn + − 2 b(Mh ) − 2 b(Mi ) − 2 b(Mk ) − 2 b(Ml ) h=1 i=1 k=1 l=1 X X X X a b d e co∞ cn∞ bo bn +2 b(Mh )+ b(M˜ i )+2 b(Mk )+ b(M˜ l ) − b − e i=1 hX=1 X Xk=1 Xl=1 a b d e χ(∂M bo) χ(∂M˜ bn) =1+2 0+ 0+2 ( k − 1) + ( l − 1) − (b + e +2f +2g − 1) 2 2 hX=1 Xi=1 Xk=1 Xl=1 a b d e χ(∂M bo) χ(∂M bn) + − 2 0 − 2 (−1) − 2 ( k − 1) − 2 ( l − 1) h=1 i=1 k=1 2 l=1 2 X X X X a b d e χ(∂M bo) χ(∂M˜ bn) +2 0+ 0+2 ( k − 1)+ ( l − 1) − b − e h=1 i=1 k=1 2 l=1 2 X X X X χ(∂M˜ ) χ(∂M˜ ) =2+ − (b +2d +2e +2f +2g)+ − χ(∂M)+ + b 2 2

=2+ χ(∂M) − (b +2d +2e +2f +2g)+ | b| =2+ χ(∂M) − 2(d + e) − 2(f + g) =2+ χ(∂M) − 2(p + q).

Here the second equation follows from equations (5.8), (5.9), (5.10), (5.11). The third equation follows from the deﬁnition of b(N). The EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS21 fourth equation follows from the computations of b(N). The ﬁfth equation follows from equation (5.12). The last equation follows from equation (5.7).

Remark 5.5. In the proof of Proposition 5.4, if we allow some Mi 2 in (i) or some Ql in (iii) contains two-sided RP , then we also get a lower bound of χ4(π), which depends on the number of two-sided 2 RP and does not match the upper bound of χ4(π) in Section 4. The computation in this case is more complicated and we omit it.

Proof of Theorem 1.2. Let M be a compact 3-manifold with prime decomposition described as in (1.1) and (i)-(iv), such that any prime factor that is not an RP 2-bundle does not contain 2-sided RP 2. Then we have

2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M) ≤ χ4(M) ≤ 2 − (p + q)+ χ(∂M), and the result follows. Here the ﬁrst and second inequalities follow from Propositions 5.4 and 4.1 respectively.

6. p(π)= χ4(π) for 3-manifolds without closed non-orientable prime factor

The proof of Theorem 1.3 follows from Proposition 4.1, Proposition 3.1 and the next two propositions.

Proposition 6.1. [Ko1, Theorem 4.2] If β4(π)=0, then

p(π) ≥ 2 − 2β1(π)+2β2(π). Proposition 6.2. Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold and M = P #Q#S satisfying the following.

m n (i) P = (#i=1Mi)#(#j=1Nj), such that each Mi is a closed prime 3- 2 2 manifold with |π1(Mi)| = ∞ and not an S - or RP -bundle over 1 S , and the number of non-orientable Mi is k ≥ 0; each Nj is a closed prime 3-manifold with ﬁnite fundamental group; p (ii) Q = #l=1Ql and each Ql is a prime 3-manifold with non-empty ∂Ql; q 2 2 (iii) S = #e=1Se and each Si is homeomorphic to an S - or RP bundle over S1.

Let π = π1(M), then

2 − 2β1(π)+2β2(π)=2 − 2(k + p + q)+ χ(∂M). 22 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

Proof. Since each Nj is closed and orientable, and the number of non- orientable Mi is k ≥ 0, the number of non-orientable prime factor in P is k ≥ 0. By M-V sequence we have

m β2(P ) = Σi=1β2(Mi)+ δk, (6.1) where δk is 0 if k = 0, and is k − 1 if k> 0. So rewrite Proposition 3.1(2)

m p β2(K(π, 1)) = Σi=1β2(Mi) + Σl=1β2(Ql). as the following formula

p β2(K(π, 1)) + δk = β2(P ) + Σl=1β2(Ql) (6.2).

Still by Euler’s formula, for any compact 3-manifold Y , we have

χ(Y )=1 − β1(Y )+ β2(Y ) − β3(Y ) (6.3).

When a 3-manifold Y has non-empty boundary, we have β3(Y )=0 and 2χ(Y ) = χ(∂Y ). Applying these facts to Ql and (6.3), we can rewrite (6.3) as

χ(∂Ql)=2 − 2β1(Ql)+2β2(Ql) (6.4).

When Y is a closed 3-manifold, we have χ(Y ) = 0, and moreover 0 ≤ β3(Y ) ≤ 1 (which equals 1 if and only if Y is orientable). Applying these facts to P and (6.4), we can rewrite (6.3) as

1 − β1(P )+ β2(P ) − β3(P )=0 (6.5).

Note that M is the connected sum of P and Qi and Si, so

p q β1(π)= β1(M)= β1(P ) + Σl=1β1(Ql) + Σe=1β1(Se)

p = β1(P ) + Σl=1β1(Ql)+ q (6.6). EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS23

Now we have,

2 − 2β1(π)+2β2(π) p = 2 − 2(β1(P ) + Σl=1β1(Ql)+ q)+2β2(π) p = − 2q + (2 − 2β1(P )) − Σl=12β1(Ql)+2β2(π) p = − 2q + (2β3(P ) − 2β2(P ))+Σl=1(χ(∂Ql) − 2 − 2β2(Ql))+2β2(π) p p = − 2(p + q)+2β3(P ) − 2β2(P ) − 2Σl=1β2(Ql) + Σl=1χ(∂Ql)+2β2(π) p = − 2(p + q)+2β3(P ) − 2β2(P ) − 2Σl=1β2(Ql)+ χ(∂M)+2β2(π) p = − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M)+2β3(P ) − 2(β2(P ) + Σl=1β2(Ql))+2β2(π)

= − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M)+2β3(P ) − 2(β2(K(π1, 1)) + δk)+2β2(π)

= − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M)+2(β3(P ) − δk).

Here the ﬁrst equation follows from equation (6.6), the third equation follows from equations (6.4) and (6.5), the ﬁfth equation follows from p Σl=1χ(∂Ql)= χ(∂M), and the seventh equation follows from (6.2).

If k = 0, then β3(P ) = 1 (since P is orientable) and δk = 0; If k > 0, then β3(P ) = 0 (since P is non-orientable), and δk = k − 1. So in both cases we have β3(P ) − δk =1 − k. Then we have

2 − 2β1(π)+2β2(π)=2 − 2(k + p + q)+ χ(∂M) (6.7).

Proof of Theorem 1.3. Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold with prime decomposition described as in (1.1) and (i)-(iv), and the number of non-orientable Mi is k ≥ 0. Let π = π1(M). Then we have

2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M) ≥ χ4(π) ≥ p(π)

≥ 2 − 2β1(π)+2β2(π)=2 − 2(k + p + q)+ χ(∂M). Here the ﬁrst inequality follows from Proposition 4.1, the second inequality follows from (1.0), the third inequality follows from from Propo- sition 3.1 and Proposition 6.1, and the last equality follows from Propo- sition 6.2. When k = 0, we get

χ4(π)= p(π)=2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M). 24 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

∗ 7. q (π)= χ4(π) for 3-manifold groups containing no 2-torsions

In this section, we work on (co)homology groups and betti numbers with Z2-coeﬃcients. The proof of Theorem 1.4 follows from Proposition 4.1, Corollary 3.3 and the next two propositions. Proposition 7.1. Let M be a compact 3-manifold whose fundamental group π containing no 2-torsions, and let X be a closed 4-manifold with π1(X)= π. Then we have

β2(X,Z2) ≥ 2β2(K(π, 1),Z2).

Proof. Since M is a compact 3-manifold whose fundamental group π 4 contains no 2-torsions, H (K(π, 1); Z2) is trivial according to Corollary 3.3 (1). So the cup product 2 2 4 H (K(π, 1),Z2) × H (K(π, 1),Z2) → H (K(π, 1),Z2) is trivial. Denote m = β2(K(π, 1),Z2) and n = β2(X,Z2). ∼ Since X is a 4-manifold with π1(X) = π1(M), we can construct a K(π, 1) from X by adding n-cells with n ≥ 3. So we have an inclu- sion i : X → K(π, 1) such that the induced map i∗ : H2(X,Z2) → H2(K(π, 1),Z2) is surjective. Then by algebraic duality, the induced ∗ 2 2 map i : H (K(π, 1),Z2) → H (X,Z2) is injective. ∗ 2 2 Then i (H (K(π, 1),Z2)) ⊂ H (X,Z2) is an m-dimensional subspace of an n-dimensional space, and the restriction of the cup product of ∗ H (X,Z2) on this subspace is trivial. By Poincare duality, 2 2 4 ∼ H (X,Z2) × H (X,Z2) → H (X,Z2) = Z2 is a non-singular bilinear form.

By Lemma 5.3, we must have β2(X,Z2) ≥ 2β2(K(π, 1),Z2).

Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold such that π1(M) contains no 2- torsions. Then we can rewrite M as M = P #Q#S (7.0) satisfying the following.

m n (i) P = (#i=1Mi)#(#j=1Nj), each Mi is a closed aspherical 3-manifold, and each Nj is a lens space with odd order group; p (ii) Q = #l=1Ql, each Ql is an aspherical 3-manifold with ∂Ql =6 ∅; q 2 1 (iii) S = #e=1Se, each Si is homeomorphic to an S -bundle over S . EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS25

Proposition 7.2. Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold such that π1(M) contains no 2-torsions, and M = P #Q#S satisfying (i)-(iii). Let π = π1(M), then q∗(π) ≥ 2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M).

∼ Proof. Suppose X is a closed 4-manifold such that π1(X) = π1(M). By M-V sequence we have m β2(P,Z2) = Σi=1β2(Mi,Z2), (7.1)

So rewrite Corollary 3.3 (2) m p β2(K(π, 1),Z2) = Σi=1β2(Mi,Z2) + Σl=1β2(Ql,Z2). as the following formula p β2(K(π, 1),Z2)= β2(P,Z2) + Σj=1β2(Qj,Z2) (7.2).

The formulas (6.3)–(6.6) still hold if we replace R-coefficient by Z2- coefficient. In the remainder of this proof, we always use Z2-coefficient and we omit Z2. We will still call those formulas by (6.3)–(6.6).

Since π1(X)= π1(M), we have β1(X)= β1(M) and

χ(X)=2 − 2β1(X)+ β2(X)=2 − 2β1(M)+ β2(X) (7.3).

We will prove χ(X) ≥ 2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M). Now we have p χ(X)=2 − 2(β1(P ) + Σl=1β1(Ql)+ q)+ β2(X) p = −2q + (2 − 2β1(P )) − Σl=12β1(Ql)+ β2(X) p = −2q + (2 − 2β2(P ))+Σl=1(χ(∂Ql) − 2 − 2β2(Ql)) + β2(X) p p = −2(p + q)+2 − 2β2(P ) − 2Σl=1β2(Ql) + Σl=1χ(∂Ql)+ β2(X) p = −2(p + q)+2 − 2β2(P ) − 2Σl=1β2(Ql)+ χ(∂M)+ β2(X) p = −2(p + q)+ χ(∂M)+2 − 2(β2(P ) + Σl=1β2(Ql)) + β2(X)

= −2(p + q)+ χ(∂M)+2 − 2β2(K(π1, 1) + β2(X)

= −2(p + q)+ χ(∂M)+2+(β2(X) − 2β2(K(π1, 1))). Here the ﬁrst equation follows from equations (7.3) and (6.6), the third equation follows from equations (6.4) and (6.5), the ﬁfth equation fol- p lows from Σi=1χ(∂Qi)= χ(∂M), and the seventh equation follows from (7.2). 26 HONGBINSUNANDZHONGZIWANG

By Proposition 7.1, β2(X) ≥ 2β2(K(π, 1)) holds. So we have χ(X) ≥ 2 − 2(q + p)+ χ(∂M). We ﬁnished the proof of Proposition 7.2.

Proof of Theorem 1.4. Suppose M is a compact 3-manifold with prime decomposition described as in (1.1) and (i)-(iv) and π = π1(M) contains no 2-torsion. Then we have ∗ 2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M) ≥ χ4(π) ≥ q (π) ≥ 2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M). Here the first inequality follows from Proposition 4.1, the second inequality follows from (1.0), and the third inequality follows from from Proposition 7.2. So we get ∗ χ4(π)= q (π)=2 − 2(p + q)+ χ(∂M). . Remark 7.3. (1) The proofs of Proposition 6.2 and Proposition 7.2 look similar, but different in fact: Firstly, Proposition 6.2 proves an equality and Proposition 7.2 proves an inequality. More substantially, equation (7.1) claims the additivity of Z2-coefficient β2 under connected sum, and equation (6.1) claims that this not true in Z-coefficient. This difference matches the different conditions posed in Theorems 1.3 and 1.4.

(2) If we assume that X is a PD4 complex, then Proposition 7.2 and the equation (7.3) still hold. So Theorem 1.4 still hold when q∗ is defined for PD4 complexes. (3) Our assumption that M has no S2 boundary component does not affect the correctness of Theorems 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 for 3-manifolds with S2 boundary components. If we cap off an S2 boundary component of M to get M ′, then we have M = M ′#B3. This B3 prime factor makes p increase by 1 and makes χ(∂M) increase by 2 in formulas (1.2) (1.3) (1.4), so they cancel with each other.

Acknowledgments. We thank Professor Jonathan Hillman, Professor Dieter Kotchick, Professor Yang Su and Professor Shicheng Wang for their comments on literatures and known results in this topic.

References [AH] A. Adem, I. Hambleton, Minimal Euler characteristics for even- dimensional manifolds with ﬁnite fundamental group, preprint 2021, https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.00703. EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF 4-MANIFOLDS WITH 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS27

[BK] S. Baldridge and P. Kirk, On symplectic 4-manifolds with prescribed fundamental group, Commentarii Math. Helv. 82 (2007) 845-875. [Ec] B. Eckmann, 4-manifolds, group invariants, and l2-Betti numbers. En- seign. Math. (2) 43 (1997), no. 3-4, 271-279. [Ha1] A. Hatcher, Algebraic topology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002. [Ha2] A. Hatcher, Notes on basic 3-manifold topology. http://pi.math.cornell.edu/~hatcher/. [HW] J. Hausmann, S. Weinberger, Caractéristiques d’Euler et groupes fonda- mentaux des varietes de dimension 4. (French) [Euler characteristics and fundamental groups of 4-manifolds] Comment. Math. Helv. 60 (1985), no. 1, 139-144. [He] J. Hempel, 3-manifolds, Princeton University Press and University of Tokyo Press, 1976. [Hi] J. A. Hillman, Four-manifolds, geometries and knots. Geometry & Topol- ogy Monographs, 5. Geometry & Topology Publications, Coventry, 2002 [JK] F. Johnson, D. Kotschick, On the signature and Euler characteristic of certain four-manifolds. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 114 (1993), no. 3, 431-437. [KLPT] D. Kasprowski, M. Land, M. Powell, P. Teichner, Stable classification of 4-manifolds with 3-manifold fundamental groups. J. Topol. 10 (2017), no. 3, 827-881. [Kir] R. C. Kirby, The Topology of 4-Manifolds, Lecture Notes in Math. 1374, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1990). [KL] P. Kirk, C. Livingston, The geography problem for 4-manifolds with speci- fied fundamental group. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 361 (2009), no. 8, 4091- 4124. [Ko1] D. Kotschick, Four-manifold invariants of finitely presentable groups. Topology, geometry and field theory, 89–99, World Sci. Publ., River Edge, NJ, 1994. [Ko2] D. Kotschick, Minimizing Euler characteristics of symplectic four- manifolds. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 134 (10) (2006), 3081-3083 [MSY] W. Meeks, L. Simon, S.T. Yau, Embedded minimal surfaces, exotic spheres, and manifolds with positive Ricci curvature. Ann. of Math. (2) 116 (1982), no. 3, 621 - 659. [We] C. Weibel, An introduction to homological algebra. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 38. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994. xiv+450 pp.

Department of Mathematics, Rutgers University - New Brunswick, Hill Center, Busch Campus, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA Email address: [email protected]

Department of Mathematics Science, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100080, CHINA Email address: [email protected]