Skip to main content

Timeline for Factoring maps of handlebodies

Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5

13 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 19, 2009 at 18:21 vote accept HJRW
Nov 19, 2009 at 1:21 answer added Sam Nead timeline score: 4
Nov 19, 2009 at 0:47 comment added HJRW That's exactly the order I had in mind!
Nov 19, 2009 at 0:46 history edited HJRW CC BY-SA 2.5
added 148 characters in body
Nov 19, 2009 at 0:31 comment added Sam Nead (Or does that mess up the desired order?)
Nov 19, 2009 at 0:31 comment added Sam Nead Ok, will the following suffice: homotope first, compress second and then realize that the result includes in a finite-index cover?
Nov 19, 2009 at 0:27 comment added HJRW Sam, I see what you mean - I'm a little confused about what the correct statement about the boundary should be. I realise now that my original comment didn't make sense. Well, as I said, I'd be happy for any factorization to start with, and to worry about the boundary later.
Nov 19, 2009 at 0:02 comment added Sam Nead What about taking a regular neighborhood of the (p,q) curve on the boundary (p times about the meridian, q times about the longitude). So this is incompressible... I suppose that you will homotope this to be a q-fold covering. I don't see how you are going to do this keeping the boundary "nice".
Nov 18, 2009 at 23:45 comment added HJRW I'd be happy to start with any factorization, and worry about whether the homotopy can be made nice later.
Nov 18, 2009 at 23:30 comment added Sam Nead So the maps has to start by mapping the boundary to the boundary? For example, what about placing a trefoil knot in a three-ball, and thickening it a bit? A homotopy can unknot this (and then I guess you want to compress), but not in any boundary respecting way...
Nov 18, 2009 at 20:27 comment added HJRW At each "time", the homotopy should map the boundary to itself.
Nov 18, 2009 at 20:21 comment added Sam Nead What does "respect the boundary" mean?
Nov 18, 2009 at 20:07 history asked HJRW CC BY-SA 2.5