<?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[Knots with small rational&nbsp;genus]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>I recently uploaded a paper to the arXiv entitled <em><a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/0912.1843">Knots with small rational genus</a></em>, joint with Cameron Gordon. The genesis of this paper was a couple of nice (and related) talks at Caltech by Matthew Hedden and Jake Rasmussen in 2007. They both talked about potential applications of the theory of knot Floer homology to the Berge conjecture. A <em>Berge knot</em> is a (tame) knot <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 3-sphere which lies on a genus two Heegaard surface, and with the property that on each side of the Heegaard surface there is a meridian disk that the knot intersects exactly once. Equivalently, the inclusion of the knot into each (closed) handlebody sends the generator of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpi_1%28K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;pi_1(K)" title="&#92;pi_1(K)" class="latex" /> to a generator of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpi_1%28%5Ctext%7Bhandlebody%7D%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;pi_1(&#92;text{handlebody})" title="&#92;pi_1(&#92;text{handlebody})" class="latex" />. Note that since the 3-sphere admits a unique (up to isotopy) Heegaard splitting of any genus, one may think of such a knot as lying on a specific genus 2 surface 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" />. Such knots were classified by Berge; they admit (Dehn) surgeries which result in (nontrivial) Lens spaces. The Berge conjecture is the converse; i.e.:</p>
<p><strong>Berge Conjecture:</strong> 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" /> which admits a nontrivial Lens space surgery; i.e. there is a Lens space <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" /> and a knot <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K%27&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K&#039;" title="K&#039;" class="latex" /> in <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" /> for which <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" /> is homeomorphic to <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=L+-+K%27&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="L - K&#039;" title="L - K&#039;" class="latex" />. Then <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" /> is a Berge knot.</p>
<p>An equivalent formulation (of course) is to try to classify knots in Lens spaces which admit an <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" /> surgery, i.e. to identify the knots <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K%27&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K&#039;" title="K&#039;" class="latex" /> as in the formulation of the conjecture above. The equivalent formulation says that these knots should be 1-bridge. The strategy of Hedden-Rasmussen (building on work of Ken Baker and Eli Grigsby) to approach the Berge conjecture depends on characterizing such knots by properties which can be detected by topological invariants that behave well under surgery. An example of such a topological invariant is the Casson invariant <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Clambda%28%5Ccdot%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;lambda(&#92;cdot)" title="&#92;lambda(&#92;cdot)" class="latex" />, a <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" />-valued invariant of integer homology spheres which satisfies the surgery formula <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Clambda%28M_%7Bn%2B1%7D%29+-+%5Clambda%28M_n%29+%3D+%5Ctext%7BArf%7D%28K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;lambda(M_{n+1}) - &#92;lambda(M_n) = &#92;text{Arf}(K)" title="&#92;lambda(M_{n+1}) - &#92;lambda(M_n) = &#92;text{Arf}(K)" class="latex" /> where <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M_i&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M_i" title="M_i" class="latex" /> denotes the result of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=1%2Fi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="1/i" title="1/i" class="latex" /> surgery on some integral homology sphere <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" /> along a fixed knot <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" />, and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctext%7BArf%7D%28K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;text{Arf}(K)" title="&#92;text{Arf}(K)" class="latex" /> is the Arf invariant. For more sophisticated invariants like knot Floer homology, the surgery formula is replaced by an exact triangle. One important piece of topological information that is detected by knot Floer homology is the <em>genus</em> of a knot. The approach to the Berge conjecture thus rests on Ken Baker&#8217;s <a href="http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=2253458">impressive paper</a> showing that small genus knots (in a sense to be made precise) in Lens spaces have small bridge number.</p>
<p>Hedden remarked in his talk that his work, and that of his collaborators &#8220;gave the first examples of an infinite family of knots that were characterized by their knot Floer homology&#8221;. Though technically true, I think this overstates the role of knot Floer homology in this case, since the knots (1-bridge knots in Lens spaces) are entirely characterized (up to isotopy) by their genus (and therefore by any topological invariant which detects genus). My immediate instinct was to think that knots with small genus in <em>any</em> 3-manifold should <em>always</em> be quite special, and that a complete classification might even be feasible. My paper with Cameron confirms this suspicion, and gives such a classification. Let me admit at this point that I am not especially interested in the Berge conjecture <em>per se</em>, although I find it interesting that new ideas in 3-manifold topology are starting to have something meaningful to say about it. In any case, <em>I</em> shall not have anything else to say about it (meaningful or otherwise) in this post.</p>
<p>First I should say that I have been using the word &#8220;genus&#8221; in a somewhat sloppy manner. For an oriented knot <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 <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" />, a <em>Seifert surface</em> is a compact oriented embedded surface <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5CSigma+%5Csubset+S%5E3&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;Sigma &#92;subset S^3" title="&#92;Sigma &#92;subset S^3" class="latex" /> whose boundary is <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 genus of such a surface is a non-negative integer, and the least such genus over all Seifert surfaces is (said to be) the <em>genus</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=g%28K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="g(K)" title="g(K)" class="latex" />. Such a surface represents the generator in the relative homology group <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_2%28S%5E3%2C+K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_2(S^3, K)" title="H_2(S^3, K)" class="latex" /> which equals <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1%28K%29+%3D+%5Cmathbb%7BZ%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1(K) = &#92;mathbb{Z}" title="H_1(K) = &#92;mathbb{Z}" class="latex" /> since <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" /> has vanishing homology in dimensions 1 and 2. This relative homology group is dual to <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H%5E1%28S%5E3+-+K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H^1(S^3 - K)" title="H^1(S^3 - K)" class="latex" />, which is parameterized by homotopy classes of maps from <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" /> to a circle (which is a <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K%28%5Cmathbb%7BZ%7D%2C1%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K(&#92;mathbb{Z},1)" title="K(&#92;mathbb{Z},1)" class="latex" />). The preimage of a regular value under a smooth map dual to the homology class is a smooth proper surface in <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" /> whose closure is a Seifert surface. It is immediate that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=g%28K%29%3D0&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="g(K)=0" title="g(K)=0" class="latex" /> if and only if <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" /> is an unknot; in other words, the unknot is &#8220;characterized&#8221; by its genus. There are infinitely many knots of any positive genus 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" />; on the other hand, there are only two fibered genus 1 knots &#8212; the trefoil and the figure 8 knot (three if you distinguish the left-handed from the right-handed trefoil), and it is worth remarking (from the point of view of the motivation of characterizing knots by topological invariants) that a <a href="http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=2357503">theorem</a> of Yi Ni says that fiberedness of knots can be detected by knot Floer homology.</p>
<p>For knots in integral homology <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" />-spheres, the situation is very similar: every knot admits a Seifert surface, and the least genus of such a surface is the genus of a knot. The unknot is (always) characterized by the fact that it has genus <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=0&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="0" title="0" class="latex" />, but there are infinitely many knots of every positive genus. For a knot <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 a general <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&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" /> it is not so easy to define genus. A necessary and sufficient condition for <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 bound an embedded surface in its complement is that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5BK%5D%3D1&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="[K]=1" title="[K]=1" class="latex" /> in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1%28M%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1(M)" title="H_1(M)" class="latex" />. However, if <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5BK%5D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="[K]" title="[K]" class="latex" /> has finite order, one can find an open properly embedded 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" /> in the complement 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" /> whose &#8220;boundary&#8221; wraps some number of times around <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" />. Technically, let <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" /> be a compact oriented surface, and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=f%3A%5CSigma+%5Cto+M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="f:&#92;Sigma &#92;to M" title="f:&#92;Sigma &#92;to M" class="latex" /> a map which restricts to an embedding from the interior 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" /> into <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M-K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M-K" title="M-K" class="latex" />, and which restricts to an oriented covering map from <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpartial+%5CSigma&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;partial &#92;Sigma" title="&#92;partial &#92;Sigma" class="latex" /> to <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" /> (note that we allow <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" /> to have multiple boundary components). If <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p" title="p" class="latex" /> is the degree of the covering map <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpartial+%5CSigma+%5Cto+K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;partial &#92;Sigma &#92;to K" title="&#92;partial &#92;Sigma &#92;to K" class="latex" />, we call <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" /> a <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p" title="p" class="latex" />-Seifert surface, and define the rational genus 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" /> to be <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=-%5Cchi%5E-%28%5CSigma%29%2F2p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="-&#92;chi^-(&#92;Sigma)/2p" title="-&#92;chi^-(&#92;Sigma)/2p" class="latex" />, where <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cchi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;chi" title="&#92;chi" class="latex" /> denotes Euler characteristic, and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cchi%5E-%28%5CSigma%29+%3D+%5Cmin%280%2C%5Cchi%28%5CSigma%29%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;chi^-(&#92;Sigma) = &#92;min(0,&#92;chi(&#92;Sigma))" title="&#92;chi^-(&#92;Sigma) = &#92;min(0,&#92;chi(&#92;Sigma))" class="latex" /> (for a connected 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" />). The reason to use Euler characteristic instead of genus is that Euler characteristic is multiplicative under coverings (unlike genus), and behaves well with respect to &#8220;local&#8221; operations on surfaces like cut-and-paste. Moreover, (negative) Euler characteristic, unlike genus, is a good measure of complexity for surfaces with possibly many boundary components. The coefficient of <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" /> in the denominator reflects the fact that genus is &#8220;almost&#8221; <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" /> times Euler characteristic. With this definition, we say that the <em>rational genus of </em> <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" />, for any knot <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K+%5Csubset+M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K &#92;subset M" title="K &#92;subset M" class="latex" /> with <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5BK%5D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="[K]" title="[K]" class="latex" /> of finite order in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1%28M%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1(M)" title="H_1(M)" class="latex" />, is the infimum of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=-%5Cchi%5E-%28%5CSigma%29%2F2p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="-&#92;chi^-(&#92;Sigma)/2p" title="-&#92;chi^-(&#92;Sigma)/2p" class="latex" /> over all <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p" title="p" class="latex" />-Seifert surfaces for <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" /> and all <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p" title="p" class="latex" />. The purpose of our paper is to give a complete classification of knots with sufficiently small rational genus, and to show that such knots are always &#8220;geometric&#8221; &#8212; i.e. they can be isotoped into a normal form which is sensitive to the geometric decomposition of the ambient <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&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" />. Thus the concept of rational genus makes contact between the homological world of the Thurston norm, knot Floer homology and such invariants, and the geometric world of hyperbolic structures, JSJ decompositions and so on.</p>
<p>It is worth pointing out at this point that knots with small rational genus are <em>not</em> special by virtue of being <em>rare</em>: if <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" /> is any 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 instance) of genus <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=g%28K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="g(K)" title="g(K)" class="latex" />, and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K%27&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K&#039;" title="K&#039;" class="latex" /> in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" /> is obtained by <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p%2Fq&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p/q" title="p/q" class="latex" /> Dehn surgery 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" />, then the knot <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=K%27&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="K&#039;" title="K&#039;" class="latex" /> has order <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p" title="p" class="latex" /> in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1%28M%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1(M)" title="H_1(M)" class="latex" />, and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5C%7CK%27%5C%7C+%5Cle+%28g-1%2F2%29%2F2p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;|K&#039;&#92;| &#92;le (g-1/2)/2p" title="&#92;|K&#039;&#92;| &#92;le (g-1/2)/2p" class="latex" />. Since for &#8220;most&#8221; coprime <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p%2Fq&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p/q" title="p/q" class="latex" /> the integer <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p" title="p" class="latex" /> is arbitrarily large, it follows that &#8220;most&#8221; knots obtained in this way have arbitrarily small rational genus.</p>
<p>There is a precise connection between rational genus and the Thurston norm. There is an exact sequence in homology, which contains the fragment <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_2%28M%2CK%29+%5Cto+H_1%28K%29+%5Cto+H_1%28M%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_2(M,K) &#92;to H_1(K) &#92;to H_1(M)" title="H_2(M,K) &#92;to H_1(K) &#92;to H_1(M)" class="latex" />. Since <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1%28K%29+%3D+%5Cmathbb%7BZ%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1(K) = &#92;mathbb{Z}" title="H_1(K) = &#92;mathbb{Z}" class="latex" />, the kernel of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1%28K%29+%5Cto+H_1%28M%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1(K) &#92;to H_1(M)" title="H_1(K) &#92;to H_1(M)" class="latex" /> is generated by some class <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=n%5BK%5D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="n[K]" title="n[K]" class="latex" />, and one can define the affine subspace <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpartial%5E%7B-1%7D%28n%5BK%5D%29+%5Csubset+H_2%28M%2CK%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;partial^{-1}(n[K]) &#92;subset H_2(M,K)" title="&#92;partial^{-1}(n[K]) &#92;subset H_2(M,K)" class="latex" />. By excision, we identify <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_2%28M%2CK%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_2(M,K)" title="H_2(M,K)" class="latex" /> with <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_2%28M-%5Ctext%7Bint%7D%28N%28K%29%29%2C+%5Cpartial+N%28K%29%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_2(M-&#92;text{int}(N(K)), &#92;partial N(K))" title="H_2(M-&#92;text{int}(N(K)), &#92;partial N(K))" class="latex" /> where <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=N%28K%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="N(K)" title="N(K)" class="latex" /> is a tubular neighborhood 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" />. Under this identification, the rational genus 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" /> is equal to <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cinf+%5C%7C%5B%5CSigma%5D%5C%7C_T%2F2&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;inf &#92;|[&#92;Sigma]&#92;|_T/2" title="&#92;inf &#92;|[&#92;Sigma]&#92;|_T/2" class="latex" /> where <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5C%7C%5Ccdot%5C%7C_T&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;|&#92;cdot&#92;|_T" title="&#92;|&#92;cdot&#92;|_T" class="latex" /> denotes the (relative) Thurston norm, and the infimum is taken over classes in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_2%28M-%5Ctext%7Bint%7D%28N%28K%29%29%2C+%5Cpartial+N%28K%29%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_2(M-&#92;text{int}(N(K)), &#92;partial N(K))" title="H_2(M-&#92;text{int}(N(K)), &#92;partial N(K))" class="latex" /> in the affine subspace corresponding to <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpartial%5E%7B-1%7D%28n%5BK%5D%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;partial^{-1}(n[K])" title="&#92;partial^{-1}(n[K])" class="latex" />. Since the Thurston norm is a convex piecewise rational function, this infimum is realized at some rational point. In other words, rational genus of any knot is rational, and is realized by some <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p" title="p" class="latex" />-Seifert surface, where <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" /> as above divides <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p" title="p" class="latex" /> (note: if <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" /> is a rational homology sphere, then necessarily <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p%3Dn&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p=n" title="p=n" class="latex" />, but if the rank of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=H_1%28M%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="H_1(M)" title="H_1(M)" class="latex" /> is positive, this is not necessarily true, and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p%2Fn&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p/n" title="p/n" class="latex" /> might be arbitrarily large). This relationship to the Thurston norm also gives a straightforward algorithm to compute rational genus, since one can compute Thurston norm e.g. by linear programming in normal surface space relative to any triangulation.</p>
<p>The precise statement of results depends on the geometric decomposition of the ambient manifold <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" />. By the geometrization theorem (of Perelman), a closed, orientable <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 is either reducible (i.e. contains an embedded sphere that does not bound a ball), or is a Lens space, or is hyperbolic, or is a small Seifert fiber space, or is toroidal (i.e. contains an essential (<img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cpi_1&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;pi_1" title="&#92;pi_1" class="latex" />-injective) embedded torus). For the record, the complete &#8220;classification&#8221; is as follows:</p>
<p><strong>Reducible Theorem: </strong>Let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> be a knot in a reducible manifold <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" />. Then either</p>
<ol>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B%5C%7CK%5C%7C+%5Cge+1%2F12%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/12}" title="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/12}" class="latex" />; or</li>
<li>there is a decomposition <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM+%3D+M%27+%5C%23+M%27%27%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M = M&#039; &#92;# M&#039;&#039;}" title="{M = M&#039; &#92;# M&#039;&#039;}" class="latex" />, <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK+%5Csubset+M%27%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K &#92;subset M&#039;}" title="{K &#92;subset M&#039;}" class="latex" /> and either
<ol>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%27%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M&#039;}" title="{M&#039;}" class="latex" /> is irreducible, or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B%28M%27%2CK%29+%3D+%28%5Cmathbb%7BRP%7D%5E3%2C%5Cmathbb%7BRP%7D%5E1%29%5C%23%28%5Cmathbb%7BRP%7D%5E3%2C%5Cmathbb%7BRP%7D%5E1%29%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{(M&#039;,K) = (&#92;mathbb{RP}^3,&#92;mathbb{RP}^1)&#92;#(&#92;mathbb{RP}^3,&#92;mathbb{RP}^1)}" title="{(M&#039;,K) = (&#92;mathbb{RP}^3,&#92;mathbb{RP}^1)&#92;#(&#92;mathbb{RP}^3,&#92;mathbb{RP}^1)}" class="latex" /></li>
</ol>
</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Lens Theorem: </strong>Let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> be a knot in a lens space <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" />. Then either</p>
<ol>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B%5C%7CK%5C%7C+%5Cge+1%2F24%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/24}" title="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/24}" class="latex" />; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> lies on a Heegaard torus in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" />; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" /> is of the form <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BL%284k%2C2k-1%29%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{L(4k,2k-1)}" title="{L(4k,2k-1)}" class="latex" /> and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> lies on a Klein bottle in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" /> as a non-separating orientation-preserving curve.</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Hyperbolic Theorem: </strong>Let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> be a knot in a closed hyperbolic <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B3%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{3}" title="{3}" class="latex" />-manifold <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" />. Then either</p>
<ol>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B%5C%7CK%5C%7C+%5Cge+1%2F402%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/402}" title="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/402}" class="latex" />; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is trivial; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is isotopic to a cable of the core of a Margulis tube.</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Small SFS Theorem: </strong>Let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" /> be an atoroidal Seifert fiber space over <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BS%5E2%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{S^2}" title="{S^2}" class="latex" /> with three exceptional fibers and let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> be a knot in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" />. Then either</p>
<ol>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B%5C%7CK%5C%7C+%5Cge+1%2F402%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/402}" title="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/402}" class="latex" />; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is trivial; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is a cable of an exceptional Seifert fiber of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" />; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" /> is a prism manifold and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is a fiber in the Seifert fiber structure of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" /> over <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B%5Cmathbb%7BRP%7D%5E2%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{&#92;mathbb{RP}^2}" title="{&#92;mathbb{RP}^2}" class="latex" /> with at most one exceptional fiber.</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>Toroidal Theorem: </strong>Let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" /> be a closed, irreducible, toroidal 3-manifold, and let <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> be a knot in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" />. Then either</p>
<ol>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B%5C%7CK%5C%7C+%5Cge+1%2F402%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/402}" title="{&#92;|K&#92;| &#92;ge 1/402}" class="latex" />; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is trivial; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is contained in a hyperbolic piece <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BN%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{N}" title="{N}" class="latex" /> of the JSJ decomposition of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" /> and is isotopic either to a cable of a core of a Margulis tube or into a component of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B%5Cpartial+N%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{&#92;partial N}" title="{&#92;partial N}" class="latex" />; or</li>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is contained in a Seifert fiber piece <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BN%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{N}" title="{N}" class="latex" /> of the JSJ decomposition of <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" /> and either
<ol>
<li> <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is isotopic to an ordinary fiber or a cable of an exceptional fiber or into <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7B%5Cpartial+N%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{&#92;partial N}" title="{&#92;partial N}" class="latex" />, or</li>
<li> <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BN%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{N}" title="{N}" class="latex" /> contains a copy <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BQ%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{Q}" title="{Q}" class="latex" /> of the twisted <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BS%5E1%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{S^1}" title="{S^1}" class="latex" /> bundle over the Möbius band and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is contained in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BQ%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{Q}" title="{Q}" class="latex" /> as a fiber in this bundle structure;</li>
</ol>
</li>
<p>or</p>
<li><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BM%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{M}" title="{M}" class="latex" /> is a <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BT%5E2%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{T^2}" title="{T^2}" class="latex" />-bundle over <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BS%5E1%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{S^1}" title="{S^1}" class="latex" /> with Anosov monodromy and <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%7BK%7D&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000000&#038;s=0" alt="{K}" title="{K}" class="latex" /> is contained in a fiber.</li>
</ol>
<p>The constant <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=1%2F402&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="1/402" title="1/402" class="latex" /> is presumably not optimal, but reflects the coarseness of certain geometric estimates at a particular step in the argument. Broadly speaking, there are two cases to consider: when the knot complement <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M-K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M-K" title="M-K" class="latex" /> is hyperbolic, and when it is not. The complement <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M-K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M-K" title="M-K" class="latex" /> is hyperbolic unless it contains an essential subsurface of non-negative Euler characteristic.</p>
<p>The case that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M-K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M-K" title="M-K" class="latex" /> is hyperbolic is conceptually easiest to analyze. Let <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" /> be a surface, embedded in <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" /> and with boundary wrapping some number of times around <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" />, realizing the rational genus 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 complete hyperbolic structure on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M-K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M-K" title="M-K" class="latex" /> may be deformed, adding back <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" /> as a <em>cone geodesic</em>. Just as a cone can be obtained from a wedge of paper by gluing the two edges together, the geometry of a cone geodesic is locally modeled on the quotient space obtained from a (3-dimensional hyperbolic) wedge by gluing the two flat faces together. The thinner the wedge, the smaller the cone angle along the geodesic. For all sufficiently small angles <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctheta+%3E+0&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;theta &gt; 0" title="&#92;theta &gt; 0" class="latex" />, Thurston proved that there exists a unique hyperbolic metric on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" /> which is singular along a cone geodesic, isotopic to <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 cone angle <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctheta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;theta" title="&#92;theta" class="latex" />. Call this metric space <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M_%5Ctheta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M_&#92;theta" title="M_&#92;theta" class="latex" />. The cone angle can be increased, deforming the geometry in a family of spaces, until one of the following three things happens:</p>
<ol>
<li>The cone angle is increased all the way to <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=2%5Cpi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="2&#92;pi" title="2&#92;pi" class="latex" />, resulting in the complete hyperbolic structure on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" />, in which <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" /> is isotopic to an embedded geodesic; or</li>
<li>The volume of the family of manifolds <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M_%5Ctheta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M_&#92;theta" title="M_&#92;theta" class="latex" /> goes to zero (and either converges after rescaling to a Euclidean cone manifold, or converges after rescaling to have fixed diameter and injectivity radius going to zero everywhere); or</li>
<li>The cone locus bumps into itself (this can only happen for <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctheta+%3E+%5Cpi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;theta &gt; &#92;pi" title="&#92;theta &gt; &#92;pi" class="latex" />).</li>
</ol>
<p>As the cone angle along <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" /> increases, so does the length of the cone geodesic. Simultaneously, the diameter of an embedded tube about this diameter <em>decreases</em>. While the diameter of the tube is big, the deformation can continue. Hodgson-Kerckhoff <a href="http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=2178964">analyzed</a> the kinds of degenerations that can occur, and obtained <em>universal</em> geometric control on how fast the tube diameter can shrink, or the length of the cone geodesic grow. They showed that the cone angle can be increased (giving rise to a family of singular hyperbolic structures <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M_%5Ctheta&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M_&#92;theta" title="M_&#92;theta" class="latex" />) either until <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctheta+%3D+2%5Cpi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;theta = 2&#92;pi" title="&#92;theta = 2&#92;pi" class="latex" />, or until the product <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctheta+%5Ccdot+%5Cell&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;theta &#92;cdot &#92;ell" title="&#92;theta &#92;cdot &#92;ell" class="latex" />, where <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Cell&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;ell" title="&#92;ell" class="latex" /> is the length of the cone geodesic, is at least <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=1.019675&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="1.019675" title="1.019675" class="latex" />, at which point the diameter of an embedded tube about this cone geodesic is at least <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=0.531&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="0.531" title="0.531" class="latex" />. Since <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctheta+%3C+2%5Cpi&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;theta &lt; 2&#92;pi" title="&#92;theta &lt; 2&#92;pi" class="latex" /> in the latter case, one obtains a lower bound on both the length of the cone geodesic and the diameter of an embedded tube, independent 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" /> or <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M" title="M" class="latex" />.</p>
<p>Now, one would like to use this big tube to conclude that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5C%7CK%5C%7C&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;|K&#92;|" title="&#92;|K&#92;|" class="latex" /> is large. This is accomplished as follows. Geometrically, one constructs a <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" />-form <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" /> which agrees with the length form on the cone geodesic, which is supported in the tube, and which satisfies <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5C%7Cd%5Calpha%5C%7C%5Cle+C&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;|d&#92;alpha&#92;|&#92;le C" title="&#92;|d&#92;alpha&#92;|&#92;le C" class="latex" /> pointwise for some (universal) 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" />. Then one uses this <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" />-form to control the topology 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" />. By Stokes theorem, for any surface <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" /> homotopic to <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 <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M-K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M-K" title="M-K" class="latex" /> one has an estimate</p>
<p style="padding-left:30px;"><img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=1.019675%2F2%5Cpi+%5Cle+%5Cell+%3D+%5Cint_K+%5Calpha+%3D+%5Cfrac+%7B1%7D%7Bp%7D+%5Cint_S+d%5Calpha+%5Cle+%5Cfrac+%7BC%7D%7Bp%7D+%5Ctext%7Barea%7D%28S%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="1.019675/2&#92;pi &#92;le &#92;ell = &#92;int_K &#92;alpha = &#92;frac {1}{p} &#92;int_S d&#92;alpha &#92;le &#92;frac {C}{p} &#92;text{area}(S)" title="1.019675/2&#92;pi &#92;le &#92;ell = &#92;int_K &#92;alpha = &#92;frac {1}{p} &#92;int_S d&#92;alpha &#92;le &#92;frac {C}{p} &#92;text{area}(S)" class="latex" /></p>
<p>In particular, the area of <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" /> divided by <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=p&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="p" title="p" class="latex" /> can&#8217;t be too small. However, it turns out that one can find a surface <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" /> as above with <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctext%7Barea%7D%28S%29+%5Cle+-2%5Cpi%5Cchi%28S%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;text{area}(S) &#92;le -2&#92;pi&#92;chi(S)" title="&#92;text{area}(S) &#92;le -2&#92;pi&#92;chi(S)" class="latex" />; such an estimate is enough to obtain a universal lower bound on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5C%7CK%5C%7C&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;|K&#92;|" title="&#92;|K&#92;|" class="latex" />. Such a surface <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" /> can be constructed either by the shrinkwrapping method of <a href="http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=2188131">Calegari-Gabai</a>, or the (related) PL-wrapping method of <a href="http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=2255495">Soma</a>. Roughly speaking, one uses the cone geodesic as an &#8220;obstacle&#8221;, and finds a surface <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" /> of least area homotopic to <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" /> (rel. boundary) subject to the constraint that it cannot cross the geodesic. Away from the cone geodesic, <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" /> looks like an ordinary minimal surface. In particular, its intrinsic curvature is no more than the extrinsic curvature of hyperbolic space, which is <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" /> everywhere. Along the geodesic, <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" /> looks like a bedsheet hanging on a clothesline; in particular, it does not accumulate any corners or atoms of positive curvature along this singularity, so the Gauss-Bonnet theorem gives the desired bound on <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5Ctext%7Barea%7D%28S%29&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;text{area}(S)" title="&#92;text{area}(S)" class="latex" />.</p>
<p>This leaves the case that <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M-K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M-K" title="M-K" class="latex" /> is not hyperbolic to analyze. As remarked above, this only occurs when <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=M-K&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="M-K" title="M-K" class="latex" /> contains an essential surface (which might be closed or proper) of non-negative Euler characteristic, i.e. a sphere, a disk, an annulus or a torus. In this case, one tries to make the intersection 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" /> with this essential surface as simple as possible; if one arranges this just right, every intersection contributes a definite amount to the topology 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" />, and one can conclude either 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 complicated (in which case <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=%5C%7CK%5C%7C&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="&#92;|K&#92;|" title="&#92;|K&#92;|" class="latex" /> is large), or that the intersection is simple, and therefore draw some topological conclusion.</p>
<p>To actually do this in practice is quite complicated, but fortunately it relies on (largely combinatorial) methods developed at length by Gabai, Scharlemann, Gordon and others over the last 30 years to analyze (so-called) &#8220;exceptional surgeries&#8221;. Of course, the argument is still complicated, and this analysis takes up most of the length of the paper. It is also worth pointing out that every case provided for by the classification above actually occurs, with examples of arbitrarily small rational genus.</p>
<p>This paper raises several natural questions, the most obvious of which is whether the explicit (but quite small) constants can be improved in any way. The constant <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=1%2F402&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="1/402" title="1/402" class="latex" /> in the statement of the Toroidal Theorem is really only there to take care of a knot sitting inside a hyperbolic piece in the decomposition; a knot that interacts in a meaningful way with an essential torus necessarily has rational genus at least <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=1%2F24&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="1/24" title="1/24" class="latex" /> (for a precise statement, see the paper). As remarked above, knots of (ordinary) genus <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" /> are very plentiful, even 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" />, and do not &#8220;see&#8221; any of the ambient geometry, so the wildest and most optimistic guess might be that there is a chance of classifying knots of rational genus at most <img src="https://s0.wp.com/latex.php?latex=1%2F4&#038;bg=ffffff&#038;fg=000&#038;s=0" alt="1/4" title="1/4" class="latex" />. There are some (very weak) reasons to think that this fraction is critical, at least in some cases, not least of which is the papers of Hedden and Ni mentioned above. But in the hyperbolic case, it is probably not easy to get a better estimate using purely geometric arguments.</p>
<p>Another approach might be to try to substitute another conclusion (again in the hyperbolic case) than that <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 isotopic to the cable of a core of a Margulis tube. For instance, one might ask for <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 admit an insulator family (of the kind Gabai used <a href="http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=1354958">here</a>), or one might merely ask that <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 unknotted in the universal cover, or satisfy some other condition. This goes to the heart of a very, very difficult and important question, namely how to identify geometric features of codimension 2 objects in (especially hyperbolic) geometric 3-manifolds from purely topological properties. If I am optimistic, then I can imagine that this paper makes a contribution, however small, to this ongoing project.</p>
]]></html></oembed>