DOCSLIB.ORG

The Polygon Representation of Three Dimensional Gravitation and Its Global Properties

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Polygon Representation of Three Dimensional Gravitation and Its Global Properties The polygon representation of three dimensional gravitation and its global properties The polygon representation of three dimensional gravitation and its global properties De polygoonrepresentatie van de zwaartekracht-theorie in drie dimensies en haar globale eigenschappen met een samenvatting in het Nederlands Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit Utrecht, op gezag van de Rector Magnificus, Prof. dr. W. H. Gispen, ingevolge het besluit van het College voor Promoties in het openbaar te verdedigen op maandag 18 april 2005 des middags te 14.30 uur door Zoltan´ Kad´ ar´ geboren op 26 oktober 1976 te Boedapest, Hongarije¨ Promotor: Prof. dr. G. ’t Hooft Copromotor: dr. R. Loll Instituut voor Theoretische Fysica en Spinoza Instituut Universiteit Utrecht ISBN 90-393-2698-3 Contents Preface vii 1Introductionto21gravity 1 1.1Firstorderformalism...................... 4 1.2Zerocosmologicalconstant.................. 8 1.3 Phase space reduction: second order formalism . 12 1.4Phasespacereduction:firstorderformalism......... 17 1.5Pointparticles.......................... 19 2 Polygon model 23 2.1Geometricstructures...................... 25 2.2Particles............................. 28 2.3Timeslicing,phasespace................... 30 2.4Dynamics............................ 35 2.5Vertexconditions........................ 38 2.6Thedualgraph......................... 40 2.7 One polygon tessellation OPT ................ 43 2.8Uniformizingsurfacewithoutparticles............ 46 2.8.1PropertiesofanOPT.................. 48 2.8.2Geodesicpolygon.................... 49 2.8.3TheZVCcoordinates.................. 50 2.8.4Theexchangetransition................ 51 2.8.5Lorentztransformation................. 51 2.8.6Thecomplexconstraint................ 53 2.8.7OPTwithaconcaveangle............... 56 2.8.8Multi-polygontessellation............... 57 2.9Uniformizingsurfacewithparticles.............. 59 2.10Discussion............................ 62 2.11Cosmologicalsingularities................... 65 v Contents 3 Polygon model from first order gravity 69 3.1Reductiontofinitedegreesoffreedom............ 70 3.2Gaugefixingandsymplecticreduction............ 75 3.3Statusofquantization..................... 79 Appendix 85 A.1Modelsofhyperbolicspace.................. 85 A.2 Classification of globally hyperbolic spacetimes . 86 A.3 Boost parameters from Teichmullerspace..........¨ 89 A.4Thecomplexconstraint.................... 90 A.5Eliminatingpolygonsbygauge-fixing............. 93 Bibliography 96 Samenvatting 101 Curriculum Vitae 103 vi Preface There are four fundamental interactions in nature. The electromagnetic force describes not only electric and magnetic fields, but also optical phe- nomena and other forms of radiation. The strong force, active in atomic nuclei, keeps the quarks together in protons and neutrons. Finally, the weak force is responsible for phenomena such as the beta decay of neutron into a proton while emitting an electron and a neutrino in some radioactive nuclei. These first three forces dominate small scales from millimeters to 10−16 millimeters. Together they describe the dynamical features of the so-called Standard Model. This theory requires a full use of quantum mechanics, which is very different from classical physics, like Newtonian mechanics, Maxwell’s electromagnetism or general relativity. For example, it is an es- sential feature of quantum mechanics, that simultaneous measurement on all observables of a system cannot be made with arbitrary precision, even in principle. A classical theory is deterministic: knowing all initial condi- tionsofasystemenablesustopredictitsstateinalatertimeexactly.A quantum theory is non-deterministic, it predicts probabilities for the state of a system at a later time. For the fourth force, that of gravitation, we only have a classical the- ory called General Relativity. General relativity is an extremely success- ful model of gravitation in four dimensions agreeing with all experimental data from cosmological distances to millimeter scales. So there is a classical theory describing gravitation on macroscopic scales and a quantum theory describing matter on microscopic scales. No deviations from their predic- tions have ever been observed, however, this situation cannot be logically consistent. There is one scale, called the Planck length, where effects com- ing from all theories are expected to be important. At this scale all forces should act together and therefore be in harmony with one another. It has been a long-standing open issue to unify the standard model and general relativity or to find the quantum theory of gravitation, which would predict new physics at that scale. The value of the Planck length is 10−32 millime- vii Preface ter, which is 16 orders of magnitude smaller than the best resolution we can achieve in modern particle physics, where large underground particle accelerators are being used to probe small scales using particles with the highest available energy. The Planck regime is therefore inaccessible using today’s technology. It may seem that we do not need a quantum gravity theory and there is no experimental evidence for its existence. However, we do have theoretical evidence that such a theory should exist. In quantum mechanics the position x and the momentum p of a particle cannot be measured with arbitrary precision. The more accurately its posi- tion is determined, the less precise our knowledge is about its momentum and vice versa. The uncertainty around a sharp, exact value of the location oftheparticleis∆x and the uncertainty of its momentum is ∆p. Accord- ing to quantum mechanics the product ∆x · ∆p cannot be smaller then ħ, a fundamental constant in quantum mechanics. On macroscopic scales it is a tiny number: for an object of weight 1 kg moving with 1 meter/s, the uncertainty is around 10−34 meter. Classical general relativity nevertheless can be used to measure both x and p precisely which would be a contradic- tion. This indicates that there is an inconsistency of the combined theory of quantum mechanics of matter and classical general relativity as a funda- mental theory of nature. There has to be a quantum gravity theory, which reduces to general relativity on macroscopic scales. Among others it should explain the formation and evaporation of black holes and the physics of the early universe. Physicists have been trying to construct quantum gravity since the 60’s. The situation is a bit different from the birth of fundamental theories of physics in the last couple of centuries. At that time, modifications about the current view about nature were forced upon us by numerous experimental observations. Now, for quantum gravity, the only guiding principle in the construction of the theory is that it must reduce to general relativity in the macroscopic regime. We can guess a great deal about features of quantum gravity, but the full theory itself has not yet been not found. To summarize the fundamental difficulty: the conventional quantized particle theories are formulated in a given spacetime, whereas in general relativity spacetime is an outcome of the dynamics of the theory. In general relativity, spacetime is determined or created by the type and the distribution of matter. How to reconcile these two fundamentally different approaches is a deep and fundamental problem. In modern science, if a problem turns out to be too difficult to solve, one can try to solve a simpler model of similar nature, with the intention to generalize it to the original later. In this thesis, we have chosen to re- duce the dimensionality of spacetime from four to three. That is to say, viii Preface Glue B B A O A O the number of space dimensions went from three to two. We studied grav- itating point-like particles moving in two space dimensions. For example, we have a sheet of paper, or a surface, like the surface of the Earth or a donut. The point-like particles have no size, but they have masses so they interact gravitationally. There are no such objects in the four dimensional world, since, if we try to “squeeze” matter in a too small region, it becomes a black hole. A black hole, however, is an extended object with a horizon separating its “inside” from the rest of the world. In other words, black holes have a finite size. This, however, cannot happen in three dimensions, where particles can be truly point-like. Furthermore, what is peculiar about particles living in three dimen- sions, is that they do not really feel each other in a way planets do in nature, they follow straight lines. Both space and time surrounding a point particle in three dimensions are locally flat. However, a particle creates a “cone” around itself. Consequently, the locally straight trajectory of a parti- cle may seem to be bent when regarded from a distance. This phenomenon is illustrated in the figure on the top of this page. The right side of the figure can be reproduced from the left with scissors and glue as indicated. We are at point O in the “two dimensional sea” and look to the left towards asmallshipA. There is a heavy tanker at point B. We see that the ship is goingstraightandweseeitfrombehind,butlookingtotherightwesee the front of the ship far away coming towards us! This was an illustration of the effect caused by a point-like massive particle B when Einstein’s general relativity is applied in three dimensions. An important motivation for studying three dimensional quantum grav- ity is that this theory is classically soluble. Quantization of classical systems has been studied and a general experience
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Analytic Vortex Solutions on Compact Hyperbolic Surfaces
    Analytic vortex solutions on compact hyperbolic surfaces Rafael Maldonado∗ and Nicholas S. Mantony Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge CB3 0WA, U.K. August 27, 2018 Abstract We construct, for the first time, Abelian-Higgs vortices on certain compact surfaces of constant negative curvature. Such surfaces are represented by a tessellation of the hyperbolic plane by regular polygons. The Higgs field is given implicitly in terms of Schwarz triangle functions and analytic solutions are available for certain highly symmetric configurations. 1 Introduction Consider the Abelian-Higgs field theory on a background surface M with metric ds2 = Ω(x; y)(dx2+dy2). At critical coupling the static energy functional satisfies a Bogomolny bound 2 1 Z B Ω 2 E = + jD Φj2 + 1 − jΦj2 dxdy ≥ πN; (1) 2 2Ω i 2 where the topological invariant N (the `vortex number') is the number of zeros of Φ counted with multiplicity [1]. In the notation of [2] we have taken e2 = τ = 1. Equality in (1) is attained when the fields satisfy the Bogomolny vortex equations, which are obtained by completing the square in (1). In complex coordinates z = x + iy these are 2 Dz¯Φ = 0;B = Ω (1 − jΦj ): (2) This set of equations has smooth vortex solutions. As we explain in section 2, analytical results are most readily obtained when M is hyperbolic, having constant negative cur- vature K = −1, a case which is of interest in its own right due to the relation between arXiv:1502.01990v1 [hep-th] 6 Feb 2015 hyperbolic vortices and SO(3)-invariant instantons, [3].
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Testing
    Animal Testing Adrian Dumitrescu∗ Evan Hilscher † Abstract an animal A. Let A′ be the animal such that there is a cube at every integer coordinate within the box, i.e., it A configuration of unit cubes in three dimensions with is a solid rectangular box containing the given animal. integer coordinates is called an animal if the boundary The algorithm is as follows: of their union is homeomorphic to a sphere. Shermer ′ discovered several animals from which no single cube 1. Transform A1 to A1 by addition only. ′ ′ may be removed such that the resulting configurations 2. Transform A1 to A2 . are also animals [6]. Here we obtain a dual result: we ′ give an example of an animal to which no cube may 3. Transform A2 to A2 by removal only. be added within its minimal bounding box such that ′ ′ It is easy to see that A1 can be transformed to A2 . the resulting configuration is also an animal. We also ′ We simply add or remove one layer of A1 , one cube O n present a ( )-time algorithm for determining whether at a time. The only question is, can any animal A be n a configuration of unit cubes is an animal. transformed to A′ by addition only? If the answer is yes, Keywords: Animal, polyomino, homeomorphic to a then the third step above is also feasible. As it turns sphere. out, the answer is no, thus our alternative algorithm is also infeasible. 1 Introduction Our results. In Section 2 we present a construction of an animal to which no cube may be added within its An animal is defined as a configuration of axis-aligned minimal bounding box such that the resulting collection unit cubes with integer coordinates in 3-space such of unit cubes is an animal.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Complexity of Perfect Matching in Bounded Genus Bipartite Graphs
    Space Complexity of Perfect Matching in Bounded Genus Bipartite Graphs Samir Datta1, Raghav Kulkarni2, Raghunath Tewari3, and N. Variyam Vinodchandran4 1 Chennai Mathematical Institute Chennai, India [email protected] 2 University of Chicago Chicago, USA [email protected] 3 University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, USA [email protected] 4 University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, USA [email protected] Abstract We investigate the space complexity of certain perfect matching problems over bipartite graphs embedded on surfaces of constant genus (orientable or non-orientable). We show that the prob- lems of deciding whether such graphs have (1) a perfect matching or not and (2) a unique perfect matching or not, are in the logspace complexity class SPL. Since SPL is contained in the logspace counting classes ⊕L (in fact in ModkL for all k ≥ 2), C=L, and PL, our upper bound places the above-mentioned matching problems in these counting classes as well. We also show that the search version, computing a perfect matching, for this class of graphs is in FLSPL. Our results extend the same upper bounds for these problems over bipartite planar graphs known earlier. As our main technical result, we design a logspace computable and polynomially bounded weight function which isolates a minimum weight perfect matching in bipartite graphs embedded on surfaces of constant genus. We use results from algebraic topology for proving the correctness of the weight function. 1998 ACM Subject Classification Computational Complexity Keywords and phrases perfect matching, bounded genus graphs, isolation problem Digital Object Identifier 10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2011.579 1 Introduction The perfect matching problem and its variations are one of the most well-studied prob- lems in theoretical computer science.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fundamental Polygon 3 3. Method Two: Sewing Handles and Mobius Strips 13 Acknowledgments 18 References 18
    THE CLASSIFICATION OF SURFACES CASEY BREEN Abstract. The sphere, the torus, and the projective plane are all examples of surfaces, or topological 2-manifolds. An important result in topology, known as the classification theorem, is that any surface is a connected sum of the above examples. This paper will introduce these basic surfaces and provide two different proofs of the classification theorem. While concepts like triangulation will be fundamental to both, the first method relies on representing surfaces as the quotient space obtained by pasting edges of a polygon together, while the second builds surfaces by attaching handles and Mobius strips to a sphere. Contents 1. Preliminaries 1 2. Method One: the Fundamental Polygon 3 3. Method Two: Sewing Handles and Mobius Strips 13 Acknowledgments 18 References 18 1. Preliminaries Definition 1.1. A topological space is Hausdorff if for all x1; x2 2 X, there exist disjoint neighborhoods U1 3 x1;U2 3 x2. Definition 1.2. A basis, B for a topology, τ on X is a collection of open sets in τ such that every open set in τ can be written as a union of elements in B. Definition 1.3. A surface is a Hausdorff space with a countable basis, for which each point has a neighborhood that is homeomorphic to an open subset of R2. This paper will focus on compact connected surfaces, which we refer to simply as surfaces. Below are some examples of surfaces.1 The first two are the sphere and torus, respectively. The subsequent sequences of images illustrate the construction of the Klein bottle and the projective plane.
    [Show full text]
  • GENERIC DIRICHLET POLYGONS and the MODULAR GROUP by A
    GENERIC DIRICHLET POLYGONS AND THE MODULAR GROUP by A. M. MACBEATH Dedicated to Robert Rankin, teacher, colleague and friend on his seventieth birthday 1. Introduction. The concept of "marked polygon", made explicit in this paper, is implicit in all studies of the relationships between the edges and vertices of a fundamental polygon for Fuchsian group, as well as in the topology of surfaces. Once the matching of the edges under the action of the group is known, one can deduce purely combinatorially the distribution of the vertices into equivalence classes, or cycles. Knowing a little more, the order of the rotation group fixing a vertex in each cycle, we can write down a presentation for the group. It was recognized by Poincare that, when we have a polygon which is not a priori associated with a group, but when a matching of its edges is known and certain simple metric conditions, one of which he overlooked, are satisfied, then a group with the given polygon as fundamental polygon can be constructed. This is the celebrated Poincare Existence Theorem, for which a complete satisfactory proof has been published only as recently as 1971, independently by Maskit and de Rham ([6], [12]). If we choose a fixed base-point in the hyperbolic plane, then for every discrete isometry group F we can form the Dirichlet polygon by selecting only those points of the plane which are at minimal distance, among points in the same F-orbit, from p. We then have an edge-matching for this polygon. The distribution of groups in a given isomorph- ism class between the various combinatorially possible edge-matchings is of interest in itself and will probably help us to understand related questions such as the action of the Mapping Class Group on Teichmiiller space.
    [Show full text]
  • Examensarbete on Poincarés Uniformization Theorem Gabriel
    Examensarbete On Poincar´esUniformization Theorem Gabriel Bartolini LITH-MAT-EX–2006/14 On Poincar´esUniformization Theorem Applied Mathematics, Link¨opingsUniversitet Gabriel Bartolini LITH-MAT-EX–2006/14 Examensarbete: 20 p Level: D Supervisor: Milagros Izquierdo Barrios, Applied Mathematics, Link¨opingsUniversitet Examiner: Milagros Izquierdo Barrios, Applied Mathematics, Link¨opingsUniversitet Link¨oping: December 2006 Avdelning, Institution Datum Division, Department Date Matematiska Institutionen December 2006 581 83 LINKOPING¨ SWEDEN Spr˚ak Rapporttyp ISBN Language Report category ISRN Svenska/Swedish Licentiatavhandling x Engelska/English x Examensarbete LITH-MAT-EX–2006/14 C-uppsats Serietitel och serienummer ISSN D-uppsats Title of series, numbering Ovrig¨ rapport URL f¨orelektronisk version Titel On Poincar´esUniformization Theorem Title F¨orfattare Gabriel Bartolini Author Sammanfattning Abstract A compact Riemann surface can be realized as a quotient space U/Γ, where U is the sphere Σ, the euclidian plane C or the hyperbolic plane H and Γ is a discrete group of automorphisms. This induces a covering p : U → U/Γ. For each Γ acting on H we have a polygon P such that H is tesselated by P under the actions of the elements of Γ. On the other hand if P is a hyperbolic polygon with a side pairing satisfying certain conditions, then the group Γ generated by the side pairing is discrete and P tesselates H under Γ. Nyckelord Keyword Hyperbolic plane, automorphism, Fuchsian group, Riemann surface, cov- ering, branched covering, orbifold, uniformization, fundamental domain, Poincar´estheorem vi Abstract A compact Riemann surface can be realized as a quotient space U/Γ, where U is the sphere Σ, the euclidian plane C or the hyperbolic plane H and Γ is a discrete group of automorphisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Canonical Polygons for Finitely Generated Fuchsian Groups
    CANONICAL POLYGONS FOR FINITELY GENERATED FUCHSIAN GROUPS BY LINDA KEEN The Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N.J., U. S. A. 1. Introduction We consider finitely generated Fuchsian groups G. For such groups Fricke defined a class of fundamental polygons which he called canonical. The two most important distinguishing properties of these polygons are that they are strictly convex and have the smallest possible number of sides. A canonical polygon P in Fricke's sense de- pends on a choice of a certain "standard" system of generators S for G. Fricke proved that for a given G and S canonical polygons always exist. His proof is rather com- plicated. Also, Fricke's polygons are not canonical in the technical sense; there are infinitely many P for a given G and S. In this paper, we shall construct a uniquely determined fundamental polygon P which satisfies all of Fricke's conditions for every given G of positive genus and for every given S. We call this P a canonical Fricke polygon. For every given G of genus zero, and S, we shall define a uniquely determined fundamental polygon P which we call a canonical polygon without accidental vertices. From this P, one can obtain in infinitely many ways polygons satisfying l~'ricke's conditions. Our canonical polygons are invariant under similarity transformations of the group G if G is of the first kind. If G is of the second kind, this statement remains true after a suitable modification which will be clear from the construction. The proof involves elementary explicit constructions, and continuity arguments which use quasiconformal mappings, as developed by Ahlfors and Bers.
    [Show full text]
  • Planar Drawings of Higher-Genus Graphs Christian A
    Journal of Graph Algorithms and Applications http://jgaa.info/ vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 7{32 (2011) Planar Drawings of Higher-Genus Graphs Christian A. Duncan 1 Michael T. Goodrich 2 Stephen G. Kobourov 3 1Dept. of Computer Science, Louisiana Tech Univ. 2Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of California, Irvine 3Dept. of Computer Science, University of Arizona Abstract In this paper, we give polynomial-time algorithms that can take a graph G with a given combinatorial embedding on an orientable surface S of genus g and produce a planar drawing of G in R2, with a bounding face defined by a polygonal schema P for S. Our drawings are planar, but they allow for multiple copies of vertices and edges on P's boundary, which is a common way of visualizing higher-genus graphs in the plane. However, unlike traditional approaches the copies of the vertices might not be in perfect alignment but we guarantee that their order along the boundary is still preserved. Our drawings can be defined with respect to either a canonical polygonal schema or a polygonal cutset schema, which provides an interesting tradeoff, since canonical schemas have fewer sides, and have a nice topological structure, but they can have many more repeated vertices and edges than general polygonal cutsets. As a side note, we show that it is NP-complete to determine whether a given graph embedded in a genus-g surface has a set of 2g fundamental cycles with vertex-disjoint interiors, which would be desirable from a graph-drawing perspective. Submitted: Reviewed: Revised: Accepted: December 2009 August 2010 August 2010 August 2010 Final: Published: December 2010 February 2011 Article type: Communicated by: Regular paper D.
    [Show full text]
  • 3. Fuchsian Groups
    SEMINAR 9 3. Fuchsian Groups 3.1. Riemann surfaces and Fuchsian groups. A Riemann surface S is a (con- nected) surface where the transition functions are holomorphic functions. It is easy to see that if π : S˜ → S is the universal covering of S then it is possible to put on S˜ a (unique) Riemann surface structure so that π becomes a holomorphic function. Thus a natural question is to find what simply connected Riemann surface exists. The Riemann Mapping Theorem gives us a first result on the complex plane: any simply connected subset of C is either the complex plane of the unit disc, up to biholomorphisms. Theorem 3.1 (Uniformization Theorem). Any simply connected Riemann surface is biholomorphic to one (and only one) of the following surfaces: the Riemann sphere C = C ∪ {∞}, the complex plane C or the upper half plane H. b The unit disc D is conformally equivalent to the upper half plane; we can use for example the Cayley transform as done ealier in these notes. We have then that any Riemann surface can be written as S/Γ, where S is a subset of the Riemann sphere and Γ is the group of covering transformate ions. It ise easy to see that the elements of Γ are biholomorphic mappings of S. The groups of automorphisms (biholomorphic self-mappings) of the three simply connectede surfaces C, C and H are groups of M¨obius transformations, so we conclude that any Riemannb surface can be expressed as the quotient of an open subset of the Riemann sphere by a group of M¨obius transformations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Universal Properties of Teichm¨Uller Spaces
    THE UNIVERSAL PROPERTIES OF TEICHMULLERÄ SPACES VLADIMIR MARKOVIC AND DRAGOMIR SARI· C¶ Abstract. We discuss universal properties of general TeichmÄullerspaces. Our topics include the TeichmÄullermetric and the Kobayashi metric, extremality and unique extremality of quasiconformal mappings, biholomorphic maps be- tween TeichmÄullerspace, earthquakes and Thurston boundary. 1. Introduction Today, TeichmÄullertheory is a substantial area of mathematics that has inter- actions with many other subjects. The bulk of this theory is focused on studying TeichmÄullerspaces of ¯nite type Riemann surfaces. In this article we survey the theory that investigates all TeichmÄullerspaces regardless of their dimension. We aim to present theorems (old and recent) that illustrate universal properties of TeichmÄullerspaces. TeichmÄullerspaces of ¯nite type Riemann surfaces (or just ¯nite Riemann sur- faces) are ¯nite-dimensional complex manifolds with rich geometric structures. Te- ichmÄullerspaces of in¯nite type Riemann surfaces are in¯nite-dimensional Banach manifolds whose geometry di®ers signi¯cantly from the ¯nite case. However, some statements hold for both ¯nite and in¯nite cases. The intent is to describe these universal properties of all TeichmÄullerspaces and to point out to di®erences between ¯nite and in¯nite cases when these are well understood. The following is the list of topics covered. In the second section we briefly in- troduce quasiconformal maps and mention their basic properties. Then we proceed to give the analytic de¯nition of TeichmÄullerspaces, regardless whether the un- derlying Riemann surface is of ¯nite or in¯nite type. We de¯ne the TeichmÄuller metric and introduce the complex structure on TeichmÄullerspaces. Next we dis- cuss the Kobayashi metric, the tangent space and the barycentric extensions.
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamental Polygons for Coverings of the Double-Torus
    faculteit Wiskunde en Natuurwetenschappen Fundamental Polygons for Coverings of the Double-Torus Bacheloronderzoek Wiskunde Augustus 2011 Student: Jorma Dooper Eerste Begeleider: prof. dr. G. Vegter Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Hyperbolic Geometry 3 2.1 The Hyperbolic Plane . .4 2.2 The Hyperbolic lines . .5 2.3 The Hyperbolic Isometries . .7 2.4 Hyperbolic polygons . .9 2.5 Side-pairing Transformations . 12 3 Geometric Surfaces 13 3.1 The Euler Characteristic . 13 3.2 Surfaces as Identification Spaces . 14 3.3 Quotient Surfaces . 16 3.4 Covering Surfaces . 17 3.5 Tesselation of the Plane by the Fundamental Polygon . 19 3.6 Group Presentations and Homomorphisms to Finite Cyclic Groups. 20 4 Covering Constructions 21 4.1 Construction of Covering Surfaces for the Double Torus . 22 4.2 Construction of Fundamental Polygons for Subgroups of a Torus Group . 24 4.3 Construction of Fundamental Polygons for Subgroups of a Double Torus Group . 26 4.4 A double covering for the 2-torus . 30 4.5 Dirichlet Polygons for Subgroups of Higher Index . 31 5 Conclusion 34 2 1 Introduction This text is concerned with the construction of fundamental polygons for coverings of finite multiplicity for the double torus, or the orientable surface of genus 2. We will consider the double torus as a geometric surface of constant curvature. We will see that this means that it is locally isometric to the hyperbolic plane and is therefor called a hyperbolic surface. The surfaces we consider are assumed to be connected, compact and orientable. By the classification of compact surfaces, such a surface is always homeomporphic to a sphere with n ≥ 0 handles.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Early History of Moduli and Teichm {\" U} Ller Spaces
    ON THE EARLY HISTORY OF MODULI AND TEICHMULLER¨ SPACES NORBERT A’CAMPO, LIZHEN JI, AND ATHANASE PAPADOPOULOS Abstract. We survey some major contributions to Riemann’s moduli space and Teichm¨uller space. Our report has a historical character, but the stress is on the chain of mathematical ideas. We start with the introduction of Riemann surfaces, and we end with the discovery of some of the basic structures of Riemann’s moduli space and Teichm¨uller space. We point out several facts which seem to be unknown to many algebraic geometers and analysts working in the theory. The period we are interested in starts with Riemann, in 1851, and ends in the early 1960s, when Ahlfors and Bers confirmed that Teichm¨uller’s results were correct. This paper was written for the book Lipman Bers, a life in Mathemat- ics, edited by Linda Keen , Irwin Kra and Rubi Rodriguez (Amercian Mathematical Society, 2015). It is dedicated to the memory of Lip- man Bers who was above all a complex analyst and spent a large part of his life and energy working on the analytic structure of Teichm¨uller space. His work on analysis is nevertheless inseparable from geometry and topology. In this survey, we highlight the relations and the logi- cal dependence between this work and the works of Riemann, Poincar´e, Klein, Brouwer, Siegel, Teichm¨uller, Weil, Grothendieck and others. We explain the motivation behind the ideas. In doing so, we point out sev- eral facts which seem to be unknown to many Teichm¨uller theorists. AMS Mathematics Subject Classification: 01A60; 30-32; 32-02; 32- 03; 30F60; 30F10; 32G15.
    [Show full text]