7
$\begingroup$

Consider $S$ a surface homeomorphic to a connected sum of $n$ projective planes, $n \geq 2$. Can there be a two sided projective plane embedded in $[-\epsilon,\epsilon]\times S$?

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ There is absolutely nothing unclear about this question. $\endgroup$ – user98602 Jan 7 '16 at 15:13
  • $\begingroup$ And absolutely no personal input either. $\endgroup$ – Did Jan 7 '16 at 15:57
  • $\begingroup$ what is the meaning of two sided protective plane?? and yes I agree with @MikeMiller $\endgroup$ – Anubhav Mukherjee Jan 7 '16 at 16:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Anubhav.K: It's an embedding of $\Bbb{RP}^2$ that extends to an embedding of $\Bbb{RP}^2 \times [-1,1]$; that is to say, it's an embedding of $\Bbb{RP}^2$ with trivial normal bundle. One can find this definition in any book about 3-manifolds, including Hatcher's online notes, especially in the context of the sphere theorem. $\endgroup$ – user98602 Jan 7 '16 at 16:23
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Anubhav.K So, you agreed with "there is absolutely nothing unclear" while asking for clarification... $\endgroup$ – user147263 Jan 7 '16 at 21:47
3
$\begingroup$

Call your surface $\Sigma$ so as to avoid confusion with spheres. Our first course of action is to note that $\Sigma$ has no 2-torsion in its fundamental group. (Actually, there's a much stronger true fact: a finite CW complex with contractible universal cover has no torsion in its fundamental group. I will not need or prove this.) To see this, note that if it did, it has as a covering space a noncompact surface with fundamental group $\Bbb Z/2$; but the only simply connected surfaces are $S^2$ and $\Bbb R^2$, and $\Bbb R^2$ does not have any continuous involutions with no fixed point. (It's easier to see that neither $\Bbb R^2$ or the unit disc with hyperbolic metric have isometric involutions with no fixed point; we only need to work in the case of isometric quotients by the uniformization theorem.)

Something slightly stronger than your question is true: there's not even a 2-sided $\Bbb{RP}^2$ in $\Sigma \times S^1$. (Indeed, there's no embedded $\Bbb{RP}^2$ at all, since a manifold with a 1-sided $\Bbb{RP}^2$ has $\Bbb{RP}^3$ as a connected summand; and we have no 2-torsion in our fundamental group, so that's not possible.)

To see this, note that a 2-sided $\Bbb{RP}^2$ cannot possibly disconnect the manifold: this would imply that $\Bbb{RP}^2$ bounds a compact 3-manifold, which it does not. The fact that it does not disconnect implies that it is a homologically nontrivial submanifold (meaning it represents a nonzero class in $H_2$): you can find a loop that intersects with $\Bbb{RP}^2$ in precisely one point, and mod 2 intersection numbers are defined on the level of homology classes.

Now recall that $\pi_1(S^1 \times \Sigma)$ had no 2-torsion, so the map $\pi_1(\Bbb{RP}^2) \to \pi_1(S^1 \times \Sigma)$ is trivial, and the map from $\Bbb{RP}^2$ factors through the universal cover of $S^1 \times \Sigma$: that is, through $\Bbb R^3$. But $\Bbb R^3$ is contractible, which implies your 2-sided embedding of $\Bbb{RP}^2$ was null-homotopic. This contradicts the fact above that it was a homologically nontrivial submanifold.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.