Difference between revisions of "VS, TS and TG Algebras"

From Drorbn
Jump to: navigation, search
(Abstract)
Line 84: Line 84:
  
 
===Locality===
 
===Locality===
 +
 +
'''Definition.''' A VS-algebra <math>{\mathbf A}</math> is called "local" if <math>\Psi_1\Psi_2=\Psi_2\Psi_1</math> in <math>A_m</math> whenever "<math>\Psi_2</math> regards the strands that <math>\Psi_1</math> is supported on as equivalent". More precisely, whenever <math>\Psi_i=\alpha_i^\star\Phi_i</math> for <math>i=1,2</math>, where <math>\Phi_i\in A_{n_i}</math> and <math>\alpha_i:\underline{m}\to\underline{n_i}</math> and where <math>\alpha_2</math> is constant on the subset of <math>\underline{m}</math> on which <math>\alpha_1</math> is non-zero.
 +
 +
It is an excellent idea to pause briefly and try to see why the informal part of the above definition matches with it formal part. Also, if you know about "locality in space" and "locality in scale" as they are described in {{ref|Bar-Natan_97}}, it is an excellent idea to verify that our single notion of locality is equivalent to the conjunction of the two localities of that paper.
 +
 +
'''Theorem.''' Any solution <math>(R,\Phi)</math> of the pentagon and hexagon equations in a local VS-algebra leads to an invariant of braids.
 +
 +
Of course, this theorem is not quite well-formulated; strictly speaking one can always take the invariant of braids in the theorem to be the trivial invariant. So the theorem fully makes sense only after its proof is given. But we have no intention of providing a proof here - the theorem and its proof are quite obvious if you think in the spirit of {{ref|Bar-Natan_97}}.
  
 
==TS-Algebras in Some Detail==
 
==TS-Algebras in Some Detail==

Revision as of 19:47, 15 October 2006

Contents

Abstract

We introduce VS-, TS- and TG-Algebras; three types of algebraic entities within which some basic equations of knot theory (related to Algebraic Knot Theory) can be written and potentially solved.

Why Bother?

  • These equations are valuable yet not well understood. My hope is to study them in many simpler spaces (i.e., in many simpler VS-, TS- and TG-Algebras) than the ones that naturally occur in knot theory, in the hope that out of many test cases an understanding will emerge.
  • In particular, one day I hope to write (or encourage the writing of) computer programs that will take a VS-, TS-, or TG-algebra "plug-in" and given it, will carry out all the necessary higher-level algebra. This will make it easier to study particular cases computationally. But for this, the notions of VS-, TS- and TG-Algebras must first be completely specified.

VS-Algebras in One Paragraph

A VS-Algebra (Vertical Strands Algebra) is an algebraic object that is endowed with the same operations as the algebras {\mathcal A}_n^{hor} of horizontal chord chord diagrams - multiplication (vertical stacking, a binary operation) and strand permutation, strand addition, strand doubling and strand deletion (all unary operations). It is local if it satisfies the same "locality in time" and "locality in space" relations that {\mathcal A}_n^{hor} satisfies [Bar-Natan_97]. In any local VS-algebra the equations for a Drinfel'd associator (i.e., the pentagon and the hexagon) can be written and potentially be solved, and solutions always lead to braid invariants. Likewise in any local VS-algebra the largely undocumented braidor equations can be written and potentially be solved, and solutions always lead to braid invariants.

TS-Algebras in One Paragraph

A TS-Algebra (Tangled Strands Algebra) is to tangles as a VS-algebra is to braids. Equally cryptically, it is to {\mathcal A}_n as a VS-algebra is to {\mathcal A}_n^{hor}. Thus a TS-algebra has the same unary operations as a VS-algebra along with a fancier collection of "products" that allow for "reversing" and "bending back" strands before they are concatenated. Thus every TS-algebra is in particular a VS-algebra, hence if it is "local" (with the same definition as for a VS-algebra), associators and braidors make sense it it. In a TS-algebra every associator or braidor satisfying some minor further symmetry conditions leads to a knot and link invariant. Furthermore, sufficiently symmetric associators lead to full-fledged Algebraic Knot Theories.

TG-Algebras in One Paragraph

A TG-Algebra (Trivalent Graph Algebra) is to knotted trivalent graphs as a TS-algebra is to tangles. Knotted trivalent graphs are equivalent to tangles, in some topological sense; indeed, given a knotted trivalent graph, pick a maximal tree and contract it until it is just a thick point. What remains, in the complement of that think point, is just a number of knotted edges with no vertices. That is, it is a tangle. It follows that a knotted trivalent graph is merely a tangle with just a bit of extra combinatorial labeling. Likewise the notions of a TG-algebra and of a TS-algebra are nearly equivalent. They differ mostly just by how certain things are labeled.

VS-Algebras in Some Detail

The basic definitions

Definition. For a natural number n let \underline{n} denote the set \{0,1,2,\ldots,n\}. Let {\mathbf{VS}} denote the category whose objects are the natural numbers and whose morphisms are given by

\operatorname{mor}_{\mathbf{VS}}(m,n)=\{\alpha:\underline{m}\to\underline{n}:\alpha(0)=0\},

with the obvious composition of morphisms. For brevity we will often specify morphisms/functions by simply listing their values, omitting the value at 0 as it is anyway fixed. Thus for example, \alpha=(1,2,2), or even shorter, \alpha=(122), means \alpha:\underline{3}\to\underline{2} with \alpha(0)=0, \alpha(1)=1, \alpha(2)=2 and \alpha(3)(2) (strictly speaking, the target space of (122) can be any \underline{n} with n\geq 2).

Interpretation. The object "n" stands for "n strands". A morphism \alpha:m\to n means "for any 1\leq k\leq m, strand number k in m looks at strand number \alpha(k) in n if \alpha(k)>0, and looks nowhere if \alpha(k)=0".

Definition. A VS-algebra is a contravariant functor {\mathbf A} from the category {\mathbf{VS}} to the category of algebras over some fixed ring of scalars. We denote {\mathbf A}(n) by A_n and {\mathbf A}(\alpha) by \alpha^\star.

Interpretation. In a TS-algebra we have an algebra for any number of strands, with multiplication corresponding to "stacking two n-stranded objects (imagine braids) one on top the other". We think of an element \Psi of A_n as "n strands each of which carrying some algebraic information". If \alpha:m\to n, then \alpha^\star\Psi has m strands carrying algebraic information, and if \alpha(k)>0, strand number k in \alpha^\star\Psi "reads" its information from strand number \alpha(k) in \Psi. If \alpha(k)=0, strand number k in \alpha^\star\Psi reads its information from nowhere, so it carries some "default" information, presumably "empty".

You are probably familiar with the notation used elsewhere (in [Bar-Natan_97], for example) when dealing with associators and the pentagon and hexagon equations. Here's a quick dictionary:

Elsewhere In Words Here In Words
(1\otimes\Delta):{\mathcal A}_2\to{\mathcal A}_3 Copy the first strand untouched and double the second strand (122)^\star The first output strand reads from the first input strand, the second and third both read from the second.
s_2:{\mathcal A}_3\to{\mathcal A}_2 Delete the second strand. (13)^\star Nothing reads from the second strand, as 2 isn't in the range of (13).
\Psi\mapsto\Psi^{23} Add an empty strand on the left. (012)^\star The first strand reads from nowhere to it is empty. The second and third output strands read from the first and second input strands respectively.
\Psi\mapsto\Psi^{231} Permute the strands: Install 1 on 2, 2 on 3 and 3 on 1. (312)^\star Permute the strands: Read 1 from 3, 2 from 1 and 3 from 2.

Thus the new notation is the opposite of the old when it comes to permutations: if \sigma is a permutation, \Psi^\sigma is now (\sigma^{-1})^\star\Psi. It is a small price to pay considering the very short description (as above) that now becomes available for VS-algebras.

The pentagon and the hexagons

The Pentagon For Parenthesized Braids.jpg The Hexagons For Parenthesized Braids.jpg
The Pentagon and the Hexagons for Parenthesized Braids

The main thing I'd like to do in a VS-algebra is to write and solve the pentagon and hexagons equations. The unknowns in these equations are an element R\in A_2 and an element \Phi\in A_3, and the equations read:

[Pentagon]
(1230)^\star\Phi\cdot(1223)^\star\Phi\cdot(0123)^\star\Phi = (1123)^\star\Phi\cdot(1233)^\star\Phi     in     A_4,

and

[Hexagons]
(112)^\star(R^{\pm 1}) = \Phi\cdot (012)^\star(R^{\pm 1})\cdot(132)^\star(\Phi^{-1})\cdot(102)^\star(R^{\pm 1})\cdot(231)^\star\Phi     in     A_3.

In old notation, this is:

\Phi^{123}\cdot(1\otimes\Delta\otimes 1)(\Phi)\cdot\Phi^{234}=(\Delta\otimes 1\otimes 1)(\Phi)\cdot(1\otimes 1\otimes\Delta)(\Phi)     in     {\mathcal A}_4,

and

(\Delta\otimes 1)(R^{\pm 1}) = \Phi^{123}\cdot (R^{\pm 1})^{23}\cdot(\Phi^{-1})^{132}\cdot(R^{\pm 1})^{13}\cdot\Phi^{312}     in     {\mathcal A}_3.

Locality

Definition. A VS-algebra {\mathbf A} is called "local" if \Psi_1\Psi_2=\Psi_2\Psi_1 in A_m whenever "\Psi_2 regards the strands that \Psi_1 is supported on as equivalent". More precisely, whenever \Psi_i=\alpha_i^\star\Phi_i for i=1,2, where \Phi_i\in A_{n_i} and \alpha_i:\underline{m}\to\underline{n_i} and where \alpha_2 is constant on the subset of \underline{m} on which \alpha_1 is non-zero.

It is an excellent idea to pause briefly and try to see why the informal part of the above definition matches with it formal part. Also, if you know about "locality in space" and "locality in scale" as they are described in [Bar-Natan_97], it is an excellent idea to verify that our single notion of locality is equivalent to the conjunction of the two localities of that paper.

Theorem. Any solution (R,\Phi) of the pentagon and hexagon equations in a local VS-algebra leads to an invariant of braids.

Of course, this theorem is not quite well-formulated; strictly speaking one can always take the invariant of braids in the theorem to be the trivial invariant. So the theorem fully makes sense only after its proof is given. But we have no intention of providing a proof here - the theorem and its proof are quite obvious if you think in the spirit of [Bar-Natan_97].

TS-Algebras in Some Detail

TG-Algebras is Some Detail

This section will surely wait a while to be written; at the moment I don't have an immediate reason to write it nor do I know exactly what I want written.

References

[Bar-Natan_97] ^  Dror Bar-Natan, Non-Associative Tangles, in Geometric topology, proceedings of the Georgia international topology conference, W. H. Kazez, ed., 139-183, Amer. Math. Soc. and International Press, Providence, 1997.