Skip to main content
hfquestion's user avatar
hfquestion's user avatar
hfquestion's user avatar
hfquestion
  • Member for 8 years, 10 months
  • Last seen more than 1 year ago
revised
Loading…
comment
Admissibility in Heegaard Floer, especially with torsion Spin^c structures
Ah, I think I see it now. Weak admissibility only requires a nontrivial periodic domain to have positive and negative coefficients if $c_1(\mathfrak{s})$ vanishes on it for the reasons you've explained, and makes no demands of periodic domains seen by $c_1(\mathfrak{s})$. Strong admissibility makes the same requirement of periodic domains on which $c_1(\mathfrak{s})$ vanishes, but now also requires periodic classes on which $c_1(\mathfrak{s})$ is positive to have some sufficiently positive coefficient (and doesn't care when $c_1(\mathfrak{s})$ is negative on the domain). Correct?
Loading…
awarded
comment
Admissibility in Heegaard Floer, especially with torsion Spin^c structures
Thanks, the edit really clears things up -- and my question was admittedly unclear. I've accepted the answer since it fully handles the torsion case I asked about, but I'm also curious about the non-torsion case (where it's pointed out that strong admissibility still implies weak admissibility). My follow-up question won't fit here, so I've edited it into the original post. Would you mind taking a look?
revised
Loading…
awarded
awarded
awarded
Loading…