Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

This is discussed in the standard textbooks on algebraic topology. Pick a presentation of the group $G = \langle g_1,g_2,...,g_n|r_1,r_2,...r_m \rangle$ where $g_i$ are generators and $r_j$ are relations. Then we have a wedge of $n$ circles and attach two-cells to the wedge sum according to the relations $r_j$. Denote the final space $X$. Then van Kampen says $\pi_1(X)=G$. While usually $X$ is not a manifold, it is well-known that every finitely generated group $G$ can be realized as the fundamental group of some 4-manifold $X$. Can someone sketch the proof? Also, if $X$ could not be some manifold of dimension $<4$, what is the obstruction?

share|improve this question

3 Answers 3

Theorem. Every finitely presentable group is the fundamental group of a closed 4-manifold.

Sketch proof. Let $\langle a_1,\ldots,a_m\mid r_1,\ldots, r_n\rangle$ be a presentation. By van Kampen, the connected sum of $m$ copies of $S^1\times S^3$ has fundamental group isomorphic to the free group on $a_1,\ldots, a_m$. Now we can quotient by each relation $r_j$ as follows. Realise $r_j$ as a simple loop. A tubular neighbourhood of this looks like $S^1\times D^3$. Do surgery and replace this tubular neighbourhood with $S^2\times D^2$. This kills $r_j$. QED

There are many restrictions on 3-manifold groups. One of the simplest arises from the existence of Heegaard splittings. It follows easily that if $M$ is a closed 3-manifold then $\pi_1(M)$ has a balanced presentation, meaning that $n\leq m$.

Other obstructions to being a 3-manifold group were discussed in this MO question.

share|improve this answer
1  
Ok, we have $\pi_1(S^2\times D^2)=1$, so the loop $r_j$ has been killed. But how do you know that this surgery operation does not alter $\pi_1$ in any other way, i.e. adding/removing any other generators/relations? –  Leon Lampret Aug 12 '13 at 16:43
2  
@LeonLampret: van Kampen's theorem. –  HJRW Aug 12 '13 at 16:55

A slightly different way of proving the same is the following.

Take a wedge of n circles, one each for the generators. Now attach a disc for each relation. Imagine this complex $X$ sitting inside $\mathbb{R}^5$. By general position and finitely presented nature of $G$, the discs have no intersections in the interior. Take a tubular neighbourhood of $X$ in $\mathbb{R}^5$ and then take its boundary. One can check that this is a $4$-manifold with the required property.

share|improve this answer
    
Sorry if this is silly but what is the tubular neighborhood of $X$ if $X$ is not a manifold? –  zygund Apr 8 '12 at 2:23
1  
An appropriate tubular neighbourhood in this context would be all points in $\mathbb{R}^5$ which are $\epsilon$-close to $X$, where $\epsilon$ is suitably chosen. –  Somnath Basu Apr 8 '12 at 5:52

Yet another explanation of the same constructions given above is to add 1 and 2 handles to the 4 ball according t the given presentation, obtaining a 4 manifold $X$ with boundary. Now the boundary of $X\times I$ (i.e. the double of $X$) has the same fundamental group by Van Kampen and the fact that $\partial X\subset X$ induces a surjection on fundamental groups (turning $X$ upside down shows that $X$ is obtained from $\partial X$ by adding 2 and 3 handles).

Since the first homology=abelianization of $\pi_1$ of closed 1 and 2-manifolds are known, it is easy to see most groups dont occur for $n=1$ or $2$. For $n=3$, another algebraic obstruction is to observe that if $\pi=\pi_1(M^3)$, then $H_2(M)\to H_2(\pi)$ is onto, and if $M$ is orientable, then $H_2(M)=H^1(M)=H^1(\pi)$. So if $H^1(\pi)$ is smaller than $H_2(\pi)$, it cannot occur (for an oriented 3-manifold, in any case).

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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