<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[Geometry and the imagination]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[https://lamington.wordpress.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Danny Calegari]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://lamington.wordpress.com/author/dannycaltech/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Quasimorphisms from knot&nbsp;invariants]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>Last week, Michael Brandenbursky from the Technion gave a talk at Caltech on an interesting connection between knot theory and quasimorphisms. Michael&#8217;s paper on this subject may be obtained from the <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/0907.2626">arXiv</a>. Recall that given a group <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=G&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="G" title="G" class="latex" />, a quasimorphism is a function <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cphi%3AG+%5Cto+%5Cmathbb%7BR%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;phi:G &#92;to &#92;mathbb{R}" title="&#92;phi:G &#92;to &#92;mathbb{R}" class="latex" /> for which there is some least real number <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=D%28%5Cphi%29+%5Cge+0&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="D(&#92;phi) &#92;ge 0" title="D(&#92;phi) &#92;ge 0" class="latex" /> (called the <em>defect</em>) such that for all pairs of elements <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=g%2Ch+%5Cin+G&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="g,h &#92;in G" title="g,h &#92;in G" class="latex" /> there is an inequality <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7C%5Cphi%28gh%29+-+%5Cphi%28g%29+-+%5Cphi%28h%29%7C+%5Cle+D%28%5Cphi%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="|&#92;phi(gh) - &#92;phi(g) - &#92;phi(h)| &#92;le D(&#92;phi)" title="|&#92;phi(gh) - &#92;phi(g) - &#92;phi(h)| &#92;le D(&#92;phi)" class="latex" />. Bounded functions are quasimorphisms, although in an uninteresting way, so one is usually only interested in quasimorphisms up to the equivalence relation that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cphi+%5Csim+%5Cpsi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;phi &#92;sim &#92;psi" title="&#92;phi &#92;sim &#92;psi" class="latex" /> if the difference <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7C%5Cphi+-+%5Cpsi%7C&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="|&#92;phi - &#92;psi|" title="|&#92;phi - &#92;psi|" class="latex" /> is bounded. It turns out that each equivalence class of quasimorphism contains a unique representative which has the extra property that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cphi%28g%5En%29+%3D+n%5Cphi%28g%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;phi(g^n) = n&#92;phi(g)" title="&#92;phi(g^n) = n&#92;phi(g)" class="latex" /> for all <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=g%5Cin+G&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="g&#92;in G" title="g&#92;in G" class="latex" /> and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=n+%5Cin+%5Cmathbb%7BZ%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="n &#92;in &#92;mathbb{Z}" title="n &#92;in &#92;mathbb{Z}" class="latex" />. Such quasimorphisms are said to be <em>homogeneous</em>. Any quasimorphism may be <em>homogenized</em> by defining <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Coverline%7B%5Cphi%7D%28g%29+%3D+%5Clim_%7Bn+%5Cto+%5Cinfty%7D+%5Cphi%28g%5En%29%2Fn&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;overline{&#92;phi}(g) = &#92;lim_{n &#92;to &#92;infty} &#92;phi(g^n)/n" title="&#92;overline{&#92;phi}(g) = &#92;lim_{n &#92;to &#92;infty} &#92;phi(g^n)/n" class="latex" /> (see e.g. <a href="https://lamington.wordpress.com/2009/08/04/faces-of-the-scl-norm-ball/">this post</a> for more about quasimorphisms, and their relation to stable commutator length).</p>
<p>Many groups that do not admit many homomorphisms to <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cmathbb%7BR%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;mathbb{R}" title="&#92;mathbb{R}" class="latex" /> nevertheless admit rich families of homogeneous quasimorphisms. For example, groups that act weakly properly discontinuously on word-hyperbolic spaces admit infinite dimensional families of homogeneous quasimorphisms; see e.g. <a href="http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=2332668">Bestvina-Fujiwara</a>. This includes hyperbolic groups, but also mapping class groups and braid groups, which act on the complex of curves.</p>
<p>Michael discussed another source of quasimorphisms on braid groups, those coming from knot theory. Let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=I&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="I" title="I" class="latex" /> be a knot invariant. Then one can extend <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=I&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="I" title="I" class="latex" /> to an invariant of pure braids on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=n&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="n" title="n" class="latex" /> strands by <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=I%28%5Calpha%29+%3D+I%28%5Cwidehat%7B%5Calpha+%5CDelta%7D%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="I(&#92;alpha) = I(&#92;widehat{&#92;alpha &#92;Delta})" title="I(&#92;alpha) = I(&#92;widehat{&#92;alpha &#92;Delta})" class="latex" /> where <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CDelta+%3D+%5Csigma_1+%5Ccdots+%5Csigma_%7Bn-1%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Delta = &#92;sigma_1 &#92;cdots &#92;sigma_{n-1}" title="&#92;Delta = &#92;sigma_1 &#92;cdots &#92;sigma_{n-1}" class="latex" />, and the &#8220;hat&#8221; denotes plat closure. It is an interesting question to ask: under what conditions on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=I&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="I" title="I" class="latex" /> is the resulting function on braid groups a quasimorphism?</p>
<p>In the abstract, such a question is probably very hard to answer, so one should narrow the question by concentrating on knot invariants of a certain kind. Since one wants the resulting invariants to have some relation to the algebraic structure of braid groups, it is natural to look for functions which factor through certain algebraic structures on knots; Michael was interested in certain <em>homomorphisms</em> from the <em>knot concordance group</em> to <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cmathbb%7BR%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;mathbb{R}" title="&#92;mathbb{R}" class="latex" />. We briefly describe this group, and a natural class of homomorphisms.</p>
<p>Two oriented knots <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K_1%2CK_2&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K_1,K_2" title="K_1,K_2" class="latex" /> in the <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="3" title="3" class="latex" />-sphere are said to be <em>concordant</em> if there is a (locally flat) properly embedded annulus <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=A&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="A" title="A" class="latex" /> in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=S%5E3+%5Ctimes+%5B0%2C1%5D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="S^3 &#92;times [0,1]" title="S^3 &#92;times [0,1]" class="latex" /> with <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=A+%5Ccap+S%5E3+%5Ctimes+0+%3D+K_1&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="A &#92;cap S^3 &#92;times 0 = K_1" title="A &#92;cap S^3 &#92;times 0 = K_1" class="latex" /> and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=A+%5Ccap+S%5E3+%5Ctimes+1+%3D+K_2&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="A &#92;cap S^3 &#92;times 1 = K_2" title="A &#92;cap S^3 &#92;times 1 = K_2" class="latex" />. Concordance is an equivalence relation, and the equivalence classes form a group, with connect sum as the group operation, and orientation-reversed mirror image as inverse. The only subtle aspect of this is the existence of inverses, which we briefly explain. Let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" /> be an arbitrary knot, and let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K%5E%21&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K^!" title="K^!" class="latex" /> denote the mirror image of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" /> with the opposite orientation. Arrange <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K+%5Ccup+K%5E%21&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K &#92;cup K^!" title="K &#92;cup K^!" class="latex" /> in space so that they are symmetric with respect to reflection in a dividing plane. There is an immersed annulus <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=A&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="A" title="A" class="latex" /> in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=S%5E3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="S^3" title="S^3" class="latex" /> which connects each point on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" /> to its mirror image on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K%5E%21&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K^!" title="K^!" class="latex" />, and the self-intersections of this annulus are all disjoint embedded arcs, corresponding to the crossings of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" /> in the projection to the mirror. This annulus is an example of what is called a <em>ribbon</em> surface. Connect summing <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" /> to <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K%5E%21&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K^!" title="K^!" class="latex" /> by pushing out a finger of each into an arc in the mirror connects the ribbon annulus to a ribbon disk spanning <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K+%5C%23+K%5E%21&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K &#92;# K^!" title="K &#92;# K^!" class="latex" />. A ribbon surface (in particular, a ribbon disk) can be pushed into a (smoothly) embedded surface in a <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=4&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="4" title="4" class="latex" />-ball bounding <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=S%5E3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="S^3" title="S^3" class="latex" />. Puncturing the <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=4&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="4" title="4" class="latex" />-ball at some point on this smooth surface, one obtains a concordance from <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K%5C%23K%5E%21&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K&#92;#K^!" title="K&#92;#K^!" class="latex" /> to the unknot, as claimed.</p>
<p>The resulting group is known as the <em>concordance group</em> <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cmathcal%7BC%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;mathcal{C}" title="&#92;mathcal{C}" class="latex" /> of knots. Since connect sum is commutative, this group is abelian. Notice as above that a <em>slice</em> knot &#8212; i.e. a knot bounding a locally flat disk in the <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=4&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="4" title="4" class="latex" />-ball &#8212; is concordant to the unknot. Ribbon knots (those bounding ribbon disks) are smoothly slice, and therefore slice, and therefore concordant to the trivial knot. Concordance makes sense for codimension two knots in any dimension. In higher even dimensions, knots are always slice, and in higher odd dimensions, Levine <a href="http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=246314">found</a> an algebraic description of the concordance groups in terms of (Witt) equivalence classes of linking pairings on a Seifert surface; (some of) this information is contained in the <em>signature</em> of a knot.</p>
<p>Let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" /> be a knot (in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=S%5E3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="S^3" title="S^3" class="latex" /> for simplicity) with Seifert surface <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma" title="&#92;Sigma" class="latex" /> of genus <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=g&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="g" title="g" class="latex" />. If <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Calpha%2C%5Cbeta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;alpha,&#92;beta" title="&#92;alpha,&#92;beta" class="latex" /> are loops in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma" title="&#92;Sigma" class="latex" />, define <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=f%28%5Calpha%2C%5Cbeta%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="f(&#92;alpha,&#92;beta)" title="f(&#92;alpha,&#92;beta)" class="latex" /> to be the linking number of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Calpha&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;alpha" title="&#92;alpha" class="latex" /> with <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cbeta%5E%2B&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;beta^+" title="&#92;beta^+" class="latex" />, which is obtained from <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cbeta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;beta" title="&#92;beta" class="latex" /> by pushing it to the positive side of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma" title="&#92;Sigma" class="latex" />. The function <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=f&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="f" title="f" class="latex" /> is a bilinear form on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1%28%5CSigma%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1(&#92;Sigma)" title="H_1(&#92;Sigma)" class="latex" />, and after choosing generators, it can be expressed in terms of a matrix <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=V&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="V" title="V" class="latex" /> (called the <em>Seifert matrix</em> of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" />). The <em>signature</em> of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" />, denoted <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Csigma%28K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;sigma(K)" title="&#92;sigma(K)" class="latex" />, is the signature (in the usual sense) of the symmetric matrix <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=V+%2B+V%5ET&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="V + V^T" title="V + V^T" class="latex" />. Changing the orientation of a knot does not affect the signature, whereas taking mirror image multiplies it by <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=-1&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="-1" title="-1" class="latex" />. Moreover, if <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma_1%2C%5CSigma_2&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma_1,&#92;Sigma_2" title="&#92;Sigma_1,&#92;Sigma_2" class="latex" /> are Seifert surfaces for <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K_1%2CK_2&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K_1,K_2" title="K_1,K_2" class="latex" />, one can form a Seifert surface <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma" title="&#92;Sigma" class="latex" /> for <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K_1+%5C%23+K_2&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K_1 &#92;# K_2" title="K_1 &#92;# K_2" class="latex" /> for which there is some sphere <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=S%5E2+%5Cin+S%5E3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="S^2 &#92;in S^3" title="S^2 &#92;in S^3" class="latex" /> that intersects <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma" title="&#92;Sigma" class="latex" /> in a separating arc, so that the pieces on either side of the sphere are isotopic to the <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma_i&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma_i" title="&#92;Sigma_i" class="latex" />, and therefore the Seifert matrix of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K_1+%5C%23+K_2&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K_1 &#92;# K_2" title="K_1 &#92;# K_2" class="latex" /> can be chosen to be block diagonal, with one block for each of the Seifert matrices of the <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K_i&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K_i" title="K_i" class="latex" />; it follows that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Csigma%28K_1+%5C%23+K_2%29+%3D+%5Csigma%28K_1%29+%2B+%5Csigma%28K_2%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;sigma(K_1 &#92;# K_2) = &#92;sigma(K_1) + &#92;sigma(K_2)" title="&#92;sigma(K_1 &#92;# K_2) = &#92;sigma(K_1) + &#92;sigma(K_2)" class="latex" />. In fact it turns out that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Csigma&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;sigma" title="&#92;sigma" class="latex" /> is a <em>homomorphism</em> from <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cmathcal%7BC%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;mathcal{C}" title="&#92;mathcal{C}" class="latex" /> to <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cmathbb%7BZ%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;mathbb{Z}" title="&#92;mathbb{Z}" class="latex" />; equivalently (by the arguments above), it is zero on knots which are topologically slice. To see this, suppose <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" /> bounds a locally flat disk <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CDelta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Delta" title="&#92;Delta" class="latex" /> in the <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=4&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="4" title="4" class="latex" />-ball. The union <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma%27%3A%3D%5CSigma+%5Ccup+%5CDelta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma&#039;:=&#92;Sigma &#92;cup &#92;Delta" title="&#92;Sigma&#039;:=&#92;Sigma &#92;cup &#92;Delta" class="latex" /> is an embedded bicollared surface in the <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=4&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="4" title="4" class="latex" />-ball, which bounds a <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="3" title="3" class="latex" />-dimensional Seifert &#8220;surface&#8221; <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=W&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="W" title="W" class="latex" /> whose interior may be taken to be disjoint from <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=S%5E3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="S^3" title="S^3" class="latex" />. Now, it is a well-known fact that for any oriented <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="3" title="3" class="latex" />-manifold <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=W&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="W" title="W" class="latex" />, the inclusion <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpartial+W+%5Cto+W&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;partial W &#92;to W" title="&#92;partial W &#92;to W" class="latex" /> induces a map <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1%28%5Cpartial+W%29+%5Cto+H_1%28W%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1(&#92;partial W) &#92;to H_1(W)" title="H_1(&#92;partial W) &#92;to H_1(W)" class="latex" /> whose kernel is <em>Lagrangian</em> (with respect to the usual symplectic pairing on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1" title="H_1" class="latex" /> of an oriented surface). Geometrically, this means we can find a basis for the homology of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma%27&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma&#039;" title="&#92;Sigma&#039;" class="latex" /> (which is equal to the homology of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma" title="&#92;Sigma" class="latex" />) for which half of the basis elements bound <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=2&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="2" title="2" class="latex" />-chains in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=W&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="W" title="W" class="latex" />. Let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=W%5E%2B&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="W^+" title="W^+" class="latex" /> be obtained by pushing off <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=W&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="W" title="W" class="latex" /> in the positive direction. Then chains in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=W&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="W" title="W" class="latex" /> and chains in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=W%5E%2B&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="W^+" title="W^+" class="latex" /> are disjoint (since <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=W&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="W" title="W" class="latex" /> and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=W%5E%2B&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="W^+" title="W^+" class="latex" /> are disjoint) and therefore the Seifert matrix <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=V&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="V" title="V" class="latex" /> of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K" title="K" class="latex" /> has a block form for which the lower right <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=g+%5Ctimes+g&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="g &#92;times g" title="g &#92;times g" class="latex" /> block is identically zero. It follows that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=V%2BV%5ET&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="V+V^T" title="V+V^T" class="latex" /> also has a zero <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=g%5Ctimes+g&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="g&#92;times g" title="g&#92;times g" class="latex" /> lower right block, and therefore its signature is zero.</p>
<p>The Seifert matrix (and therefore the signature), like the Alexander polynomial, is sensitive to the structure of the first homology of the universal abelian cover of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=S%5E3+-+K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="S^3 - K" title="S^3 - K" class="latex" />; equivalently, to the structure of the maximal metabelian quotient of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpi_1%28S%5E3+-+K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;pi_1(S^3 - K)" title="&#92;pi_1(S^3 - K)" class="latex" />. More sophisticated &#8220;twisted&#8221; and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=L%5E2&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="L^2" title="L^2" class="latex" /> signatures can be obtained by studying further derived subgroups of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpi_1%28S%5E3+-+K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;pi_1(S^3 - K)" title="&#92;pi_1(S^3 - K)" class="latex" /> as modules over group rings of certain solvable groups with torsion-free abelian factors (the so-called <em>poly-torsion-free-abelian</em> groups). This was accomplished by <a href="http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1973052">Cochran-Orr-Teichner</a>, who used these methods to construct infinitely many new concordance invariants.</p>
<p>The end result of this discussion is the existence of many, many interesting homomorphisms from the knot concordance group to the reals, and by plat closure, many interesting invariants of braids. The connection with quasimorphisms is the following:</p>
<p><strong>Theorem</strong>(Brandenbursky): A homomorphism <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=I%3A%5Cmathcal%7BC%7D+%5Cto+%5Cmathbb%7BR%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="I:&#92;mathcal{C} &#92;to &#92;mathbb{R}" title="I:&#92;mathcal{C} &#92;to &#92;mathbb{R}" class="latex" /> gives rise to a quasimorphism on braid groups if there is a constant <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=C&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="C" title="C" class="latex" /> so that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7CI%28%5BK%5D%29%7C+%5Cle+C%5Ccdot%5C%7CK%5C%7C_g&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="|I([K])| &#92;le C&#92;cdot&#92;|K&#92;|_g" title="|I([K])| &#92;le C&#92;cdot&#92;|K&#92;|_g" class="latex" />, where <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5C%7C%5Ccdot%5C%7C_g&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;|&#92;cdot&#92;|_g" title="&#92;|&#92;cdot&#92;|_g" class="latex" /> denotes <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=4&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="4" title="4" class="latex" />-ball genus.</p>
<p>The proof is roughly the following: given pure braids <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Calpha%2C%5Cbeta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;alpha,&#92;beta" title="&#92;alpha,&#92;beta" class="latex" /> one forms the knots <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cwidehat%7B%5Calpha%5CDelta%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;widehat{&#92;alpha&#92;Delta}" title="&#92;widehat{&#92;alpha&#92;Delta}" class="latex" />, <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cwidehat%7B%5Cbeta%5CDelta%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;widehat{&#92;beta&#92;Delta}" title="&#92;widehat{&#92;beta&#92;Delta}" class="latex" /> and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cwidehat%7B%5Calpha%5Cbeta%5CDelta%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;widehat{&#92;alpha&#92;beta&#92;Delta}" title="&#92;widehat{&#92;alpha&#92;beta&#92;Delta}" class="latex" />. It is shown that the connect sum <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=L%3A%3D+%5Cwidehat%7B%5Calpha+%5CDelta%7D+%5C%23+%5Cwidehat%7B%5Cbeta%5CDelta%7D+%5C%23+%5Cwidehat%7B%5Calpha%5Cbeta%5CDelta%7D%5E%21&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="L:= &#92;widehat{&#92;alpha &#92;Delta} &#92;# &#92;widehat{&#92;beta&#92;Delta} &#92;# &#92;widehat{&#92;alpha&#92;beta&#92;Delta}^!" title="L:= &#92;widehat{&#92;alpha &#92;Delta} &#92;# &#92;widehat{&#92;beta&#92;Delta} &#92;# &#92;widehat{&#92;alpha&#92;beta&#92;Delta}^!" class="latex" /> bounds a Seifert surface whose genus may be universally bounded in terms of the number of strands in the braid group. Pushing this Seifert surface into the <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=4&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="4" title="4" class="latex" />-ball, the hypothesis of the theorem says that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=I&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="I" title="I" class="latex" /> is uniformly bounded on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=L&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="L" title="L" class="latex" />. Properties of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=I&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="I" title="I" class="latex" /> then give an estimate for the defect; qed.</p>
<p>It would be interesting to connect these observations up to other &#8220;natural&#8221; chiral, homogeneous invariants on mapping class groups. For example, associated to a braid or mapping class <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cphi+%5Cin+%5Ctext%7BMCG%7D%28S%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;phi &#92;in &#92;text{MCG}(S)" title="&#92;phi &#92;in &#92;text{MCG}(S)" class="latex" /> one can (usually) form a hyperbolic <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="3" title="3" class="latex" />-manifold <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M_%5Cphi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M_&#92;phi" title="M_&#92;phi" class="latex" /> which fibers over the circle, with fiber <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=S&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="S" title="S" class="latex" /> and monodromy <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cphi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;phi" title="&#92;phi" class="latex" />. The <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ceta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;eta" title="&#92;eta" class="latex" />-invariant of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M_%5Cphi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M_&#92;phi" title="M_&#92;phi" class="latex" /> is the signature defect <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ceta%28M_%5Cphi%29+%3D+%5Cint_Y+p_1%2F3+-+%5Ctext%7Bsign%7D%28Y%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;eta(M_&#92;phi) = &#92;int_Y p_1/3 - &#92;text{sign}(Y)" title="&#92;eta(M_&#92;phi) = &#92;int_Y p_1/3 - &#92;text{sign}(Y)" class="latex" /> where <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=Y&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="Y" title="Y" class="latex" /> is a <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=4&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="4" title="4" class="latex" />-manifold with <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpartial+Y+%3D+M_%5Cphi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;partial Y = M_&#92;phi" title="&#92;partial Y = M_&#92;phi" class="latex" /> with a product metric near the boundary, and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p_1&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p_1" title="p_1" class="latex" /> is the first Pontriagin form on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=Y&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="Y" title="Y" class="latex" /> (expressed in terms of the curvature of the metric). Is <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ceta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;eta" title="&#92;eta" class="latex" /> a quasimorphism on some subgroup of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctext%7BMCG%7D%28S%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;text{MCG}(S)" title="&#92;text{MCG}(S)" class="latex" /> (eg on a subgroup consisting entirely of pseudo-Anosov elements)?</p>
]]></html></oembed>