11
$\begingroup$

Looking at Kervaire and Milnor's1 classification of exotic spheres, for each $n$ there are a finite number of distinct (up to diffeomorphism) smooth structures you can impose on the $n$-sphere (OEIS sequence A001676). The first few terms of this sequence, denoted $[\Theta_n]$, are

$$ \begin{array}{c|cc} n & 1&2&3&4&5&6&7&8&9&10&11&12&13&14&15&\dotsb\\\hline [\Theta_n] & 1&1&1&\geq1&1&1&28&2&8&6&992&1&3&2&16256&\dotsb\\ \end{array} \;.$$

There are obvious spikes in the value of $[\Theta_n]$ for $n \equiv 3 \!\pmod 4$. Is there a nice reason why this happens? The details of the linked paper are a bit over my head.

Wikipedia gives a brief explanation: $\Theta_n$ is the group of $h$-cobordism classes of the homotopy $n$-sphere, and there's a correspondence between the elements of this group and the number of smooth structures of the $n$-sphere. Each group $\Theta_n$ contains a cyclic subgroup $bP_{n+1}$ of the "$n$-spheres that bound parallelizable manifolds." And then for some reason the size of $bP_{n+1}$ can be very large for $n \equiv 3 \!\pmod 4$ and somehow relates to Bernoulli numbers.


  1. Kervaire and Milnor, Groups of homotopy spheres: I, Ann. Math. (2) 77 (1963), 504-537
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Did you follow the construction of 28 smooth structures on the $7$-sphere ? $\endgroup$ – reuns Nov 26 '16 at 4:24
  • $\begingroup$ @user1952009 Yeah, I'm okay with that construction, but I don't see how it relates to the algebraic side of things. Like for that manifold in $\mathbb{C}^5$, I don't see why $k=29$ wouldn't give you a new smooth structure distinct from the previous $28$. $\endgroup$ – Mike Pierce Nov 26 '16 at 4:44
  • $\begingroup$ I don't follow it but there P.21 it defines a topological invariant specific to $4k-1$ manifolds $\endgroup$ – reuns Nov 26 '16 at 5:02
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It is because in those dimension, the size of $bP_{n+1}$ are related to numbers that can be signature of manifolds bounding homotopy spheres/ actual spheres. You need to fight very hard to obtain the formula given in Kerviare & Milnor(no proof is given there). A proof can be found in Kosinski's book Differentiable Manifolds. And the proof does not use Brieskorn's construction. $\endgroup$ – Mingcong Zeng Nov 26 '16 at 5:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Duplicate of mathoverflow.net/questions/219869/… $\endgroup$ – Tom Copeland Nov 27 '16 at 3:19
3
$\begingroup$

I wish I can give a more detailed explanation here.

The group $\Theta_n$ fits into an exact sequence $0 \rightarrow bP_{n+1} \rightarrow \Theta_n \rightarrow Coker J$, which is essentially Theorem 4.1 in Kervaire & Milnor. $bP_{n+1}$ is the subgroup of homotopy n-spheres(under connected sum) which are bounded by some n+1-manifolds. $CokerJ$ is the cokernel of the stable J-homomorphism in that dimension. The last map will have cokernel $\mathbb{Z}/2$ if $n = 2$ mod $4$ and Kervaire invariant in that dimension is nontrivial. Otherwise it is surjective. $bP_{n+1}$ is trivial when $n+1$ is odd. And is $\mathbb{Z/2}$ or trivial, when $n+1 = 2$ mod $4$, depending on whether we have a trivial Kervaire invariant in this dimension or not. The invariant is defined in the last section of the paper. If you google Kervaire invaraint you can see a lot of stuff about this.

The case you are interested in is when $n+1$ is a multiple of $4$. The formula I mentioned in comment is given in the paper after Corollary 7.6 with a promise of a proof in a non-exist following paper. However a proof can be found in various places. I learned a proof from Kosinski's book Differential Manifold(Theorem IX.8.7 in the book), which is a great book on everything you need for understanding Kervaire & Milnor. The number you see is so big basically because such coefficients appear in the Hirzebruch signature theorem, which you can use to compute signature of a manifold by Pontrjagin classes.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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