Let $M$ be a PL-manifold that is a homotopy sphere (PL stands for Piecewise Linear). Does it follow that $M$ is PL-homeomorphic to the sphere $S^n$ (with the usual PL-structure)? Here is the background:

Zeeman (1962 [ 2 ]: The Poincaré conjecture for $n\geq 5$) writes:

[Smale] assumed a differentiable structure upon the manifold instead of a combinatorial structure, and because of the triangulation theorem for differentiable manifolds, this was at first a weaker version than Stallings' result. Then, however, he used a constructed structed differentiable structure to prove a stronger combinatorial version (which we state without proof):

``THEOREM 3 (Differential: Smale). Let $M^n$ be a connected closed combinatorial manifold, $n\ne 4,5,7$. If $M^n$ is a homotopy sphere then it is a combinatorial sphere.''

I cannot find a proof for this statement. The best I could find is the following:

Stallings (Polyhedral homotopy spheres [ 1 ]) says that it is combinatorially equivalent to $\mathbb{R}^n$ away from a point.

[ 1 ] J. Stallings. Polyhedral homotopy-spheres. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 66 (1960), 485-488. ProjetEuclid link.

[ 2 ] E. Zeeman. The Poincaré conjecture for $n\ge 5$. 1962 Topology of 3-manifolds and related topics (Proc. The Univ. of Georgia Institute, 1961) pp. 198-204 Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ See theorem 3.12 in arxiv.org/abs/math/0105047 and references therein. $\endgroup$ Aug 24, 2019 at 13:12
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that's a good answer. It does follow indeed from Kirby-Siebenmann. Incidentally, it also follows from K-S that every topological manifold that is h.e. to $S^n$ is homeomorphic to $S^n$, which I guess does not follow from any of the original approaches. This still begs the question though, whether K-S is necessary. Zeeman seems to suggest that it should have been known by the early 1960's. $\endgroup$ Aug 24, 2019 at 20:21
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think Kirby-Siebenmann's results are relevant here. As Rudyak says before theorem 3.12, everything was settled in the 60s. The details are not on my fingertips though. I briefly looked in Stallings' notes and could not immediately see how to use them to adapt Smale's argument to the PL setting. $\endgroup$ Aug 25, 2019 at 3:31
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I also had a look at Stallings notes, but it is not clear how it helps. I guess many of these arguments are only comprehensible if one is immersed in the PL-language, which people were in the 60s. This teaches us again the lesson that results should be written up in such a way that they are comprehensible by future generations who might have a very different background. $\endgroup$ Aug 25, 2019 at 7:25

1 Answer 1


For spheres of dimension $n>5$ the PL Poincare conjecture follows from the s-cobordism theorem. Indeed, removing disjoint two small open disks one gets an s-cobordism (this uses excision in homology, Poincare duality and Hurewicz theorem). The s-cobordsim is PL trivial (if the cobordsim has dimension is $>5$) from where a PL homeomorphism to a sphere should be obvious. This is done in detail eg in Rourke-Sanderson PL topology book, pp 8-10.

The 5-dimensional case involves a trick. By a surgery theoretic argument Kervaire proved that every PL homology $n$-sphere $\Sigma$ with $n\neq 3$ bounds a contractible PL manifold, see p.71 in [Smooth homology spheres and their fundamental groups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 144 (1969), 67–72]. Removing a small open disk from the interior of that manifold gives a cobordism $W$ between $\Sigma$ and $S^5$ which is an $s$-cobordism since $\Sigma$ is simply-connected. Since $\dim(W)>5$ the s-cobordism is trivial, so $\Sigma$ is PL homeomorphic to $S^5$.

It seems that the result was first discovered through the smoothing theory as follows:

Step 1 is to show that any homotopy $5$-sphere has a smooth structure. Munkres and Hirsch developed an obstruction theory for putting a smooth structure on a PL manifold. The obstruction groups are cohomology groups of $M$ rel boundary (if any) with coefficients in the groups $\Gamma^k$ of isotopy classes of diffeomorphism of $S^{k-1}$ moduli those that extend to the $k$-disk. Now $\Gamma^k=0$ for $k\le 4$ where the hardest case $k=4$ is a famous theorem of Cerf. This shows that any PL $5$-manifold has a smooth structure.

Step 2 is to show that any smooth homotopy $5$-sphere $\Sigma$ bounds a smooth compact contractible manifold $W^6$. This is done by a surgery theoretic argument staring with some $6$-manifolds with boundary $\Sigma$ and the simplifying it by surgery. This is due to Milnor-Kevaire and Wall (independently). See theorem 9.1 of Milnor's "Lectures on the h-cobordsim theorem".

Step 3 is to remove a small open ball from the interior of $W^6$ to get a smooth $h$-cobordism between $\Sigma$ and $S^5$, which is trivial by the smooth $h$-cobordism theorem. Thus $\Sigma$ is diffeomorphic and hence PL homeomorphic to $S^5$.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! I didn't know that Rourke-Sanderson does the PL h-cobordism theorem. It still feels like Zeeman was a little quick. It's nice to know that one does not need scary math (Kirby-Siebenmann) but that one can do with much better understood mathematics. $\endgroup$ Aug 26, 2019 at 19:07

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.