5
$\begingroup$

Given a knotted arc $A \subset D^3$ (whose endpoints are, say, at $(\pm 1,0,0)$), the spun knot on this arc is $$\partial\left((D^3, A) \times D^2\right), = (\partial(D^3,A) \times D^2) \cup ((D^3,A) \times \partial D^2),$$ a smoothly embedded 2-sphere in $S^4$.

The Gluck twist on a smoothly embedded 2-sphere $S^2 \hookrightarrow S^4$ deletes a tubular neighborhood $\nu(S^2)$, giving a closed manifold with boundary $S^2 \times S^1$. Reglue $\nu(S^2)$ via the diffeomorphism $S^2 \times S^1 \to S^2 \times S^1, (x,t) \mapsto (\alpha(t)x, t)$, where $\alpha$ is the nontrivial element of $\pi_1(SO(3))$ (ie, $\alpha(t)$ is rotation by the angle $t$). This gives a homotopy 4-sphere.

Gluck claims, in "Embeddings of two-spheres in the four-sphere", that on a spun knot, this construction results in $S^4$. I don't understand his argument, which is (essentially) as follows.

"If the two-sphere $S^2 \times 0$ on the boundary of $S^4 \setminus \nu(S^2)$ is itself the boundary of a three-sphere with handles, "nicely" situated in $S^4 \setminus \nu(S^2)$, then $M^4$ is homeomorphic to $S^4$." He then claims spun knots as a particular case.

(It should be possible to replace homeomorphic here with diffeomorphic, if we can see this geometrically - i.e., without invoking Freedman's theorem. References to this particular case agree that the resulting smooth manifold is the standard $S^4$.)

What he calls $S^2 \times 0$, I assume, just means $S^2 \times \{pt\}$, the latter some point in $S^1$. I do not understand what he means by a "three-sphere with handles" - and this term does not appear elsewhere - nor do I see why he should conclude that $M^4$ is homeomorphic to $S^4$.

(I know there are more general results involving twist-spun knots and 0-concordant knots, but I'd like to understand this argument.)

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

8
$\begingroup$

This was shown by Gluck, in the cited paper; see section 22. The basic point is explained in section 17. (What we now call) the Gluck twist will produce an equivalent knot if the circle action on the 2-sphere extends over some 3-manifold that the knot bounds; this is Theorem 17.1 but I recommend that you try to prove it yourself before looking. For the spin of a knot K in $S^3$, you can cook up such a 3-manifold by `spinning' any Seifert surface that K bounds.

I didn't see the phrase you mention (three-sphere with handles) but I presume that it means a punctured connected sum of copies of $S^1\times S^2$. Note that you can readily find the extension of the circle action over such a manifold. Indeed, $S^1\times S^2$ has a circle action with two circle fixed points. Forming equivariant connected sums gives you such an action on $\#^n (S^1\times S^2)$, and you can just remove an invariant neighborhood of any point on a circle of fixed points.

Finally, a spun knot always bounds a punctured $\#^n (S^1\times S^2)$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the comments, they're very helpful. It turns out I must have been looking at a Bulletins version of the paper; see here. I've now found the full paper. I'll try to prove the theorem with your comments first. Much appreciated! $\endgroup$
    – mme
    Mar 12, 2015 at 22:49

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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