Domination between different products and finiteness of associated semi-norms
Christoforos Neofytidis

TL;DR
This paper characterizes domination relations between products of manifolds and establishes the finiteness of associated semi-norms, providing partial answers to Gromov's questions on manifold invariants.
Contribution
It determines all possible dominations between product manifolds with certain restrictions and proves the finiteness of related semi-norms on their fundamental classes.
Findings
All domination relations between specified product manifolds are classified.
Finiteness of product-associated semi-norms on fundamental classes is established.
Results partially answer questions posed by M. Gromov.
Abstract
In this note we determine all possible dominations between different products of manifolds, when none of the factors of the codomain is dominated by products. As a consequence, we determine the finiteness of every product-associated functorial semi-norm on the fundamental classes of the aforementioned products. These results give partial answers to questions of M. Gromov.
Peer Reviews
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.
Domination between different products
and finiteness of associated semi-norms
Christoforos Neofytidis
Department of Mathematics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
Abstract.
In this note we determine all possible dominations between different products of manifolds, when none of the factors of the codomain is dominated by products. As a consequence, we determine the finiteness of every product-associated functorial semi-norm on the fundamental classes of the aforementioned products. These results give partial answers to questions of M. Gromov.
Key words and phrases:
Non-zero degree maps, semi-norms on products
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
57N65, 55M25, 46B20
I am grateful to M. Gromov for stimulating questions and discussions. The hospitality and support of the IHÉS where part of this project was carried out is also gratefully acknowledged.
1. Motivation and Results
A finite functorial semi-norm in degree singular homology is a semi-norm
[TABLE]
for every topological space , where “functorial” means that the semi-norm is not increasing under induced homomorphisms for all continuous maps .
In [2, Chapter 5G+] Gromov suggested (originally using the Euler characteristic of products of surfaces, see below) the following construction of product-associated semi-norms on homology classes of a topological space : Let be a finite functorial semi-norm on the fundamental classes of products of closed oriented -manifolds. For a homology class , , define
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all , all products of closed oriented -manifolds , and all continuous maps such that . For we have a trivial product with only one factor.
The idea of extending from the category of products of -manifolds to , i.e. to any -dimensional integral homology class and any topological space , stems from the following immediate property that every functorial semi-norm satisfies:
Lemma 1.1** (Mapping Lemma).**
Let and be a (finite) functorial semi-norm on the fundamental classes of products of closed oriented -manifolds . If is a map of degree , then .
Similarly to Thurston, who used the Euler characteristic of embedded surfaces in a -manifold to define a norm in , Gromov’s original example in [2] is a norm in degree homology where is the absolute value of the Euler characteristic of (products of) surfaces. Namely, for a space and , , the (product) Euler characteristic norm is defined as
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all , all products of closed hyperbolic surfaces , and all continuous maps such that . Indeed, the Euler characteristic satisfies Lemma 1.1 for maps between (products of) surfaces; see the Mapping Lemmas in [2, Sections 5.35–36].
Gromov asked when the product Euler characteristic norm is finite, writing [2, page 301]
*“ it is unclear which classes in
come from (mapped) products of surfaces”*.
The obvious generalization of Gromov’s question is:
Question 1.2**.**
Let be a finite functorial semi-norm on the fundamental classes of products of closed oriented -manifolds. For which spaces and which homology classes , , is finite?
Gromov predicted that the product Euler characteristic norm is infinite on many -dimensional fundamental classes (), pointing out the fundamental classes of irreducible locally symmetric spaces as potential candidates. That prediction has since been verified by Kotschick and Löh, who proved that irreducible locally symmetric spaces of non-compact type do not admit maps of non-zero degree from direct products (whose factors are of any dimension, not necessarily surfaces); cf. [3, Corollary 4.2].
The topic of realizing (co-)homology classes by direct products of manifolds is a special case of a classical problem of Steenrod [1, Problem 25]. When the target homology class is the fundamental class of a manifold, we deal with maps of non-zero degree. We say that dominates , and write , if there is a continuous map of non-zero degree, that is in homology or equivalently in cohomology (as usual, denotes the cohomological fundamental class of ).
The following question, posed to me by M. Gromov, is essential in order to understand the finiteness of on the fundamental classes of arbitrary products, and has also independent interest on the level of domination between manifolds:
Question 1.3**.**
Let be a Cartesian product of closed oriented manifolds of positive dimensions. Which other non-trivial products dominate ?
In this paper we give a complete answer to Question 1.3 when none of the factors is dominated by products:
Theorem 1.4**.**
Suppose are closed oriented manifolds of positive dimensions, such that are not dominated by non-trivial direct products and . Then if and only if for all , where , and if .
In particular, we obtain an answer to Question 1.2 for fundamental classes of products whose factors are not dominated by products:
Corollary 1.5**.**
Let be closed oriented manifolds of positive dimensions that are not dominated by non-trivial direct products and , for some . The following are equivalent:
- (i)
* is a product with factors of closed oriented -manifolds.*
- (ii)
Every semi-norm is finite on .
- (iii)
There is a finite semi-norm on .
Note that if in (1), then obviously
[TABLE]
Thus, the equivalent conditions (i)-(iii) in Corollary 1.5 are moreover equivalent to
[TABLE]
for every finite semi-norm .
2. Proofs
We now prove Theorem 1.4 and Corollary 1.5. The proof of Theorem 1.4 uses Thom’s work [8] on the Steenrod problem about realizing homology classes by closed manifolds [1, Problem 25]. Thom’s celebrated realization theorem states that, given a topological space and a homology class , there is a closed oriented smooth -dimensional manifold and a continuous map such that , for some non-zero integer . Or, equivalently, if one starts with a cohomology class , then .
Proof of Theorem 1.4.
The “ if ” direction is trivial and so we prove the converse.
Let be a map of non-zero degree, and denote by the projection to the -th factor. Then is not trivial and, since the are not dominated by products, Thom’s theorem [8] implies that belongs in
[TABLE]
Indeed, suppose maps non-trivially under in some
[TABLE]
where and . Then, by Thom’s theorem, there exist two closed oriented manifolds and of positive dimensions, with , and a continuous map such that , for some non-zero integer . Thus , which contradicts our assumption that is not dominated by products.
Thus, we have
[TABLE]
where .
2.1. A Reduction:
We first observe that (3) implies that can be at most , otherwise the number of factors in the codomain of would not suffice to give
[TABLE]
Thus we split the proof into the following cases:
2.2. Case I:
In this case, (3) and (4) imply that for each there exists at least one such that
[TABLE]
This means that through the composite map
[TABLE]
where is the inclusion.
The assumption that and (4) imply moreover that for each there exist with and . Thus, after reordering the if necessary, we conclude that for all .
2.3. Case II:
In this case, (3) and (4) imply that for some there exist , , among the , such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where is the projection. This means that through the composite map
[TABLE]
where is the inclusion.
Now, by the naturality of the cup product, we obtain
[TABLE]
and so Reduction 2.1 implies that . If , then the result follows by Case I. If , then we repeat the argument as in Case II, to find some and some such that (where for all ). We then have and we finish the proof by iterating the process. ∎
Proof of Corollary 1.5.
(i) (ii) If can be written as a product with factors of closed oriented -manifolds , then clearly every semi-norm is finite on , because
[TABLE]
and is finite by assumption.
(ii) (iii) This implication holds trivially.
(iii) (i) Suppose that some semi-norm is finite. This means that there exist closed oriented -manifolds such that
[TABLE]
Then Theorem 1.4 implies that each dominates a different (and possibly containing only one factor) subproduct . In particular, each is a -manifold, and so can be written as a product with factors those -manifolds:
[TABLE]
∎
Remark 2.1**.**
The statements and proofs in this paper are on the level of products of fundamental classes of manifolds. One can naturally generalize Theorem 1.4 to the level of realizing arbitrary products of co-homology classes by other products of co-homology classes and, subsequently, obtain (non-)finiteness results of semi-norms on products of more general co-homology classes instead of fundamental classes of products of manifolds.
3. Two illustrative examples
The key property in this paper is that none of the factors of the codomain is dominated by direct products. There is a variety of examples of manifolds that are not dominated by products, and techniques to identify such manifolds were developed in the recent years [3, 4, 6, 7]. Some large classes of examples are non-positively curved manifolds that are not decomposable as products and certain circle bundles, including low-dimensional aspherical manifolds that possess certain Thurston geometries. So, any combination of those manifolds can be used to construct direct products that fulfill Theorem 1.4 and Corollary 1.5.
Example 3.1**.**
Suppose are closed oriented manifolds of dimensions , and . The possible ordered pairs such that are
[TABLE]
If the are not dominated by products, then Corollary 1.5 applies: First, since there are three factors, then for any finite functorial semi-norm we obtain
[TABLE]
Also is not a product of three -manifolds, thus we have
[TABLE]
However, is a product of the two -dimensional manifolds and and so
[TABLE]
Finally, it is immediate by the definition in (1) that
[TABLE]
Example 3.2**.**
Let , , be closed oriented manifolds that are not dominated by products. Suppose
[TABLE]
where are closed oriented (hyperbolic) surfaces. By Theorem 1.4 (or by [5, Theorem 2.3]) we conclude that each is a surface, and since the are not dominated by products, we deduce that each is a hyperbolic surface (and also ).
Thus Corollary 1.5 implies that, if are closed oriented manifolds that are not dominated by products, then
[TABLE]
This answers Question 1.2 for the product Euler characteristic norm on fundamental classes of products whose factors are not themselves dominated by products.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] S. Eilenberg, On the problems of topology , Ann. of Math. (2), 50 (1949), 247–260.
- 2[2] M. Gromov, Metric Structures for Riemannian and Non-Riemannian Spaces , With appendices by M. Katz, P. Pansu and S. Semmes, translated from the French by S. M. Bates, Progress in Mathematics 152, Birkhäuser Verlag, 1999.
- 3[3] D. Kotschick and C. Löh, Fundamental classes not representable by products , J. London Math. Soc., 79 (2009), 545–561.
- 4[4] D. Kotschick and C. Löh, Groups not presentable by products , Groups Geom. Dyn. 7 (2013), 181–204.
- 5[5] D. Kotschick, C. Löh and C. Neofytidis, On stability of non-domination under taking products , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 144 (2016), 2705–2710.
- 6[6] D. Kotschick and C. Neofytidis, On three-manifolds dominated by circle bundles , Math. Z. 274 (2013), 21–32.
- 7[7] C. Neofytidis, Fundamental groups of aspherical manifolds and maps of non-zero degree , Groups Geom. Dyn. 12 (2018), 637–677.
- 8[8] R. Thom, Quelques propriétés globales des variétés différentiables , Comment. Math. Helv., 28 (1954), 17–86.
