3
$\begingroup$

Suppose you have a group $G$ given by a finite presentation $\langle X; \mathbf{r}\rangle$, and also suppose you know that this group decomposes as a free product with amalgamation $A\ast_CB$ (with $A$, $B$ and $C$ all infinite, and I am happy to assume $C\cong\mathbb{Z}$ for simplicity).

Is there any way we can link the presentation complex $\mathcal{C_P}$ of $G$ (single vertex, edges labelled from $X$, 2-cells attached using $\mathbf{r}$) with the Seifert-van Kampen-esque 2-complex $\mathcal{C}_{SvK}$ underlying $A\ast_CB$?

My initial thought was to look at the cover associated to the amalgamating subgroup $C$, and ask if I get a complex with a subcomplex which satisfies Seifert-van Kampen. However, this doesn't seem to work even if I take the cover of the presentation complex of $A\ast_CB$.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Never heard of the Seifert-van Kampen-eqs 2-complex associated to an amalgamated product. Could you define it? $\endgroup$ Feb 23 '16 at 15:46
  • $\begingroup$ I really meant "some" not "the", and I don't know if such a thing always/ever exists. But I meant a 2-complex with subcomplexes $A^{\prime}$ and $B^{\prime}$ associated to $A$ and $B$ which meet over some subcomplex associated to $C$. $\endgroup$
    – user1729
    Feb 23 '16 at 16:08
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Regarding $\mathcal{C}_{SvK}$, might you be referring to a "graph of spaces" in the sense of Scott-Wall? 392c.wordpress.com/2009/03/08/… Roughly speaking, you take (say) presentation complexes $C_A$ and $C_B$ for chosen presentations of $A$ and $B$, and then attach an annulus with one boundary circle mapped to $A$ and the other mapped to $B$. $\endgroup$
    – Lee Mosher
    Feb 24 '16 at 13:39
  • $\begingroup$ @LeeMosher After Daniel's comment I got thinking, and I my ideas were roughly what you are suggesting. So, yes. Thanks for the link+name. $\endgroup$
    – user1729
    Feb 25 '16 at 10:40
1
$\begingroup$

Hatcher in Algebraic Topology discusses "graphs of groups" at the end of section 1.B. One example is the realization of an Eilenberg-MacLane space $K(A*_CB,1)$ from a $K(A,1)$, a $K(B,1)$, and a $K(C,1)$. The construction uses the fact that any homomorphism $\pi_1(X)\to A$ for a CW complex $X$ is induced by a map $X\to K(A,1)$, unique up to homotopy. The two homomorphisms $C\to A$ and $C\to B$ correspond to a pair of maps $K(C,1)\to K(A,1)$ and $K(C,1)\to K(B,1)$ that can be used in a mapping-cylinder-like construction. In particular, you take a mapping cylinder for each and then join them along the $K(C,1)$.

The two-skeleton of a $K(A*_CB,1)$ can be thought of as a presentation complex for this amalgamated product, what you were calling $\mathcal{C}_{SvK}$. The cell structure of the Eilenberg-MacLane space can be arranged to have only a single $0$-cell, if you so choose.

An isomorphism $G\to A*_CB$ gives rise to a homotopy equivalence $K(G,1)\to K(A*_CB,1)$, which we can take to be cellular (the $n$-skeleton maps into the $n$-skeleton). If you restrict to the two-skeleta, you get a map $f:\mathcal{C}_P\to\mathcal{C}_{SvK}$ (in your terminology) that induces an isomorphism on $\pi_1$. It's worth mentioning that a $K(G,1)$ can be built by extending a presentation complex for $G$ using only $(n\geq 3)$-cells.

What follows is the beginnings of locating $C$ in $\mathcal{C}_P$.

Let's consider a complex for $\mathcal{C}_{SvK}$ from the mapping cylinder construction. Call the subcomplexes from each group $\mathcal{C}_A$, $\mathcal{C}_B$, and $\mathcal{C}_C$, where there are some remaining $1$-cells and $2$-cells in the complement from attaching the $\mathcal{C}_C$ to either complex.

Now, let's suppose that each $2$-complex's $2$-cells' attaching maps are "taut," in that there is no backtracking or pausing and it is basically piecewise linear (the boundary of the $D^2$ is subdivided into intervals for how it is glued into the $1$-skeleton, just like the usual identification diagrams). We can make the image of $f$ transverse to $\mathcal{C}_C$ in a sense. By a homotopy of $f$, we can make the $0$-skeleton avoid $\mathcal{C}_C$, and instead land in the $0$-skeleta of $\mathcal{C}_A$ and $\mathcal{C}_B$. Now consider the image of a $1$-cell of $\mathcal{C}_P$ through $f$, which we may assume is taut after a homotopy of $f$. Since each $1$-cell has an incident $2$-cell from the mapping cylinder construction, we can homotope $f$ so that the $1$-cell crosses through $\mathcal{C}_C$ at a $0$-cell, without the path spending any time in $\mathcal{C}_C$. Lastly, we can assume the images of $2$-cells are taut, and then if a $2$-cell spends any time on a $2$-cell of $\mathcal{C}_C$, the boundary of that $2$-cell has an image on $\mathcal{C}_A$ and $\mathcal{C}_B$, so the map can be modified without changing the fact that $f_*$ is an isomorphism on $\pi_1$ (this amounts to homotoping the $\mathcal{C}_P\to K(A*_CB,1)$ map, which still had $3$-cells). By another homotopy, we can make it so the $2$-cells contain entire $1$-cells of $\mathcal{C}_C$ if they intersect the interior of the $1$-cell at all.

Then, $f^{-1}(\mathcal{C}_C)$ consists of points of the $1$-skeleton (finitely many per $1$-cell) along with loops and arcs on the $2$-cells, with the arcs connecting these points. There is a modification of $f$ that can remove these loops: since they bound disks, the image of the disk can be made to avoid the $\mathcal{C}_C$, essentially by a homotopy of the original $\mathcal{C}_P\to K(A*_CB,1)$. If one could modify $f$ to make the preimage connected, then this would decompose $\mathcal{C}_C$ into two pieces, with the $\pi_1$-image of the common intersection lying in the image of $C$ in $A*_CB$.

Example. Let $\Sigma$ be a genus-$g$ closed surface, which is already a presentation complex of $\pi_1(\Sigma)$. If $\pi_1(\Sigma)$ were represented as an amalgamated product, the preceding would give that there is a map $f:\Sigma\to \mathcal{C}_{SvK}$ with $f^{-1}(\mathcal{C}_C)$ being a collection of disjoint curves, none of which bound disks. There are two kinds of curves: non-separating and separating, where the latter must be of the type that represent a connect-sum decomposition. By some theory of non-separating curves on surfaces, since any closed loop must intersect transversely the separating curves an even number of times (since $\mathcal{C}_{SvK}-\mathcal{C}_C$ is two pieces), they must come in homotopic pairs, and so by a modification of $f$ we can eliminate the pairs one at a time while still giving an isomorphism on $\pi_1$. So, using the fact that there are at most $g-1$ pairwise non-homotopic separating curves that are not nullhomotopic: the $g=1$ case implies that $\mathbb{Z}^2$ is not a non-trivial amalgamated product, and the $g=2$ case implies every non-trivial amalgamated product comes from a connect sum of two tori (i.e., $\pi_1(\Sigma_2)=F_2*_{\mathbb{Z}}F_2$ with $1\mapsto aba^{-1}b^{-1}$ is the only nontrivial splitting, up to isomorphism). I'm not sure what can be said about $g>2$, though! I couldn't figure out how to join separating curves together into one, if that is even possible.

$\endgroup$

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.