This paper explores relative knot invariants, establishing inequalities, their additive properties, limitations, and classification results for relatively Legendrian simple knots.
Contribution
It extends classical knot invariants to the relative case, providing new inequalities, additive properties, and classification insights.
Limitations similar to classical invariants are observed.
Abstract
We state Bennequin inequalities in the relative case, and show that the relative invariants are additive under relative connected sums. We show they exhibit similar limitations as their classical analogues. We study relatively Legendrian simple knots and give some classification results.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsGeometric and Algebraic Topology · Advanced Combinatorial Mathematics · semigroups and automata theory
Full text
Relative Knot Invariants: Properties and Applications
Georgi D. Gospodinov
Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering, 1000 Olin Way, Needham, MA 02492
We state Bennequin inequalities in the relative case, and show that the relative invariants are additive under relative connected sums. We show they exhibit similar limitations as their classical analogues. We study relatively Legendrian simple knots and give some classification results.
Key words and phrases:
Legendrian knots, relative invariants, contact connected sum
1. Introduction
Classifying Legendrian and transverse knots in contact 3-manifolds has been an important part of the recent development of 3-manifold topology. One of the breakthroughs in this direction came about with the work of GIroux and the theory of convex surfaces (see [1, 10, 11, 13]). Ideas of convex surface theory are usually applied to null-homologous knots in a contact 3-manifold. Our goal is to apply them in the case when a knot is homologous to another “reference” knot.
In [17], we defined the following relative invariants.
Definition 1.1**.**
Let K and J be homologous Legendrian knots in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ) oriented accordingly with K∪J=∂Σ for an oriented embedded Seifert surface Σ so that [∂Σ]=[K]−[J]. Define the Thurston-Bennequin invariant of K relative to J by
[TABLE]
where FrΣ denotes the Seifert framing that K (resp. J) inherits from Σ, and tw(ξ,FrΣ) denotes the number of 2π-twists (with sign) of the contact framing relative to FrΣ along K or J. For push-offs K′ and J′ of K and J in the direction normal to the contact planes, tbΣ(K,J)=K′⋅Σ−J′⋅Σ=lkΣ(K′,K)−lkΣ(J′,J).
Definition 1.2**.**
Let K and J be homologous Legendrian knots in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ) oriented accordingly with K∪J=∂Σ for an oriented embedded Seifert surface Σ so that [∂Σ]=[K]−[J]. The restriction to K of the trivialized contact 2-plane field ξ∣Σ gives a map σ:ξ∣K→K×R2, under which a non-zero tangent vector field vK to K traces out a path of vectors in R2. We can then compute the winding number wσ(vK) and similarly for J. Then define the relative rotation number of K by
[TABLE]
Equivalently, rΣ(K,J)=e(ξ,vK∪vJ)([Σ]).
Definition 1.3**.**
Let K and J be homologous transverse knots in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ) oriented accordingly with K∪J=∂Σ for an oriented embedded Seifert surface Σ so that [∂Σ]=[K]−[J]. The contact 2-plane field ξ is trivial over Σ, so there exists a nonzero vector field v in ξ∣Σ. Take K′ and J′ to be the push offs of K and J in the direction of v. Then define the relative self-linking number of K with respect to J by
[TABLE]
In what follow, we establish relative versions of the Bennequin inequalities and develop some prototypical examples. We describe relative connected sums of Legendrian and transverse knots and study the additivity of the relative invariants, following the foundational work of Etnyre-Honda [11]. We show that the relative invariants exhibit similar limitations as their classical analogues, in particular, the relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant and the relative rotation number are not able to distinguish relative connected sums of the Chekanov knots [3] which are smoothly isotopic, have equal relative invariants, but are not Legendrian isotopic. We study basic knot types which can be classified by their relative invariants, and give a generalization of the structure theorem of Etnyre-Honda [11] which classifies Legendrian knots in a relative knot type in terms of their relative connected sum prime components.
2. Acknowledgements
I would like to express deep gratitude to John Etnyre for his guidance and help with many fundamental and technical aspects of this work. I am also grateful to my advisor Danny Ruberman for his patience and support throughout my graduate years when the ideas of this paper were developed.
3. Background
We briefly recall some facts from contact geometry and convex surface theory. This is far from a complete introduction to the subject, and the reader should consult the more complete treatment in [1, 10, 11, 13].
Definition 3.1**.**
An (transversely) oriented positive contact structure ξ on M is an oriented 2-plane field ξ⊂TM for which there is a 1-form α such that ξ=kerα and α∧dα>0 (recall that M is oriented).
Two contact structures ξ1,ξ2 on a 3-manifold M are homotopic if they are homotopic as 2-plane distributions. They are isotopic if they are homotopic through contact structures. They are contactomorphic if there is a diffeomorphism f:M→M such that f sends one of the contact structures to the other, i.e., f∗(ξ1)=ξ2. Then f is called a contactomorphism.
Perturbing a contact structure occurs only through perturbing the ambient manifold, as the theorem below states.
Theorem 3.2** (Gray Stability).**
Given a 1-parameter family of contact structures ξt,t∈[0,1], there is a 1-parameter family of diffeomorphisms ft:M→M such that (ft)∗(ξ0)=ξt for all t.
A smooth oriented embedding of S1 in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ) is called a Legendrian knot if it is everywhere tangent to the contact planes. It is a transverse knot if it is everywhere transverse to the contact planes.
If K⊂Σ is a simple closed Legendrian curve in an embedded surface Σ in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ), then twΣ(K) is the twisting of ξ along K relative to the Seifert framing FrΣ. That is, both ξ and Σ give K a framing (a trivialization of its normal bundle) by taking a vector field normal to K and tangent to ξ or Σ, respectively (note that ξ is trivializable over Σ). Then twΣ(K) measures the number of 2π-twists (as we traverse the oriented K) of the vector field corresponding to ξ relative to the vector field coming from Σ. By convention, left-handed twists are negative and right-handed twists are positive. Equivalently, take a push-off K′ of K along a vector field transverse to ξ. Then twΣ(K) is equal the signed intersection of K′ with Σ, twΣ(K)=K′⋅Σ, or the linking number of K with K′.
Let Σ be an oriented compact surface embedded in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ). If ∂Σ is nonempty, assume that it is Legendrian. Then the line field lp=ξp∩TpΣ, p∈Σ, integrates to a singular foliation on Σ called the characteristic foliation, denoted Σξ.
The contact structure ξ is called overtwisted if there is an embedded disc D such that Dξ contains a closed leaf. Such a disc is called an overtwisted disc. If there are no overtwisted discs in ξ, then the contact structure is called tight.
Now we turn to the theory of convex surfaces, which have been a very useful tool in the study of 3-dimensional contact manifolds.
Definition 3.3**.**
Let Σ be an oriented compact surface embedded in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ). If ∂Σ is nonempty, assume that it is Legendrian. Then Σ is called convex if there exists a contact vector fieldX that is transverse to Σ (a contact vector field X is a vector field whose flow preserves the contact structure).
Any closed surface is C∞-close to a convex surface. If Σ has Legendrian boundary with twΣ(K)≤0 for all components K of ∂Σ, then after a C0-small perturbation of Σ near the boundary (but fixing the boundary), Σ will be C∞-close to a convex surface.
Definition 3.4**.**
Let Σ be a convex surface with X a transverse contact vector field. The set ΓΣ={p∈Σ∣Xp∈ξp} is an embedded multi-curve on Σ called the dividing set.
Proposition 3.5**.**
Let F be a singular foliation on Σ and let Γ be a multi-curve on Sigma. The multi-curve is said to divide F if
(a)
ΓΣ* is transverse to F*
2. (b)
Σ∖ΓΣ=Σ+⨿Σ−**
3. (c)
there is a vector field X and a volume form ω on Σ such that
(i)
X* directs F (that is, it is tangent to F at non-singular points and X=0 at the singular points of F)*
2. (ii)
the flow of X expands ω on Σ+ and contracts ω on Σ−
3. (iii)
and X points transversely out of Σ+.
Theorem 3.6** (Giroux’s Criterion).**
Let Σ be a convex surface in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ). Then Σ has a tight neighborhood in M if and only if Σ=S2 and ΓΣ contains no contractible curves or Σ=S2 and ΓΣ is connected.
4. Generalized Bennequin inequalities
Let Σ be an embedded surface in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ) with ∂Σ=∅ having multiple components. Let F be the singular characteristic foliation on Σ. Isotop Σ (C∞-small) away from ∂Σ so that the singularities of F are isolated elliptic and hyperbolic (see [8, 13]). Let e± be the number of positive/negative elliptic singularities and h± be the number of positive/negative hyperbolic singularities. The Poincaré-Hopf theorem says that χ(Σ)=(e++e−)−(h++h−).
For a transverse knot K with Seifert surface Σ in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ), consider a non-zero section in the trivialization ξ∣Σ and take a push-off K′ of K along this section. The self-linking number of K is defined by sl(K):=K′⋅Σ. Let e(ξ)([Σ]) denote the Euler class of ξ∣Σ. Let F be the characteristic foliation which flows transversely out of K=∂Σ. Consider the graph G={(x,p)∈ξ∣Σ∣p=v(x),x∈Σ,p∈ξx} of v which directs F. G is a surface in the 4-manifold ξ∣Σ, and the zero section is another surface given by {(x,0)∈ξ∣Σ∣x∈Σ}, so the Euler class of ξ∣Σ is the oriented intersection number of these two surfaces. Counting singularities with signs, we have −sl(K)=e(ξ)([Σ])=(e+−h+)−(e−−h−). The Poincaré-Hopf theorem yields Eliashberg’s equation χ(Σ)+e(ξ)([Σ])=2(e+−h+). Convex surface theory gives us that e+=0 (see [6, 8]) and we obtain the classical Bennequin inequality sl(K)≤−χ(Σ) ([2]).
This approach generalizes directly for Σ with transverse ∂Σ=K1∪⋯∪Km, we have −(sl(K1)+⋯+sl(Km))=e(ξ)([Σ])=(e+−h+)−(e−−h−).
Lemma 4.1**.**
(Generalized Bennequin inequality)
Given Σ with transverse ∂Σ=K1∪⋯∪Km in a tight contact 3-manifold, sl(K1)+⋯+sl(Km)≤−χ(Σ).
Following Eliashberg [6] and Etnyre [8, 9], consider a Legendrian knot K with Seifert surface Σ and an annulus A=S1×[−1,1] in a standard neighborhood around K such that A is transverse to ξ and K is the only closed leaf on the characteristic foliation of A. Then take the union of Σ with the appropriate part of A to form a Seifert surface Σ± for the knot γ±=S1×{±1}. If the neighborhood is chosen so that ∂A, the Σ± are isotopic to Σ, and the Euler characteristic of χ(Σ±)=χ(Σ) because the part of A in each Seifert surface does not contribute to χ(Σ±). Then sl(K_{1\pm})+\cdots+sl(K_{m\pm})=\Big{(}tw_{K_{1}}(\xi,Fr_{\Sigma})\mp r(K_{1})\Big{)}+\cdots+\Big{(}tw_{K_{m}}(\xi,Fr_{\Sigma})\mp r(K_{m})\Big{)}.
Lemma 4.2**.**
(Generalized Thurston-Bennequin inequality)
Given Σ with transverse ∂Σ=K1∪⋯∪Km in a tight contact 3-manifold, we have
[TABLE]
This observation has several important consequences.
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let K and J be homologous Legendrian knots in a tight contact 3-manifold (M,ξ), then tbΣ(K,J) is bounded above.
Proof.
By Lemma 4.2, twK(ξ,FrΣ)+twJ(ξ,FrΣ)+∣r(K)+r(J)∣≤−χ(Σ) yields tbΣ(K,J)+∣rΣ(K)+rΣ(J)∣≤−χ(Σ)−2twJ(ξ,FrΣ) or tbΣ(K,J)≤−χ(Σ)−2twJ(ξ,FrΣ). The quantity −χ(Σ)−2twJ(ξ,FrΣ) is fixed because J is fixed.
∎
This argument generalizes directly for a knot homologous to multiple knots.
Lemma 4.4**.**
If K,J1,…,Jm are Legendrian with K∪J1∪J2∪⋯∪Jm=∂Σ in a tight contact 3-manifold (M,ξ), then tbΣ(K,J1∪⋯∪Jm) is bounded above.
Remark 4.5*.*
The above bound depends on the Ji while tbn(K,J) in Theorem 6.7 is bounded by Tb(φ(K))−n for φ(K)⊂(S3,ξstd) and even though J is also fixed, instead of using the Seifert surface for K∪J directly, we find a Seifert surface Σ′ for φ(K) and use the bound on tbΣ′(φ(K)). We want to compare the two approaches. Since Σ′=Σ∪D, χ(Σ′)=χ(Σ)+χ(D). The two bounds are tbΣ(K,J)≤TbΣ′(φ(K))−twJ(ξn,FrΣ) and tbΣ(K,J)≤−χ(Σ)−2twJ(ξn,FrΣ). Since TbΣ′(φ(K))≤−χ(Σ′), we have tbΣ(K,J)≤−χ(Σ′)−twJ(ξn,FrΣ). Also tbD(φ(K))+∣rD(φ(K))∣≤−χ(D) and tbD(K0)=twJ(ξn,FrΣ), which implies that twJ(ξn,FrΣ)≤−χ(D), which yields tbΣ(K,J)≤−χ(Σ′)−twJ(ξn,FrΣ). Both bounds are smaller than −χ(S)−twJ(ξn,FrΣ), but we do not have a direct way of comparing them by just using classical methods. This relates to the problem of the exactness of the Thurston-Bennequin inequality.
5. Additivity of the relative invariants
We study the additivity of the relative invariants under versions of connected sum. The results build up on the work of Etnyre-Honda [11]. Recall the following.
Theorem 5.1**.**
(Colin [4])
Denote by Tight(M) the space of tight contact 2-plane fields on a 3-manifold M. Then given contact 3-manifolds M1,M2, there is an isomorphism π0(Tight(M1)×π0(Tight(M2))≅π0(Tight(M1#M2)).
Remark 5.2*.*
(Contact connected sum [11, 23])
Let (Mi,ξi),i=1,2, be tight contact 3-manifolds. Choose points pi∈Mi and a standard contact 3-ball Bi around each pi (by Darboux’s theorem, (Bi,ξi∣Bi) is contactomorphic to a 3-ball around the origin in (S3,ξstd)). Note ∂Bi is C∞-close to a convex 2-sphere with a single dividing curve (Giroux’s Criterion, [16]), and Giroux’s Flexibility Theorem [13] allows us to arrange that ∂Bi have diffeomorphic foliations so the Bi are contactomorphic ([5]), and there is an orientation-reversing diffeomorphism f:∂(M1∖B1)→∂(M2∖B2) that maps the characteristic foliation on ∂(M1∖B1) to the characteristic foliation on ∂(M2∖B2). Then the contact connected sum(M_{1},\xi_{1})\#(M_{2},\xi_{2})=\big{(}(M_{1}\setminus B_{1})\cup_{f}(M_{2}\setminus B_{2}),\xi_{1}\#_{f}\xi_{2}\big{)} yields a tight contact 3-manifold and is independent of the choice of Bi,pi, and f. Moreover, every tight contact structure on M arises as the contact connected sum of a unique pair (ξ1,ξ2).
Remark 5.3*.*
(Legendrian connected sum [11])
The Legendrian connected sum is a relative version of the contact connected sum. In (S3,ξstd), it can easily be described using the front projection of two Legendrian knots K1 and K2 as joining a right cusp of K1 and a left cusp of K2 (well-defined by the uniqueness of the front projection). By Theorem 5.1, the contact structure on S3=(S3,ξstd)#(S3,ξstd) is tight so it is isotopic to ξstd. In the general construction ([11]), pick points pi∈Ki⊂Mi and neighborhoods Bi of the pi. Then use an orientation-reversing diffeomorphism f:∂B1→∂B2 to construct the contact connected sum M1#M2=(M1∖B1)∪f(M2∖B2). This diffeomorphism (Remark 5.2) performs exactly what we observed in the front projection, with the cusps at the points pi.
Lemma 5.4**.**
In the connected sum of K1, K2, tb(K1#K2)=tb(K1)+tb(K2)+1.
Proof.
This was proved in [11, 23], here we show an argument due to Etnyre (in a personal note) which keeps track of the Seifert surfaces. For Legendrian knots K1 and K2 with Ki=∂Σi,i=1,2, pick a small arc ai on Ki and isotop (the interior of) Σi so that there is a positive elliptic singularity on ai and no other singularities in a small disc Di⊂Σi about ai. Near Σi but disjoint from it, pick a disc Di′ with boundary ∂Di′=ai′∪bi where the arc ai′ has a negative elliptic point, the arc bi is transverse to ξi, and there are no other singularities in Di′. Now take a Legendrian arc ci connecting the elliptic points on ai and ai′. In (R3,ξ0), take a right cusp in the xz-plane centered on the x-axis lying to the left of the z-axis, a left cusp to the right of the z-axis, and a Legendrian arc on the x-axis connecting the cusps. There is a contactomorphism of a neighborhood of Di∪ci∪Di′ to two discs in (R3,ξ0) having the cusps in the boundary and the arc on the y-axis. Now apply the Legendrian connected sum in the front projection to these cusps along the arc on the x-axis. In particular, one can see that the singularity ai in the characteristic foliation of Σi before we perform the connected sum contributes a left-handed half-twist to the twisting of the contact planes along Ki relative to the framing from Σi. After the connect sum operation, both these singularities are gone, but all other singularities remain. So there is a net ”+1” to the contact plane twisting along the knot relative to the Seifert framing (here, the Seifert surface is given by (Σ1∖D1)∪(Σ2∖D2)).
∎
Lemma 5.5**.**
(Splitting a Legendrian connected sum)
Consider a Legendrian knot K=∂Σ of knot type κ1#κ2 in a tight contact 3-manifold (M,ξ)=(M1,ξ1)#(M2,ξ2). Then K can be split into knots Ki′⊂(Mi,ξi) of knot type κi⊂(Mi,ξi) such that tb(K)=tb(K1′)+tb(K2′)+1.
Proof.
We modify the Etnyre-Honda construction in [11] to keep track of the Seifert surfaces. Let K=∂Σ be a Legendrian knot of knot type κ1#κ2 in a tight contact 3-manifold (M,ξ)=(M1,ξ1)#(M2,ξ2). There exists a splitting 2-sphere S for Σ such that S∩Σ=α, an arc with ∂α={x1,x2}⊂K. Isotop Σ so that x1 is a negative singularity on K and x2 is a positive singularity on K in the characteristic foliation of Σ (isotop S to make it convex). Note α intersects the dividing set ΓS in {x1,x2}. Take a closed curve γ⊂S containing α and isotop S to Legendrian realize γ (see [19]). Then α is a Legendrian arc on Σ which still intersects K=∂Σ in {x1,x2}. The interior of α contains an odd number of intersections with ΓS (intuitively, it contains an odd number of half-twists of the contact planes relative to FrΣ). Moreover, ΓS consists of a single closed curve, so the arc γ⊂ΓS, ∂γ={x1,x2}, which intersects α is “parallel” to α, that is, γ and α co-bound a collection of (an even number of) 2-discs on S. Consider another arc α′⊂S which is parallel to α, is tangent to α at x1 and x2, and which contains a single intersection with ΓS in its interior. Isotop S to Legendrian realize α′ and isotop the interior of Σ so that S∩Σ=α′. Note that α′ contains a single left twist of the contact planes with respect to FrS and thus - relative to FrΣ. Use α′ to complete each of the components of K corresponding to the knot type of K1 or K2, respectively. Thus, we obtain two knots Ki′⊂(Mi,ξi) of knot type κi⊂(Mi,ξi) with tb(K)=tb(K1′)+tb(K2′)+1. If Σ has any other boundary components, the equality tb(K)=tb(K1′)+tb(K2′)+1 holds in one of its relative versions (see below).
∎
First we look at a “semi-relative” case when one of the connected summands is homologous to another knot. Note tbΣ(K1#K2,J) is well-defined (see [17]).
Proposition 5.6**.**
Let K1,J⊂(M1,ξ1) be homologous Legendrian knots and K2⊂(M2,ξ2) be a null-homologous Legendrian knot. Assume the ξi are tight, tbΣ1(K1,J)=Tb(K1,J), and tb(K2)=Tb(K2). Then Tb(K1#K2,J)=Tb(K1,J)+Tb(K2)+1, where J in Tb(K1#K2,J) is the image of J⊂M1 under the connected sum.
Proof.
Because ξi are tight, tb(K1,J) and tb(K2) are bounded. For Legendrian knots K1,K2,J as above, Lemma 5.4 gives Tb(K1,J)+Tb(K2)+1=tb(K1#K2,J)≤Tb(K1#K2,J). Conversely, if tb(K1#K2,J)=Tb(K1#K2,J), then Lemma 5.5 implies that Tb(K1#K2,J)=tb(K1,J)+tb(K2)+1≤Tb(K1,J)+Tb(K2)+1.
∎
The above also follows from the relative structure theorem (Theorem 12.1) and directly extends to the case when both summands are homologous to another knot.
Proposition 5.7**.**
For homologous Legendrian knots Ki,Ji⊂(Mi,ξi) with Ki∪Ji=∂Si,i=1,2. Assume ξi is tight, and tb~(K1#K2,J1∪J2)=Tb(K1#K2,J1∪J2). Then Tb(K1#K2,J1∪J2)=Tb(K1,J)+Tb(K2,J2)+1, where J1∪J2 in the term Tb(K1#K2,J1∪J2) is a knot in M1#M2 .
Remark 5.8*.*
(Relative Legendrian connected sum)
Consider homologous Legendrian knots Ki,Ji⊂(Mi,ξi) with Seifert surface Σi,i=1,2. Take an arc αi⊂Σi with ∂αi⊂∂Σi such that αi runs from Ki to Ji.
Take a neighborhood Bi⊂Mi of αi (with convex boundary) and an orientation-reversing diffeomorphism f:∂B1→∂B2. Form the connected sum M1#α1,α2M2=(M1∖B1)∪f(M2∖B2) as follows. First, Bi∩Σi is a 2-disc Di⊂Σi with four corners, ai,bi,ci,di, whose boundary ∂Di is a union of four arcs. Isotop the interior of Σ so that the four corners of ∂Di are singularities in the foliation of Σ.
We have ∂Di=γKi∪γJi∪γi′∪γi′′ where γKi⊂Ki with ∂γKi={ai,bi}, γJi⊂Ji with ∂γJi={ci,di} (Figure 14). Isotop ∂Bi to Legendrian realize ∂Di and isotop the interior of Di to make it convex. By tightness, tb(Di)≤−1. Also, γKi (resp., γJi) intersects ΓDi once and contains a negative half-twist along Ki (resp., Ji).
Now take an orientation-reversing diffeomorphism f:(M1∖B1)→(M2∖B2) such that f(∂D1)=∂D2 and f(a1)=a2,f(b1)=b2,f(c1)=c2,f(d1)=d2, so that f(γK1) is isotopic to γK2, f(γJ1) is isotopic to γK2, f(γ1′) is isotopic to γ2′, and f(γ1′′) is isotopic to γ2′′ (rel boundary as unoriented arcs). Then in M1#α1,α2M2, the knots K=(K1∖γK1)∪f(K2∖γK2) and J=(J1∖γJ1)∪f(J2∖γJ2) co-bound a surface Σ=(Σ1∖D1)∪f(Σ2∖D2) and are of type K1#α1,α2K2 and J1#α1,α2J2, respectively. Moreover, by construction twK(ξ,FrΣ)=twK1(ξ1,FrΣ1)+twK2(ξ2,FrΣ2)+1 and twJ(ξ,FrΣ)=twJ1(ξ1,FrΣ1)+twJ2(ξ2,FrΣ2)+1.
The diffeomorphism type of Σα1,α2 with ∂Σα1,α2=(K1#α1,α2K2)∪(J1#α1,α2J2) and the link type of K1#α1,α2K2∪J1#α1,α2J2 depend on the choice of the arcs αi so this construction is not well-defined as a connected sum of the links Ki∪Ji.
Lemma 5.9**.**
Consider homologous Legendrian knots Ki, Ji in a tight contact 3-manifold (Mi,ξi),i=1,2. In M1#α1,α2M2=(M1∖B1)∪f(M2∖B2), the diffeomorphism type of M1#α1,α2M2, the isotopy type of ξ1#α1,α2ξ2, and the knot type of K1#α1,α2K2 and J1#α1,α2J2 are independent of the choices of the αi,Bi,f.
Proof.
Consider the relative Legendrian connected sums of (K1,J1,M1,ξ1) with (K2,J2,M2,ξ2) along two sets of arcs {α1,α2} and {β1,β2}. Then M1#α1,α2M2 and M1#β1,β2M2 are diffeomorphic as smooth manifolds because any two 3-balls in a connected 3-manifold are isotopic, which extends to a global isotopy between the diffeomorphisms fα and fβ. Moreover, Colin’s theorem gives that ξ1#α1,α2ξ2 and ξ1#β1,β2ξ2 are isotopic. The knots K1#α1,α2K2 and K1#β1,β2K2 are of the same knot type in M1#M2 (γKi do depend on the choice of αi or βi but we can isotop the Bi (slide them along Ki and Ji) so that γKi coincide for either αi or βi). Similarly, J1#α1,α2J2 and J1#β1,β2J2 are of the same knot type in M1#M2.
∎
Lemma 5.10**.**
In the relative Legendrian connected sum of (K1,J1,M1,ξ1) and (K2,J2,M2,ξ2), twK1#K2(ξ1#ξ2,FrΣ1#Σ2) and twJ1#J2(ξ1#ξ2,FrΣ1#Σ2) are well-defined and independent of the choice of arcs αi.
Proof.
Consider the relative Legendrian connected sum of (K1,J1,M1,ξ1) and (K2,J2,M2,ξ2) along two sets of arcs α1,α2 and β1,β2, where αi,βi⊂Σi. Then we can isotop αi so that ∂αi coincides with ∂βi, thus the arcs γKi and γJi are the same for both αi and βi. Therefore, under the diffeomorphism between M1#αi,α2M2 and M1#βi,β2M2, K1#α1,α2K2 is sent to K1#β1,β2K2 and J1#α1,α2J2 is sent to J1#β1,β2J2. This diffeomorphism extends to a framing-preserving contactomorphism from a neighborhood of K1#α1,α2K2 to a neighborhood of K1#β1,β2K2 (similarly for J1#α1,α2J2 and J1#β1,β2J2). Under this contactomorphism, the contact framings and the Seifert framings are identified, and the result follows.
∎
Corollary 5.11**.**
The value of tbΣ1#Σ2(K1#K2,J1#J2) in the relative Legendrian connected sum is independent of the choice of arcs αi,Bi,f.
By definition, tb(K1#K2,J1#J2)=twK1#K2(ξ,FrΣ)−twJ1#J2(ξ,FrΣ) or \big{(}tw_{K_{1}}(\xi_{1},Fr_{\Sigma_{1}})+tw_{K_{2}}(\xi_{2},Fr_{\Sigma_{2}})+1\big{)}-\big{(}tw_{J_{1}}(\xi_{1},Fr_{\Sigma_{1}})+tw_{J_{2}}(\xi_{2},Fr_{\Sigma_{2}})+1\big{)} and rearranging terms, we obtain tbΣ1(K1,J1)+tbΣ2(K2,J2).
∎
Proposition 5.13**.**
Consider a homologous Legendrian knot pair (Ki,Ji) in a tight contact 3-manifold (Mi,ξi) such that tb(Ki,Ji)=Tb(Ki,Ji),i=1,2. Then in the relative Legendrian connected sum Tb(K1#K2,J1#J2)≥Tb(K1,J2)+Tb(K2,J2).
Proof.
By the construction of the relative Legendrian connected sum (Remark 5.4) and by Lemma 5.12 above, tb(K1#K2,J1#J2)=Tb(K1,J1)+Tb(K2,J2), which implies that Tb(K1#K2,J1#J2)≥Tb(K1,J2)+Tb(K2,J2).
∎
Remark 5.14*.*
(Splitting a relative Legendrian connected sum) Consider a tight contact 3-manifold (M,ξ) with a Legendrian knot pair (K1#K2,J1#J2) which is a relative Legendrian connected sum of (K1,J1,M1,ξ1) with (K2,J2,M2,ξ2). Then there exists an embedded splitting 2-sphere S⊂(M,ξ) such that S∩Σ is the union of arcs α1 and α2. Take a 2-disc D⊂S with ∂D=γ′∪α1∪γ′′∪α2 (Figure 2).
Let M=M1′∪M2′ with ∂Mi′=S, where S is a 2-sphere with appropriate orientation, and complete each Mi′ by a standard contact 3-ball B. Then Mi′∪B is diffeomorphic to the original manifold Mi used in the relative Legendrian connected sum. Completing K by γ′ and J by γ′′ yields knots of type Ki,Ji⊂Mi. On the contact level, ξ∣Mi′ extends uniquely over B, and by Colin’s theorem, each Mi′ has a tight contact structure ξi. The arcs γ′ and γ′′ are Legendrian and contain one left-handed half-twist of the contact planes relative to FrS each. So the resulting knots are Legendrian and satisfy tb(K1,J2)+tb(K2,J2)=tb(K1#K2,J1#J2). The diffeomorphism type of the components that Σ is split into depends on the arcs αi and surface S. However, knot types of the knots, the diffeomorphism type of the manifolds Mi, and the isotopy type of ξi,i=1,2 are all independent of αi and S.
Proposition 5.15**.**
Let (M,ξ)be tight and let (K1#K2,J1#J2) be a relative Legendrian connected sum pair with tb(K1#K2,J1#J2)=Tb(K1#K2,J1#J2). Then Tb(K1#K2,J1#J2)≤Tb(K1,J2)+Tb(K2,J2).
Theorem 5.16**.**
In the relative Legendrian connected sum of homologous Legendrian knot pairs (Ki,Ji) in tight contact 3-manifolds, Tb(K1#K2,J1#J2)=Tb(K1,J2)+Tb(K2,J2).
Remark 5.17*.*
(Additivity of the relative rotation number)
in some cases, from a global trivialization of the contact structure. The rotation number is measured as the difference of the upward and downward cusps, so r(K1#K2)=r(K1)+r(K2) in (S3,ξstd). By construction, the relative rotation numbers below are well-defined and independent of the choices made in the corresponding connected sum. In the relative Legendrian connected sum, the arcs α1 and α2 contribute the same amount to the rotation number. Since they get sent to one upward and one downward cusp under the (local) contactomorphism to (S3,ξstd), their total contribution to the rotation number is 0. Alternatively, note that the orientation-reversing diffeomorphism used in forming all of the connected sums identifies arcs along the summand knots with the same (and opposite in sign) contributions to the respective rotation numbers.
Proposition 5.18**.**
Given homologous Legendrian knots K1,J⊂(M1,ξ1) with K1∪J=∂S1 and a Legendrian knot K2⊂(M2,ξ2) with a Seifert surface K2=∂Σ2, assume that the ξi are tight. Then rΣ(K1#K2,J)=rΣ1(K1,J)+rΣ2(K2), where J in the term rΣ(K1#K2,J) is a knot in M1#M2.
Theorem 5.19**.**
For a homologous Legendrian knot pair (Ki,Ji) in a tight contact 3-manifold (Mi,ξi) with Seifert surface Σi,i=1,2, assume (Mi,ξi) is tight. Then rΣ(K1#K2,J1∪J2)=rΣ1(K1,J1)+rΣ2(K2,J2), where J1∪J2 in the term rΣ(K1#K2,J1∪J2) is a knot in M1#M2.
Remark 5.20*.*
Combined with the classical additivity of the self-linking number under transverse connected sums, the constructions in this section (in particular, Remarks 5.2, 5.3, and 5.8, and Lemmas 5.4, 5.5) carry over to the transverse category to give the construction of relative transverse connected sums and additivity of the relative self-linking number under those. In particular, the generalized Bennequin inequality for a tight contact 3-manifold, implies that we would get an additivity of the maximal self-linking numbers of transverse knot pairs under relative transverse connect sums.
6. Relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant in (S1×D2,ξn)
Consider S1×D2 with \xi_{n}=\ker\big{(}\sin(2\pi nz)dx+\cos(2\pi nz)dy\big{)},n\geq 1, in local coordinates {z,{x,y}}, where ξn is generated by {∂/∂z,cos(2πnz)∂/∂x−sin(2πnz)∂/∂y}. The core curve J=S1×{(0,0)} is Legendrian and, in fact, all curves of the form {(z,(x,y))∣x2+y2<1,z∈S1} are Legendrian. Intuitively, S1×D2 is foliated by Legendrian curves parallel to the core J. The contact structure is invariant under translation in the plane {z=const.}, however, it is not vertically invariant, in particular, it makes n left-handed 2π-twists along each (oriented) Legendrian curve parallel to the core J.
Since S1×D2∖J retracts to ∂(S1×D2)≅S1×S1, H1(S1×D2∖J)≅Z⊕Z is generated by oriented {μ,λ}, where λ=S1×{p},p∈∂D2, and μ⊂(S1×D2∖J) is the boundary of {0}×D2 with λ⋅μ=1. Then for K⊂(S1×D2∖J), [K]=nμ+mλ∈H1(S1×D2∖J),n,m∈Z. Call n in [K]=nμ+mλthe linking number lk(K,J) of Kwith J. Alternatively, this is the geometric intersection of K with the annulus A=S1×[(0,0),(1,0)] so lk(K,J)=K⋅A.
Consider a Legendrian knot K homologous to J in (S1×D2,ξn), K∪J=∂Σ. Denote the Thurston-Bennequin invariant of K relative to J by tbn,Σ(K,J):=twK(ξ,FrΣ)−twJ(ξ,FrΣ). It is well-defined (with H2(S1×D2)=0 implying it is independent of the Seifert surface Σ) and depends on the integer n. So for a knot K homologous to the core J and ∂Σ=K∪J in (S1×D2,ξn), we will omit the subscript Σ, and use the notation tbn(K,J)=twK(ξ,FrΣ)−twJ(ξ,FrΣ). We want to study Legendrian isotopies of K across J.
Lemma 6.1**.**
Fix a number r∈(0,1) and let [p,q denote the line segment in D2⊂R2 from point p to point q. There exists an annulus A=S1×[(0,0),(a,b)] with a2+b2<r, such that K⊂S1×{(x,y):x2+y2≤a2+b2} and K⋔A.
Proof.
Since K is properly embedded in S1×D2, it is contained in a solid torus of the type S1×{(x,y)∣x2+y2≤r′} for some r′∈(0,1),r′<r. Parametrize K by t⟼{z(t),x(t),y(t)}, where t∈S1 and consider the map f:K⟶S1 given by f:{z(t),x(t),y(t)}⟼θ∈S1 such that x=cosθ and y=sinθ, in other words, θ is the angle that the segment [(0,0),(x(t),y(t))] makes with the x-axis. So f:S1→S1 is a smooth map and by Sard’s theorem, almost every value of the map is a regular value, that is, the differential of f is onto everywhere. Then f−1(θ) for a given regular value θ produces a set of transverse intersection points of K with the annulus A=S1×{(x,y):x2+y2≤r}.
∎
Lemma 6.2**.**
The annulus A traces out a Legendrian isotopy from J=S1×{(0,0)} to J′=S1×{(c,d)}, c2+d2=r, with lk(J′,K)=0 and A⋔K. It extends to an ambient contact isotopy of (S1×D2,ξn) fixing the boundary.
Proof.
The annulus A is foliated by Legendrian knots of type S1×{(x,y)}, all parallel copies of the core J=S1×{(0,0)}, so it traces out a Legendrian isotopy between J=S1×{(0,0)} and J′=S1×{(c,d)}. Since J′⊂S1×{(x,y):x2+y2≤r′<r}, J′ and K are unlinked, J′ co-bounds an annulus A′ with S1×{(1,0)} and K∩A′=∅. This Legendrian isotopy extends to an ambient contact isotopy of (S1×D2,ξn) and can be arranged to be the identity on the boundary.
∎
Lemma 6.3**.**
The inverse of the isotopy traced out by A is an ambient contact isotopy sending J′ to J such that the image of K is a Legendrian knot that crosses J transversely to become unlinked from J.
Lemma 6.3 says that for homologous K and J, Legendrian isotoping K across J does not change the value of tbΣ(K,J). From the construction, such a Legendrian isotopy always exists.
Proposition 6.4**.**
Given a Legendrian knot K homologous to J=S1×{(0,0)} in (S1×D2,ξn), there exists an ambient contact isotopy, identity on the boundary, from K to K′ such that lk(K′,J)=0 and tbn(K′,J)=tbn(K,J).
Lemma 6.5**.**
After an unlinking Legendrian isotopy of K as in Proposition 6.4, twJ(ξn,FrΣ′)=n and tbn(K)=twK(ξn,FrΣ′)−n, where K′∪J=∂Σ′.
Proof.
Once an unlinking Legendrian isotopy is applied to K, the Seifert surface Σ′ for K′∪J induces a Seifert framing FrΣ′ on J which is equal to the product framing on J (a push-off J′ of J into Σ′ which defines the framing must vanish in the first homology of the complement). Therefore, twJ(ξn,FrΣ′)=n.
∎
Let κ be a smooth knot type in S1×D2, and let Ln(κ) denote the set of Legendrian representatives of κ homologous to the core J in (S1×D2,ξn).
Lemma 6.6**.**
The function tbn:Ln(κ)⟶Z is not bounded below.
Proof.
Take any Legendrian representative K∈κ and stabilize K. The resulting knot K′∈κ has tbn(K′)=tbn(K)−1 with Seifert surface Σ′ obtained from Σ by adding a half-disc (and smoothing corners). Σ for K and Σ′ are smoothly isotopic, and their boundaries are smoothly but not Legendrian isotopic,with K′∈κ. Repeating this lowers the relative Thurston-Bennequin invariant arbitrarily.
∎
Theorem 6.7**.**
The function tbn:Ln(κ)→Z is bounded above when n<0.
Proof.
Apply an unlinking Legendrian isotopy to a Legendrian representative K of κ in (S1×D2,ξn) homologous to the core J=S1×{0}. Consider a Legendrian unknot K0 in (S3,ξstd) and a 2-disc D bounded by K0. Arrange that twK0(ξstd,FrD)=tb(K0)=n<0. Since Tb=−1 for the trivial knot type in (S3,ξstd), stabilization allows us to construct such a Legendrian unknot. Now take a framed Legendrian neighborhood (N(K0),ξstd∣N(K0))≃(S1×D2,ξn), where K0 is sent to J=S1×{0,0}, the Seifert framing on K0 given by the product framing on S1×{0,0}. We have a framing-preserving contactomorphism φ:(S1×D2,ξn)→(N(K0),ξstd∣N(K0)). Then φ(K)⊂N(K0) is unlinked from K0 and cobounds a surface φ(Σ) with K0 such that twK0(ξstd,Frφ(Σ))=n. Since both framings FrD and Frφ(Σ)=φ∗(FrΣ) on K0 are Seifert, they are both given by push-offs into each respective surface which vanish in H1(N(K0)∖K0). Thus, we can isotop the interiors of D and φ(Σ) so that in a neighborhood of K0 they intersect only in K0. Away from that neighborhood, however, the interior of D may intersect the interior of φ(Σ) and/or the knot φ(K)⊂N(K0). The possible intersections are arcs and closed curves, which are eliminated standardly (see [17]) by locally isotoping the interior of D without changing tbD(K0) or tbφ(Σ)φ(K). Now φ(Σ) and D intersect only in K0. So Σ′=φ(Σ)∪D is a Seifert surface for φ(K). Since φ is framing-preserving, twK(ξn,FrΣ)=twφ(K)(φ∗(ξn),FrΣ′)=twφ(K)(ξstd∣N(K0),FrΣ′)=tbΣ′(φ(K)). Therefore, tbn(K)=twK(ξn,FrΣ)−n=tbΣ′(φ(K))−n and tbΣ′(φ(K)) is bounded above by the maximal Thurston-Bennequin invariant for the knot type of φ(K) in S3. This upper bound is independent of φ and only depends on the smooth knot type of K in S1×D2. Therefore, tbn(K)=tbΣ′(φ(K))−n≤Tb(φ(K))−n so tbn(K) is bounded above. ∎
For K⊂(S1×D2,ξn), let Tbn(K)=max{tbn(K)∣K is of type κ}.
7. Limitations of the relative Legendrian knot invariants
Let K⊂(S3,ξstd) be a null-homologous Legendrian knot, and let J′=S1×{0,21} in (S1×D2,ξn) with J∪J′=∂A for A=S1×{(x,y)∣x=0,0≤y≤21}. Then tb(J′,J)=0. Form the Legendrian connected sum K′=J′#K in (S1×D2,ξn)#(S3,ξstd)≅(S1×D2,ξn) with Seifert surface Σ′. Then tbΣ′(K′,J)=tbA(J′,J)+tbΣ(K)+1=tbΣ(K)+1 and rΣ′(K′,J)=rA(J′,J)+rΣ(K)=rΣ(K).
Consider Chekanov’s examples of Legendrian embeddings K1,K2⊂(S3,ξstd) of the 52 knot with tb(K1)=tb(K2) and r(K1)=r(K2), yet not Legendrian isotopic (see [3]). The knots K1′=J′#K1 and K2′=J′#K2 in (S1×D2,ξn) are homologous to the core J with tbn(Ki′,J)=tb(Ki)+1 and rn(Ki′,J)=r(Ki).
Lemma 7.1**.**
The knots K1′,K2′⊂(S1×D2,ξn) are not Legendrian isotopic.
Proof.
If K1′ and K2′ were Legendrian isotopic, then we embed (S1×D2,ξn) in (S3,ξstd) as a framed Legendrian neighborhood of an unknot U with tb=−n (see Section 4). The knots Ki′ are unlinked from J so φ(J) bounds a 2-disc D disjoint from the Seifert surface of each φ(Ki′) . This produces two Legendrian isotopic knots with tb(φ(Ki′))=tbn(Ki′,J)−n=tb(Ki)−n+1 and r(φ(Ki′))=rn(Ki′)=r(Ki)+rD(U). Since tb(K1)=tb(K2) and r(K1)=r(K2), we have two Legendrian embeddings that are both stabilizations of of the Legendrian representatives Ki of 52 knot in (S3,ξstd) with equal invariants and are Legendrian isotopic, contradicting Chekanov’s result.
∎
This strongly suggests that the relative invariants exhibit the same limitations as their classical analogues. Arguing this in general would follow a similar argument.
8. Legendrian knots which cobound an embedded annulus
We will prove the following general theorem. The special case for (S1×D2,ξn) with J⊂(S1×D2,ξn) denoting the Legendrian core follows directly.
Theorem 8.1**.**
Let K,J be Legendrian knots in a tight contact 3-manifold (M,ξ) cobounding an embedded annulus A↪(M,ξ) with tbA(K,J)=0 and rA(K,J)=0. There is a global contact isotopy of (M,ξ) (fixing ∂M if ∂M=∅) sending K to J.
Lemma 8.2**.**
Given two Legendrian knots K,J⊂(M,ξ) which cobound an annulus A with tbA(K,J)=0, then twK(ξ,FrA)=twJ(ξ,FrA)≤0.
Proof.
By Lemma 4.4, twK(ξ,FrA)+twJ(ξ,FrA)+∣rA(K)+rA(J)∣≤−χ(A)=0 which implies twK(ξ,FrA)=twJ(ξ,FrA)≤0.
∎
The above lemma and Honda’s theorem ([19]), which extends Giroux’s results to surfaces with boundary, imply that A can be isotoped to be convex, rel ∂A, C0-small near ∂A and C∞-small away from ∂A. When twK(ξ,FrA)=twJ(ξ,FrA)<0, we prove Theorem 8.1 by foliating A by Legendrian knots parallel to the boundary thus tracing out a Legendrian isotopy between K and J.
Remark 8.3*.*
The argument do not apply when twK(ξ,FrA)=twJ(ξ,FrA)=0. In this case, we stabilize the Legendrian knots and then apply this argument.
Lemma 8.4**.**
Given two Legendrian knots K,J⊂(M,ξ) which cobound an annulus A with tbA(K,J)=rA(K,J)=0 and twK(ξ,FrA)=twJ(ξ,FrA)<0, A can be isotoped to be convex rel boundary with characteristic foliation with Legendrian leaves parallel to the boundary components.
Note twK(ξ,FrA)=twJ(ξ,FrA)<0 implies that the dividing set ΓA has a nonempty intersection with K and J. Take another convex annulus A′ with ∂A′=K∪J such that A∩A′=K∪J. Edge-Round along K and J to build a convex torus T=A∪A′. This process uses standard framed Legendrian neighborhoods around J and K and replaces their intersection with A∪A′ by a smooth embedded surface. Locally, this is a Legendrian isotopy of K and J to knots K′,J′ (see [19]). By tightness and Giroux’s Criterion, ΓT consists of an even number of parallel dividing curves that are not meridional. Note that K,J⊂T are of the same homology class. Also, twK(ξ,FrA)=twJ(ξ,FrA)<0 implies that twK′(ξ,FrT)=twJ′(ξ,FrT)<0, so J′ and K′ intersect ΓT. We can isotop T to be foliated by leaves parallel to the knots K′ and J′ using Giroux’s Flexibility theorem ([13]). This is a Legendrian isotopy of K′ and J′, sending them to K′′ and J′′ on the new convex torus T′ where they are Legendrian isotopic through the leaves. By the Legendrian Isotopy Extension theorem, the composition of these isotopies is a global contact isotopy. Note that we used rA(K,J)=0 to build T.
∎
Parametrize A,K,J as A=φ(S1×[−21,21]),J=φ(S1×{−21}),K=φ(S1×{21}) in M. Extend φ to an embedding S1×D2↪(M,ξ). Consider a closed solid torus neighborhood T of A. Consider a diffeomorphism f:T→S1×D2 such that f:K↦S1×{p1} and f:J↦S1×{p2} for p1,p2∈D2. Let S1×D2 be equipped with the contact structure ξn, where twJ(ξ,FrA)=twK(ξ,FrA)=−n. Note f(J) and f(K) are Legendrian in (S1×D2,ξn), but they are also Legendrian in (S1×D2,f∗(ξ∣T)). So consider the Legendrian isotopy between them given by just sending S1×{p1} to S1×{p2} through parallel copies gt:S1×(1−t)p1+tp2. This is a Legendrian isotopy inside (S1×D2,ξn). Since f is a diffeomorphism rel boundary, it is a contactomorphism, and by the uniqueness of the tight contact structure ξn, there is an isotopy sending ξn to f∗(ξ∣T). The inverse of this isotopy composed with the Legendrian isotopy from f(K) to f(J) and the inverse of f yields a Legendrian isotopy from J to K in T.
∎
Note that ΓA has a component running from K to J. To see this, assume ΓA consists only of boundary-parallel dividing arcs. Then in the construction of the convex torus T=A∪A′ above, the dividing set would contain a trivial closed curve, contradicting Giroux’s Criterion. Therefore, the annulus A necessarily has a boundary-to-boundary dividing arc (an even number of these).
∎
Remark 8.5*.*
Co-bounding an embedded annulus is a transitive relation of knots. In particular, the knots in this relation are smoothly isotopic.
Lemma 8.6**.**
Let Ki be a framed knot with framing Fri,i=1,2,3 with ∂Ai=Ki∪Ki+1,i=1,2 for embedded annuli Ai. There exists an embedded annulus A with ∂A=K1∪K3 such that twK1(FrA,Fr1)=twK1(FrA1,Fr1)+K1⋅A2 and, similarly, twK3(FrA,Fr3)=twK3(FrA2,Fr3)+K3⋅A1.
Proof.
Resolve the intersections of A1 and A2 to get an embedded annulus A.
∎
Lemma 8.7**.**
Let K1 and K2 be Legendrian knots which cobound annuli Ai, respectively, with a Legendrian knot J in a tight contact 3-manifold (M,ξ). If tbA1(K1,J)=tbA2(K2,J) and rA1(K1,J)=rA2(K2,J), then K1 and K2 are Legendrian isotopic.
9. Legendrian knots isotopic to the core in (S1×D2,ξn).
Let K be isotopic to J. The generator of \ker\big{(}H_{1}(S^{1}\times D^{2}\setminus K)\to H_{1}(S^{1}\times D^{2})\big{)} is a curve μ so that the [math]-framing of K in S1×D2 is defined by K′ with [K′]=0⋅μ, where [K′] is unique up to a choice for a generator of the other factor in H1(∂(S1×D2∖K))≅Z⊕Z. A Legendrian K has a twisting number tbn(K) defined as lk(K,K′) for a push-off K′ in the normal direction to the contact planes along K, so tbn(K)=lk(K,K′)=m, where m is the unique integer with [K′]=m⋅μ. Now embed (S1×D2,ξn) in (S3,ξstd) as the framed neighborhood of a Legendrian unknot U with tb(U)=−n=tbn(J). Then K is a Legendrian unknot in (S3,ξstd) smoothly isotopic to U. Note that tbn(K)=tbDK(K), where ∂DK=K in S3. Similarly, the global trivialization of ξn in S1×D2 given by ∂/∂z gives the rotation number rn(K). After embedding (S1×D2,ξn) standardly into (S3,ξstd), we have rDK(K)=rn(K).
With this in mind, we classify Legendrian knots smoothly isotopic to the Legendrian core in (S1×D2,ξn) with equal tbn and rn.
Lemma 9.1**.**
Let K be isotopic to J=S1×{(0,0)} in (S1×D2,ξn), K∩J=∅. Then there exists an embedded annulus A↪S1×D2 with ∂A=K∪J.
Proof.
Embed (S1×D2,ξn) in (S3,ξstd) as the framed neighborhood of a Legendrian unknot U with tb(U)=tbn(J)=−n, The images of K and J are isotopic in S3, and so are the discs DK and DJ that they bound. In particular, we can isotop them outside the interior of S1×D2 so that DK and DJ coincide in there and in a curve γ⊂∂(S1×D2). Consider the annuli AK=DK∩(S1×D2) and AJ=DJ∩(S1×D2) and resolve their intersections away from γ as in [17] to obtain an embedded annulus A with ∂A=K∪J and the framings along K and J change by the same number lkAJ(K,J)=K⋅AJ=lkAK(J,K)=J⋅AK.
∎
Lemma 9.2**.**
For A↪S1×D2 above, we have tbA(K,J)=0 and rA(K,J)=0.
Proof.
For Legendrian K and J, we have tbA(K)=tbA(J) since tbn(K)=tbn(J) so tbA(K,J)=tbA(K)−tbA(J)=(tbn(K)+lkAJ(K,J))−(tbn(J)+lkAK(J,K))=0. Similarly, rA(K,J)=rn(K)−rn(J)=rA(K)−rA(J)=0. Therefore A traces out a Legendrian isotopy between K and J, by Theorem 8.4.
∎
Remark 9.3*.*
Recall we assumed in [17] that the Legendrian isotopy crossing the reference knot J was locally embedded. Lemma 9.2 shows this assumption is justified. The converse is not generally true, and finding an embedded annulus which traces out a Legendrian (or even smooth) isotopy is not generally possible. It is a good problem to find the obstructions for an isotopy to be embedded.
10. Further classification results
Let K,J1,…,Jm be Legendrian knots in a contact 3-manifold (M,ξ) with Seifert surface Σ. The relative invariants tbΣ(K,J1∪⋯∪Jm)=twK(ξ,FrΣ)−∑k=1mtwJk(ξ,FrΣ) and rΣ(K,J1∪⋯∪Jm)=ω(vK)−∑k=1mω(vJi) are well-defined ([17]), in particular, they are invariant under Legendrian isotopy of K which fixes the Ji ([17]).
Lemma 10.1**.**
Let Ji=S1×{pi},pi∈D2 be m parallel copies of J=S1×{(0,0)} in (S1×D2,ξn) and let K be a Legendrian knot with K∪J1∪⋯∪Jm=∂Σ. The Ji may be Legendrian isotoped so that twJi(ξn,FrΣ)=twJ(ξn,FrS1×D2)=tbn(J)=−n and rΣ(K,J1∪⋯∪Jm)=rn(K)−∑i=1mrn(Ji).
Proof.
The method of unlinking Legendrian isotopy (Proposition 6.4) allows us to unlink Ji from K so that the Seifert framing and the product framing coincide, without changing the relative invariants (for the invariance of the relative rotation number, note that the contact structure is globally trivial). Then twJi(ξn,FrΣ)=twJ(ξn,FrS1×D2)=−n so tbΣ(K,J1∪⋯∪Jm)=twK(ξn,FrΣ)−mn and rΣ(K,J1∪⋯∪Jm)=ω(vK)−∑i=1mω(vJi)=ω(vK)−mω(vJ).
∎
Remark 10.2*.*
Let K be a Legendrian knot which cobounds an m-punctured 2-disc D with a collection of m Legendrian copies of J in (S1×D2,ξn). Then if m is odd, K is smoothly isotopic to J and if m is even then K is homotopically trivial.
Lemma 10.3**.**
Let K1 and K2 be two Legendrian knots each cobounding an m-punctured 2-disc Di with m copies of J in (S1×D2,ξn). Assume tbD1(K1,J1′∪⋯∪Jm′)=tbD2(K2,J1′′∪⋯∪Jm′′) and rD1(K1,J1′∪⋯∪Jm′)=rD2(K2,J1′′∪⋯∪Jm′′). Then if m is odd, there exists an embedded annulus A with ∂A=K1∪K2 such that tbA(K1,K2)=0 and rA(K1,K2)=0. If m is even, there exists an embedded 2-dsic Di with Ki=∂Di such that tbD1(K1)=tbD2(K2) and rD1(K1)=rD2(K2).
Proof.
We use Proposition 6.4 to isotop all Ji′ and Jj′′ to a neighborhood N(J) of a copy of J with the Ki⊂(S1×D2)∖N(J). The relative invariants are fixed and twJi′(ξn,FrD1)=twJj′′(ξn,FrD2)=tbn(J)=−n and rD1(Ji′)=rn(Ji′)=rD2(Jj′′). Now Legendrian isotop each Ji′ to a Jj′′ through parallel copies of J. This may create circle intersections between D1 and D2, but there is an arrangement of Ji′ getting mapped to the Jj′′ which avoids all circle intersections. Also, twJi′(ξn,FrD1)=−n=twJj′′(ξn,FrD2) implies that twK1(ξn,FrD1)=twK2(ξn,FrD2) and similarly rn(K1)=ω(vK1)=rn(K2)=ω(vK2). After all circles are eliminated, Σ=D1∪D2 has no self-intersections near the Ji′=Ji′′ and arc self-intersections αk running only from K1 to K2 and possibly some other circle intersections. If m is odd, then K1 and K2 are smoothly isotopic to the core in S1×D2 and are thus smoothly isotopic, with the union of the Ki and αk cobounds a collection of disjoint 2-discs in S1×D2, whose union is an annulus A with K1∪K2=∂A. If m is even, then K1 and K2 are (trivial and therefore) isotopic in S1×D2, and the above annulus traces out the Legendrian isotopy between them.
∎
Theorem 10.4**.**
Let K1 and K2 be two smoothly isotopic Legendrian knots each cobounding an m-punctured 2-disc Di with m copies of J in (S1×D2,ξn). If tbD1(K1,J1′∪⋯∪Jm′)=tbD2(K2,J1′′∪⋯∪Jm′′) and rD1(K1,J1′∪⋯∪Jm′)=rD2(K2,J1′′∪⋯∪Jm′′), then K1 and K2 are Legendrian isotopic.
This can be translated to links in (S3,ξstd) by considering J as a trivial link component. Consider two smoothly isotopic (m+1)−component Legendrian links L1=K1∪J1∪J2∪⋯∪Jm and L2=K2∪J1′∪J2′∪⋯∪Jm′ in (S3,ξstd) consisting only of trivial components and with Seifert surfaces D1,D2 which are m-punctured 2-discs such that Ki bounds a 2-disc whose interior is disjoint from Di for i=1,2. Now take a Legendrian unknot Ui that links with Li so that lkD1(U1,Jk)=lkD2(U2,Jk′)=±1 so the new links Li∪Ui are smoothly isotopic. Then after appropriate stabilizations of some or all of their components, the links L1∪U1 and L2∪U2 are Legendrian isotopic. To see this, take a framed Legendrian neighborhood of Ui, such that the Ji are meridians, isotop the Ui to coincide, and extend to a global contact isotopy. Then the complement of the now single solid torus is a solid torus to which the above theorem applies.
11. Connected sums and Legendrian simple knots.
Etnyre and Honda [11] connected sums of Legendrian simple knots extensively. We are interested in the relative version of their results. Let L be the set of knot types whose Legendrian embeddings in (M1,ξ1) are Legendrian simple (i.e., classified by their classical invariants). Let L′ be the set of knot types K1#J, where K1∈L and J is a Legendrian knot in a tight contact 3-manifold (M2,ξ2). Consider an embedded annulus A in M2 bounded by J and another Legendrian knot K2, so K1#K2 in (M1,ξ1)#(M2,ξ2) is homologous to J. For a Legendrian representative K of K1#K2 in (M,ξ), the relative invariants tb(K,J) and r(K,J) are well-defined (??? and Theorem 5.1). Let L′′⊂L′ denote knot types in L′ whose Legendrian representatives in (M,ξ) are classified by the relative invariants with respect to J (call them relatively Legendrian simple with respect to J).
Question 11.1**.**
When does the relative connected sum give a bijection L⟺L′′? What are the obstructions, and when is the map only injective or surjective?
Etnyre-Honda [11] constructed connected sums of Legendrian simple knots in S3 which are not Legendrian simple so L→L′′ is not always a bijection.
Lemma 11.2**.**
There is a bijective correspondence between L and L′′ in the case when (Mi,ξi)=(S3,ξstd),i=1,2 and J⊂(M2,ξ2) is the unknot.
This lemma is fairly straightforward to prove. We prove a generalization below.
Lemma 11.3**.**
There is a bijective correspondence between L and L′′ for (M1,ξ1)=(S3,ξstd),(M2,ξ2)=(S1×D2,ξn), and J⊂(S1×D2,ξn) is the Legendrian core.
Proof.
The mapping is given by the relative Legendrian connected sum. To see that it is onto, we take a knot type κS1×D2∈L′′ and note that the splitting of a Legendrian connected sum gives a unique knot type κS3, so we need to show κS3∈L. Given Legendrian knots Ki′ in (S3,ξstd) with Ki′=∂Σi′ of smooth knot type κS3 with equal classical invariants tbΣi′(Ki′) and rΣi′(K), form the Legendrian connected sums Ki=Ki′#Ji′⊂(S1×D2,ξn)≅(S3,ξstd)#(S1×D2,ξn). Note that Ji′ has equal relative invariants with respect to J, and Ki′=K#J′ is homologous to J via the Seifert surface Σ′=Σ#A. Therefore, tbΣi′(Ki′,J)=tbΣi(Ki)+1 and rΣi′(Ki′,Ji′)=rΣi(Ki). So the Ki′ are relatively Legendrian isotopic in (S1×D2,ξn). Extend this Legendrian isotopy to a contact isotopy of (S1×D2,ξn) such that the separating 2-spheres and the 3-balls they bound in (S1×D2,ξn) coincide. Thus, the Legendrian isotopy reduces to an isotopy within the (now single) 3-ball containing the parts of the Ki′ corresponding to the summands Ki. Now consider a contact isotopy of (S3,ξstd) which Legendrian isotops the knots Ki′ so that they coincide at a point (on a neighborhood of that point, in fact). Such an isotopy exists (in the front projection, it is a horizontal and vertical translation). So then we can use the Legendrian isotopy fixing a common point that we found in the 3-ball above. The composition of these two Legendrian isotopies gives us the desired Legendrian isotopy from K1 onto K2 in (S3,ξstd). Note that we are using the classification of tight contact structures in S3 and the standard 3-ball. To see that the mapping is injective, note that the relative Legendrian connect sum defines the knot type κS1×D2 uniquely for a given knot type κS3 in the smooth category. For a Legendrian simple κS3, we show that κS1×D2 is relatively Legendrian simple. Consider two Legendrian knots K1 and K2 in (S1×D2,ξn) of knot typeκS1×D2 with equal relative invariants. Then Ki=Ki′#Ji for K1′ and K2′ of knot type κS3. The relative Legendrian connected sum replaces a standard 3-ball neighborhood of a point pi∈Ji′ with the standard 3-ball complement of a 3-ball neighborhood of a point on each knot Ki′. Use a contact isotopy to Legendrian isotop J1′ to J2′ so that the points pi coincide and the 3-ball neighborhoods of those coincide as well. After the connected sum, we further extend the isotopy using the Legendrian isotopy between the Ki′ from a 3-ball complement of a point in S3 (this is contained in the standard 3-ball that they are embedded in). Thus, Ki=Ki′#Ji′ are Legendrian isotopic in S1×D2 provided that the relative classical invariants of the knots Ki=Ki′#Ji′ with respect to J are equal.
∎
Remark 11.4*.*
In order to piece together the Legendrian isotopies, equality of the relative invariants is not sufficient, we may need to distribute stabilizations among the components. Thus the bijective correspondence holds up to an equivalence relation that accounts for this (see Theorem 12.1 and compare with Theorem 3.4 in [11]).
Remark 11.5*.*
The results in Section 7 follow from Lemma 11.3. Moreover, the argument generalizes to classify all Legendrian simple knot types in (S3,ξstd) as relatively Legendrian simple knot types in (S1×D2,ξn).
Lemma 11.3 applies to Legendrian links in (S3,ξstd) with a trivial component.
Theorem 11.6**.**
Let K∈L and U be an unknot. Legendrian simple links K∪U in (S3,ξstd) are classified by the link type and relative invariants of K relative to U.
12. The relative structure theorem
A homologous knot pair (K,J) in a tight contact 3-manifold (M,ξ) is relatively prime if (K,J)=(K1,J1)#(K2,J2) in (M1,ξ1)#(M2,ξ2) implies K1⊂M1 or K2⊂M2 is the unknot. Let S±(K) be the positive/negative stabilization of K and L(κ,M,ξ) be the set of isotopy classes of Legendrian representatives of κ in (M,ξ). We have a relative version of Theorem 3.4 by Etnyre-Honda in [11].
Theorem 12.1**.**
Let (κ,γ)=(κ1,γ1)#⋯#(κn,γn) be a relative connected sum decomposition in a tight (M,ξ) into relatively prime pairs (κi,γi)⊂(Mi,ξi). The map \Bigg{(}\dfrac{\big{(}\mathfrak{L}_{\kappa_{1}},\mathfrak{L}_{\gamma_{1}}\big{)}\times\cdots\times\big{(}\mathfrak{L}_{\kappa_{n}},\mathfrak{L}_{\gamma_{n}}\big{)}}{\sim}\Bigg{)}\longrightarrow\Big{(}\mathfrak{L}_{\kappa_{1}\#\cdots\#\kappa_{n}},\mathfrak{L}_{\gamma_{1}\#\cdots\#\gamma_{n}}\Big{)} is a bijection, where ∼ is defined by
(2) \Big{(}(K_{1},J_{1}),\dots,(K_{n},J_{n})\Big{)}\sim\sigma\Big{(}(K_{1},J_{1}),\dots,(K_{n},J_{n})\Big{)}, where σ is a permutation of (κi,γi) so that σ(Mi,ξi) is isotopic to (Mi,ξi) and σ(κi,γi)=(κi,γi) for all i.
This result follows directly from the structure theorem in [11], together with the construction of the relative Legendrian connected sum and the well-definedness of the relative invariants in [17].
Bibliography24
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] B. Aebisher et al., Symplectic geometry , Progress Math. 124 , Birkhäuser, Boston, MA, 1994.
2[2] D. Bennequin, Entrelacements et équations de Pfaff , Astérisque 107–108 (1983), 87–161.
3[3] Y. Chekanov, Differential algebras of Legendrian links
4[4] V. Colin, Chirurgies d’indice un et isotopies de sphères dans les vari e ´ ´ 𝑒 \acute{e} t e ´ ´ 𝑒 \acute{e} s de contact tendues , C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér I Math. 324 (1997), 659–663.
5[5] Y. Eliashberg, Contact 3-manifolds twenty years since J. Martinet’s work , Ann. Inst. Fourier 42 (1992), 165–192.
6[6] Y. Eliashberg, Legendrian and transversal knots in tight contact 3-manifolds , Topological Methods in Modern Mathematics (1993),171–193.
7[7] Y. Eliashberg and M. Fraser, Classification of topologically trivial Legendrian knots , Geometry, Topology, and Dynamics (Montreal, PQ, 1995), 17–51.
8[8] J. Etnyre, Introductory lectures on contact geometry , Proc. Sympos. Pure Math. 71 (2003), 81–107.