3
$\begingroup$

If M is a connected manifold of dimension $\geq 2$ then the set of orientation preserving homeomorphisms of M that are isotopic to the identity acts $n$-transitively on M for all positive $n\in\mathbb{N}$. I know several ways to prove this. I do not want to include a proof of this well known fact in my article, instead I am looking for a reference to a book or article where this is stated and proved (preferentially in a style that is not discouraging for the reader). Up to now I have not found such a reference.

Actually I only need it for dimension 2 so if your ref only covers dimension 2, I'll be happy with that.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Kind of pedantic but you do need an asterisk for 1-dimensional manifolds, because there the ordering of the points will be preserved $\endgroup$ May 18, 2022 at 15:13
  • $\begingroup$ Good point @KevinCasto, I have edited the question $\endgroup$ May 18, 2022 at 16:01

3 Answers 3

4
$\begingroup$

In [Ancel and Bellamy, On homogeneous locally conical spaces, Fund. Math. 241 (2018), no. 1, 1–15] it is shown that every homogeneous locally conical connected separable metric space that is not a $1$-manifold is strongly $n$-homogeneous for each $n\ge 2$.

Locally conical means that each point has a neighborhood homeomorphic to an open cone over a compact space. Manifolds are of course locally conical. It is a good elementary exercise that connected manifolds are homogeneous. (Hint: first prove it for points in the same chart, and then note that any two points can be joined by a chain of charts).

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Quite interesting, thanks. I will look closely. $\endgroup$ May 19, 2022 at 6:47
  • $\begingroup$ Very nice result and reference. Almost what I am looking for. $\endgroup$ May 19, 2022 at 9:10
1
$\begingroup$

I suppose we induct on $n$ (the number of points) and appeal to some version of "Guggenheim's theorem". I started by looking in "Introduction to piecewise linear topology" by Rourke and Sanderson [1982] (see page 56 and after). In their references, I found "Extending piecewise-linear isotopies" by Hudson [1966] who in turn points at "Unpublished doctoral dissertation" by Irwin [1962].

Anyway, Hudson gives the result in codimension three (too bad!) but gives a complicated sufficient condition ("allowable locally unknotted") in codimension two (your situation). But I am sure that "a finite set of points in a surface" satisfy the condition...

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks. That approach seems overkill. Btw what is Guggenheim's theorem? $\endgroup$ May 18, 2022 at 20:48
  • $\begingroup$ "Any two PL n-balls in a connected PL n-manifold are PL ambient isotopic." The actual theorem statement is more general. Here is the correct spelling of the name: Victor Kurt Alfred Morris Gugenheim. Here are the relevant papers: Some theorems on piecewise linear embedding [1952 - the announcement] and "Piecewise Linear Isotopy and Embedding of Elements and Spheres (I, II)" [1953 - the proofs]. $\endgroup$
    – Sam Nead
    May 19, 2022 at 9:16
  • $\begingroup$ There is an sequence of memories regarding VKAMG (very fondly) here: maths.ed.ac.uk/~v1ranick/surgery/uicc/vkamg.txt $\endgroup$
    – Sam Nead
    May 19, 2022 at 9:22
0
$\begingroup$

I think the following discussion (which includes references) may be interesting:

https://lamington.wordpress.com/2014/11/07/explosions-now-in-glorious-2d/

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ It was interesting reading this piece of history. Thanks. Too far from what I need, though. $\endgroup$ May 20, 2022 at 7:14
  • $\begingroup$ I think the lemma by Nietecki-Shub stated there gives exactly what you need (after showing that, say using convenient a gradient flow, you can take the two pairs of n-points to a small ball). $\endgroup$
    – rpotrie
    May 21, 2022 at 15:39
  • $\begingroup$ It implies the result I want. But there is the distance complication. I will look in the article to see if they do the simple case but I doubt. $\endgroup$ May 21, 2022 at 16:23
  • $\begingroup$ I read the two relevant statements (Lemmas 9 and 13) in the Nietecko-Shub paper and the proof of the second one. The proof has a few problems. Their constant 2pi is in fact the better constant 4 (actually this is good). They use state Lemma 9 with only one path but use it with several paths. The claim that the time-1 maps sends the slice 0 to the slice 2pi is likely wrong (this can be fixed but changes the estimate at the end ; maybe Lemma 9 can be adapted in fact). $\endgroup$ May 21, 2022 at 18:04
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, sorry. I didn't know that there was some careless arguments in their proof. I had just read the blog post, and thought the reference could be useful. $\endgroup$
    – rpotrie
    May 21, 2022 at 22:37

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.