Timeline for Links with same Jones polynomial
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Oct 26, 2012 at 14:41 | comment | added | Hauke Reddmann | @Paolo: THX for the paper link. (I should have added to my question that I know "mutation" and wanted to exclude this, but the paper answers my question.) @Bruce: AHA! You just answered a question I would have asked here eventually :-) @Czy: I wanted to exclude that either. Both are rather "trivial" constructions, I'm rather interested in the "accidental" cases. | |
| Oct 26, 2012 at 14:32 | vote | accept | Hauke Reddmann | ||
| Oct 26, 2012 at 13:19 | comment | added | Bruce Westbury | I don't think it has been written down (before now!). The proof is the same as the proof for the Jones polynomial. | |
| Oct 25, 2012 at 20:02 | comment | added | Paolo Aceto | @Bruce: could you give a reference of that? Thanks. | |
| Oct 25, 2012 at 12:35 | comment | added | Bruce Westbury | It is not just the HOMLFLY polynomial that is invariant under mutation. If $V$ is any representation of a quantum group such that $V\otimes V$ is multiplicity-free then the associated link invariant will be invariant under mutation. All the representations that have been studied to the point where we have an effective method for computing the link invariants have this property. | |
| Oct 25, 2012 at 11:45 | history | answered | Paolo Aceto | CC BY-SA 3.0 |