This paper investigates the lower central and derived series of braid groups on compact surfaces, determining conditions for residual nilpotency and solubility, with explicit results for specific surfaces like the torus and Klein bottle.
Contribution
It provides new explicit calculations and general descriptions of the lower central and derived series for braid groups on various compact surfaces, including non-orientable cases.
Findings
01
B extsubscript{n}(M) and P extsubscript{n}(M) are residually nilpotent or soluble for specific n
02
Explicit lower central series for P extsubscript{2}(K) where K is the Klein bottle
03
Determined residual properties for braid groups on non-orientable surfaces
Abstract
Let M be a compact surface, either orientable or non-orientable. We study the lower central and derived series of the braid and pure braid groups of M in order to determine the values of n for which B\_n(M) and P\_n(M) are residually nilpotent or residually soluble. First, we solve this problem for the case where M is the 2-torus. We then give a general description of these series for an arbitrary semi-direct product that allows us to calculate explicitly the lower central series of P\_2(K), where K is the Klein bottle, and to give an estimate for the derived series of P\_n(K). Finally, if M is a non-orientable compact surface without boundary, we determine the values of n for which B\_n(M) is residually nilpotent or residually soluble in the cases that were not already known in the literature.
Equations310
{σiσi+1σi=σi+1σiσi+1σjσi=σiσjfor all 1≤i≤n−2if ∣i−j∣≥2 and 1≤i,j≤n−1.
{σiσi+1σi=σi+1σiσi+1σjσi=σiσjfor all 1≤i≤n−2if ∣i−j∣≥2 and 1≤i,j≤n−1.
Fn(M)={(x1,…,xn):xi∈M, and xi=xj if i=j, i,j=1,…,n}.
Fn(M)={(x1,…,xn):xi∈M, and xi=xj if i=j, i,j=1,…,n}.
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 · Algebraic Geometry and Number Theory · Homotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
Full text
The lower central and derived series of the braid groups of compact surfaces
John Guaschi
Normandie Univ., Unicaen, CNRS, Laboratoire de Mathématiques Nicolas Oresme UMR CNRS 6139, 14000 Caen, France.
Let M be a compact surface, either orientable or non-orientable. We study the lower central and derived series of the braid and pure braid groups of M in order to determine the values of n for which Bn(M) and Pn(M) are residually nilpotent or residually soluble. First, we solve this problem for the case where M is the 2-torus. We then give a general description of these series for an arbitrary semi-direct product that allows us to calculate explicitly the lower central series of P2(K), where K is the Klein bottle, and to give an estimate for the derived series of Pn(K). Finally, if M is a non-orientable compact surface without boundary, we determine the values of n for which Bn(M) is residually nilpotent or residually soluble in the cases that were not already known in the literature.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary: 20F36, 20F14; Secondary: 20E26
1. Introduction
The braid groups of the disc, also called the Artin braid groups, were introduced by E. Artin [1]. If n≥1, the n-string Artin braid group, denoted by Bn, is generated by elements σ1,…,σn−1 that are subject to the Artin relations:
[TABLE]
The notion of braid group was generalised to surfaces by Fox and Neuwirth using configuration spaces as follows [12]. Let M be a compact, connected surface, and let n∈N. The nth* configuration space of M*, denoted by Fn(M), is defined by:
[TABLE]
The n-string pure braid group Pn(M) of M is defined by Pn(M)=π1(Fn(M)). The symmetric group Sn on n letters acts freely on Fn(M) by permuting coordinates, and the n-string braid group Bn(M) of M is defined by Bn(M)=π1(Fn(M)/Sn). This gives rise to the following short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
If m≥1, the projection p:Fn+m(M)⟶Fn(M) defined by p(x1,…,xn,…,xn+m)=(x1,…,xn) induces a homomorphism p∗:Pn+m(M)⟶Pn(M). Geometrically, p∗ is the homomorphism that ‘forgets’ the last m strings. If M is without boundary, Fadell and Neuwirth showed that p is a locally-trivial fibration [9], with fibre Fm(M∖{x1,…,xn}) over the point (x1,…,xn), which we consider to be a subspace of the total space via the map i:Fm(M∖{x1,…,xn})⟶Fn+m(M) defined by i((y1,…,ym))=(x1,…,xn,y1,…,ym). Applying the associated long exact sequence in homotopy to this fibration, we obtain the Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence of pure braid groups:
[TABLE]
where n≥3 if M is the sphere S2 [8, 10], n≥2 if M is the projective plane RP2 [10], and n≥1 otherwise [9], and i∗ is the homomorphism induced by the map i. This sequence has been widely studied. If M is the torus T or the Klein bottle K, the existence of a non-vanishing vector field on M allows one to construct a section for p [9]. This implies that the short exact sequence (1.2) splits for all n,m∈N, and that Pn(M) may be decomposed as an iterated semi-direct product (see Proposition 5.1 for an explicit section for p∗ in the case M=K).
Let G be a group. If g,g′∈G then [g,g′]=gg′g−1g′−1 denotes their commutator, and if H and K are subgroups of G, then the commutator subgroup of H and K, denoted by [H,K], is defined by [H,K]=\langle[h,k]:\text{h\in Handk\in K}\rangle, the subgroup of G generated by the commutators of H and K. The lower central series{Γi(G)}i≥1 of G is defined inductively by Γ1(G)=G, and for i≥1, Γi+1(G)=[Γi(G),G], and the derived series{G(i)}i≥0 of G is defined inductively by G(0)=G, and for i≥0, G(i+1)=[G(i),G(i)]. The quotient G/Γ2(G) is the Abelianisation of G that we denote by GAb. Following P. Hall, for any group-theoretic property P, a group G is said to be residually P if for any (non-trivial) element x∈G, there exists a group H that possesses property P and a surjective homomorphism φ:G⟶H such that φ(x)=1. It is well known that a group G is residually nilpotent (resp. residually soluble) if and only if ⋂i≥1Γi(G)={1} (resp. ⋂i≥0G(i)={1}).
If p is a prime number, the lower Fp-linear central filtration{γip(G)}i≥1 of G is defined inductively by γ1p(G)=G, and for i≥1, γi+1p(G)=⟨[γip(G),G],xp:x∈γip(G)⟩ [27]. If the group G is finitely generated, then G is residually p-finite if and only if ⋂i≥1γip(G)={1} [27, Proposition 2.3(2)]. For any group G, G(i)⊂Γi+1(G)⊂γi+1p(G), so residually p-finite implies residually nilpotent, which in turn implies residually soluble.
In this paper, we are interested in computing the lower central and derived series of Bn(M) and Pn(M), the aim being to determine the values of n for which these groups are residually nilpotent or residually soluble. We also give some partial results for the residual p-finiteness of Pn(K).
The first results about the lower central series of the braid groups were obtained by Gorin and Lin who gave a presentation of the commutator subgroup Γ2(Bn) of Bn for n≥3, and who showed that (Bn)(1)=(Bn)(2) for all n≥5, which implies that (Bn)(1) is perfect [20]. As a consequence, Γ2(Bn)=Γ3(Bn), for all n≥3, so Bn is not residually nilpotent. The lower central series of the pure braid group Pn was studied by Falk and Randell [11] and by Kohno [24], who proved independently that Pn is residually nilpotent for all n≥1.
The braid groups of orientable surfaces were studied by Bellingeri, Gervais and Guaschi [5]. If Mg,m is a compact, connected, orientable surface of genus g≥1 with m≥0 boundary components, then Bn(Mg,m) is not residually nilpotent if n≥3, and B2(T) is residually nilpotent. In the case of the pure braid groups, Pn(Mg,m) is residually torsion-free nilpotent for all n≥1 if m≥1, or if g=1 and m=0 (the torus). If m=0 and g≥1, Bardakov and Bellingeri proved that Pn(Mg,m) is residually torsion-free nilpotent for all n≥1, and the braid group B2(Mg,m) is residually 2-finite, in particular, it is residually nilpotent [2]. Gonçalves and Guaschi studied the lower central and derived series of the braid groups of the sphere S2 and the projective plane RP2 [14, 17]. For the sphere, Bn(S2) is residually nilpotent if and only if n≤2, and residually soluble if and only if n≤4. In the case of the projective plane, Bn(RP2) is residually nilpotent if and only if n≤3, and if n=4, Bn(RP2) is residually soluble if and only if n<4. More recently, if M is a non-orientable surface different from RP2, Bellingeri and Gervais showed that Pn(M) is residually 2-finite, and so is residually nilpotent [4].
In this paper, we study the derived series of the torus and the lower central series and derived series of non-orientable surfaces. Our main results are as follows.
Theorem 1.1**.**
The group Bn(T) is residually soluble if and only if n≤5.
For non-orientable surfaces, we first study the case of the Klein bottle. For an arbitrary semi-direct product, the following result describes its lower central series, and gives some information about its derived series. It will be used in the computation of the lower central and derived series of Pn(K), but we believe that it may be applicable to other groups.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let G and H be groups, and let φ:G⟶Aut(H) be an action of G on H. We define recursively the following subgroups of H: L1=V1=H, and if n≥2:
[TABLE]
Then φ induces an action, which we also denote by φ, of Γn(G) on Ln (resp. of G(n+1) on Vn+2), and for all n∈N, we have:
(1)
Γn(H⋊φG)=Ln⋊φΓn(G).
2. (2)
(H⋊φG)(n−1)⊂Vn⋊φG(n−1).
For the case of the commutator subgroup (n=2), part (1) was obtained in [14, Proposition 3.3]. Using Theorem 1.2, we compute explicitly Γn(P2(K)) and γn2(P2(K)) in Theorems 5.4 and 5.13 respectively, and and it will follow that P2(K) is residually nilpotent and residually 2-finite. If n≥3, in Theorem 5.20, we give an estimate of the derived series of Pn(K), which will enable us to show that Pn(K) is residually soluble, and will allow us to determine the values of n for which Bn(K) is residually nilpotent or residually soluble.
Theorem 1.3**.**
Bn(K)* is residually nilpotent if and only if n≤2, and residually soluble if and only if n≤4.*
For a non-orientable surface M without boundary of higher genus, we may decide whether Bn(M) is residually nilpotent or residually soluble using results of [4, 17].
Theorem 1.4**.**
Let M be a compact non-orientable surface of genus g without boundary. If g≥2 (resp. g=1), then Bn(M) is residually nilpotent if and only if n≤2 (resp. n≤3). For all g≥1, Bn(M) is residually soluble if and only if n≤4.
This paper is organised as follows. In Section 2, we give presentations of the braid groups used in this paper, as well as the statement of Theorem 2.5 due to Gruenberg that will be required in the proofs of some of our results. Theorem 1.2 is proved in Section 3. In Section 4, we study the case of the torus and we prove Theorem 1.1. In Section 5, our focus is on the braid groups of the Klein bottle, and we use Theorem 1.2 for the proof of Theorem 1.3. Theorem 1.4 is proved in Section 6.
If M is a compact surface different from K and the Möbius band, the centre Z(Bn(M)) of Bn(M) is known [6, 7, 13, 26, 28, 31]. We determine Z(Bn(K)) in Proposition 5.2, and for the sake of completeness, in Proposition A1 of the Appendix, we compute the centre of the braid groups of the Möbius band.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank P. Bellingeri, S. Gervais, D. Gonçalves, L. Paris and D. Vendrúscolo for stimulating conversations. C. M. Pereiro was supported by project grant no 2010/18930-6 and 2012/01740-5 from FAPESP. During the writing of this paper, J. Guaschi was partially supported by the CNRS/FAPESP PRC project no 275209.
2. Generalities
In this section, we give the presentations of the braid and pure braid groups that will be used in this paper. If M=T or K, we will make use of the following presentations of Pn(M) and Bn(M).
We consider the torus and the Klein bottle to be a square whose edges are identified as indicated in Figure 1. Geometric representatives of the generators of Pn(T) and Pn(K) given in Theorem 2.1 are illustrated in Figure 2, and may be interpreted as follows. For 1≤i≤n, the ith string is the only non-trivial string of the braid ai (resp. of bi), and it passes through the edge α (resp. β). If 1≤i<j≤n, the jth string is the only non-trivial string of the braid Ci,j, and it encircles all of the basepoints between the ith and jth points. If i=j, it will be convenient to define Ci,i to be the trivial braid. The figures represent the projection of the braids onto M, so the constant paths in each figure correspond to vertical strings of the braid.
The generators of Bn(T) and Bn(K) given in Theorem 2.2 may be taken to be the standard Artin generators σ1,…,σn−1 of Bn as shown in Figure 3, and a=a1 and b=b1.
Various presentations of the braid and pure braid groups of the torus and the Klein bottle may be found in the literature [3, 6, 19, 30], but we choose to work with those of Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 because they highlight the similarities and differences between the braid groups of T and K. For example, the word Ci,jCi+1,j−1 that appears in our presentation of Pn(T) is often replaced by its inverse in Pn(K). To prove Theorem 2.1 (resp. Theorem 2.2), one may use the Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence (1.2) (resp. the short exact sequence (1.1)), induction on n, and the following standard method for obtaining a presentation of a group extension [23, Proposition 1, p. 139]. Given a short exact sequence 1⟶A⟶iB⟶pC⟶1 and presentations C=⟨X∣R⟩ and A=⟨Y∣S⟩, then B=\bigl{\langle}\widetilde{X},\widetilde{Y}\,|\,\widetilde{S},\widetilde{R},\widetilde{T}\bigr{\rangle}, where:
[TABLE]
The details of the proofs of Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 are left to the reader.
Remark 2.3*.*
Using Theorem 2.2, it is straightforward to check that:
[TABLE]
for all n≥2, where a (resp. b, σ) represents the Γ2-coset of a (resp. of b, σ1).
For compact non-orientable surfaces of genus g≥3 without boundary, we shall make use of the following presentation of their braid groups due to Bellingeri.
the class of p-finite groups for a given prime number p.
Let K and H be groups, and suppose that K is P and that H is residually P. Then, for any group extension
[TABLE]
the group G is residually P.
3. The lower central and derived series of semi-direct products
The main aim of this section is to establish the general decomposition of the lower central series and an estimate of the derived series of an arbitrary semi-direct product given in the statement of Theorem 1.2, which will be used in later computations of the lower central and derived series of Pn(K). We first prove two lemmas that will be used in what follows.
If x1,…,xn are elements of a group G, we set:
[TABLE]
and if X is a subset of G then we denote the normal closure of X in G by ⟨⟨X⟩⟩G.
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let G be a group, and let x,y∈G. For all n∈N, we have:
[TABLE]
Proof.
We prove the lemma by induction on n. Observe that:
[TABLE]
which proves (3.1) in the case n=1.
Now let n≥2, and suppose that the result holds for all 1≤i≤n. Applying (3.2) to the elements x2n and [x2n,y], we have:
[TABLE]
and applying (3.2) to the elements x2n and y, we obtain:
[TABLE]
Thus:
[TABLE]
which completes the proof by induction.
∎
Remark 3.2*.*
With the notation of Theorem 1.2, In what follows, for the groups Kn, Hn or Hn, we will use the word generator to mean a word of the form φ(g)(h).h−1, where g∈Γn−1(G) and h∈H, g∈G and h∈Vn−1, or g∈Γn−1(G) and h∈H respectively. Similarly, a generator of the group Ln (resp. Vn) will mean either a generator of Kn or Hn, or an element of the form [h,l], where h∈H and l∈Ln−1 (resp. either a generator of Hn, or an element of the form [h,v], where h∈H and v∈Vn−1)
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let n≥2. With the notation of Theorem 1.2, the subgroups Kn, Ln and Vn are normal in H for all n≥2, and we have the inclusions Kn+1⊂Kn, Hn+1⊂Hn, Hn+1⊂Hn, Ln+1⊂Ln and Vn+1⊂Vn.
Proof.
The proof is by induction on n. The proof
in the case n=2 was given in [14, Proposition 3.3]. So suppose that n≥2, and assume that Ln (resp. Vn) is a normal subgroup of H, let x∈Ln+1 (resp. Vn+1) and let h∈H. Since L_{n+1}=\bigl{\langle}K_{n+1},H_{n+1},[H,L_{n}]\bigr{\rangle} (resp. V_{n+1}=\bigl{\langle}\widetilde{H}_{n+1},[H,V_{n}]\bigr{\rangle}), it suffices to show that hxh−1∈Ln+1, where x is a generator of Kn+1,Hn+1 or [H,Ln] (resp. of Hn+1 or [H,Vn]), as in Remark 3.2.
•
Suppose that x=φ(g)(y)y−1∈Kn+1, where g∈Γn(G) and y∈H. Then φ(g)∈Aut(H), and there exists h′∈H such that φ(g)(h′)=h, so:
[TABLE]
This also implies that Kn is a normal subgroup of H for all n≥2.
•
Suppose that x=φ(g)(y)y−1 is an element of Hn+1 (resp. of Hn+1), where g∈G and y∈Ln (resp. y∈Vn), and let h′∈H be such that φ(g)(h′)=h. Then:
[TABLE]
because h′yh′−1∈Ln (resp. Vn) by the normality of Ln (resp. Vn) in H using the induction hypothesis.
•
Suppose that x=[y,l]∈[H,Ln] (resp. [H,Vn]), where y∈H and l∈Ln (resp. l∈Vn). Then:
[TABLE]
because hlh−1∈Ln (resp. Vn) by the normality of Ln (resp. Vn) in H.
This proves that Ln (resp. Vn) is a normal subgroup of H for all n≥2.
To prove the second part, notice that the inclusion Γn(G)⊂Γn−1(G) implies that Kn+1⊂Kn for all n≥2. It is easy to see that H3⊂H2 (resp. H3⊂H2) because L2⊂H (resp. V2⊂H). By induction, suppose that Hn⊂Hn−1 (resp. Hn⊂Hn−1) for some n≥3. Since Ln−1 (resp. Vn−1) is normal in H, we have [H,Ln−1]⊂Ln−1 (resp. [H,Vn−1]⊂Vn−1). Further, using the definitions and the induction hypothesis, we have the inclusions Kn⊂Kn−1⊂Ln−1 and Hn⊂Hn−1⊂Ln−1 (resp. Hn⊂Hn−1⊂Vn−1). It follows that Ln⊂Ln−1 (resp. Vn⊂Vn−1), and then that Hn+1⊂Hn (resp. Hn+1⊂Hn). Consequently, Ln+1⊂Ln and Vn+1⊂Vn for all n≥2.
∎
The proof is by induction on n. The case n=1 is trivial. If n=2, part (1) was proved in [14, Proposition 3.3], and part (2) follows from part (1) and the fact that L2=V2. Now suppose that parts (1) and (2) hold for some n≥2, and let us prove the result for n+1. Let φ:Γn(G)⟶Aut(Ln) be the action (also denoted by φ) induced by φ such that Ln⋊φΓn(G)=Γn(H⋊φG). We claim that φ also induces an action φ:Γn+1(G)⟶Aut(Ln+1). To see this, let g∈Γn+1(G). To prove that φ(g)(Ln+1)⊂Ln+1, it suffices to take x∈Ln+1 to be of the form x=φ(g′)(h).h−1, where either g′∈Γn(G) and h∈H, or g′∈G and h∈Ln, or of the form x=[h,l]∈[H,Ln], where h∈H and l∈Ln. The result will then follow for all elements of Ln+1 because φ(g) is a homomorphism.
•
If x=φ(g′)(h).h−1∈Kn+1, where g′∈Γn(G) and h∈H, or x=φ(g′)(h).h−1∈Hn+1, where g′∈G and h∈Ln, then:
[TABLE]
If g′∈Γn(G) and h∈H then φ(g)(x)∈Kn+1⊂Ln+1 since g and gg′ belong to Γn(G). If g′∈G and h∈Ln, then φ(g)(x)∈Hn+1⊂Ln+1 because h∈Ln+1.
•
If x=[h,l]∈[H,Ln], where h∈H and l∈Ln then:
[TABLE]
since g∈Γn+1(G)⊂Γn(G), so φ(g)(l)∈Ln.
Since φ(g):Ln+1⟶Ln+1 is the restriction of an automorphism, it is injective, so to show that it is an automorphism, it suffices to prove surjectivity. We first consider the following two cases:
(a)
If x=φ(g′)(h).h−1, where either g′∈Γn(G) and h∈H, or g′∈G and h∈Ln, let:
[TABLE]
because Ln+1◃H, and one may check that φ(g)(y)=x.
2. (b)
If x=[h,l]∈[H,Ln], where h∈H and l∈Ln, there exist l′∈Ln and h′∈H such that φ(l′)=l and φ(g)(h′)=h by the induction hypothesis. Taking y=[h′,l′]∈[H,Ln]⊂Ln+1, we see that φ(g)(y)=x.
This shows that if x is a generator of Kn+1,Hn+1 or [H,Ln], there exists y∈Ln+1 such that φ(g)(y)=x. Given an arbitrary element x∈Ln+1, there exist x1,…,xs, each of which satisfies one of the conditions of cases (a) and (b) above, such that
x=x1⋯xs. So for i=1,…,s, there exists yi∈Ln+1 such that φ(g)(yi)=xi, and we have φ(g)(y1⋯ys)=x, which proves the surjectivity of φ(g):Ln+1⟶Ln+1. Therefore the semi-direct product Ln+1⋊φΓn+1(G) is well defined. Similar computations show that the same is true for the semi-direct product Vn+1⋊φ(G)(n).
To complete the proof of part (1) of Theorem 1.2, it remains to show that Ln+1⋊φΓn+1(G)=Γn+1(H⋊φG). We first prove that Ln+1⋊φΓn+1(G)⊂Γn+1(H⋊φG). Let (x,g)∈Ln+1⋊φΓn+1(G), where x∈Ln+1 and g∈Γn+1(G). Since (x,g)=(x,1)(1,g), it suffices to show that (x,1) and (1,g) belong to Γn+1(H⋊φG). Clearly, (1,g)∈Γn+1(H⋊φG). Further, (x,1) is a product of elements each of which is of one of the following forms:
•
(φ(g)(h).h−1,1)=[(1,g),(h,1)], where g∈Γn(G),h∈H, and (1,g)∈Γn(H⋊φG). Then (φ(g)(h).h−1,1)∈Γn+1(H⋊φG).
•
(φ(g)(h).h−1,1)=[(1,g),(h,1)], where g∈G and h∈Ln. Then (h,1)∈Ln⋊φΓn(G)=Γn(H⋊φG) by the induction hypothesis, and (φ(g)(h).h−1,1)∈Γn+1(H⋊φG).
•
([h,l],1)∈[H,Ln], where h∈H and l∈Ln. Then ([h,l],1)=[(h,1),(l,1)], and l∈Ln⋊φΓn(G)=Γn(H⋊φG) by the induction hypothesis, so ([h,l],1)∈Γn+1(H⋊φG).
Since all of these elements belong to Γn+1(H⋊φG), it follows that (x,1)∈Γn+1(H⋊φG), whence Ln+1⋊φΓn+1(G)⊂Γn+1(H⋊φG).
For the other inclusion, let [(h,g),(x,y)]∈Γn+1(H⋊φG), where (h,g)∈H⋊φG and (x,y)∈Γn(H⋊φG). By the induction hypothesis, Γn(H⋊φG)=Ln⋊φΓn(G), so x∈Ln and y∈Γn(G), and thus:
[TABLE]
The second factor [g,y] on the right-hand side of (3.3) belongs to Γn+1(H⋊φG), and the first factor, denoted by ρ, may be written in the following form:
[TABLE]
Note that:
•
[h,x]∈[H,Ln]⊆Ln+1, since h∈H and x∈Ln.
•
φ(g)(x).x−1∈Hn+1⊆Ln+1, since x∈Ln.
•
φ(gyg−1)(h−1).h∈Kn+1⊆Ln+1, since y∈Γn(G), so gyg−1∈Γn(G) because Γn(G) is a normal subgroup of G.
•
φ([g,y])(x−1).x∈Hn+1∩Kn+1⊆Ln+1, since x∈Ln and [g,y]∈Γn(G).
By Lemma 3.3, the conjugates by elements of H of the elements [h,x], φ(g)(x).x−1, φ(gyg−1)(h−1).h and φ([g,y])(x−1).x also belong to Ln+1, therefore ρ∈Ln+1 as required.
This proves part (1) of the statement.
To prove part (2), suppose by induction that
(H⋊φG)(n−1)⊂Vn⋊φG(n−1).
Then:
[TABLE]
To show that [Vn⋊φG(n−1),Vn⋊φG(n−1)]⊂Vn+1⋊φG(n), let (h,g),(x,y)∈Vn⋊φG(n−1). Then:
•
[h,x]∈[H,Vn]⊆Vn+1 because h,x∈Vn⊂H.
•
the three elements φ(g)(x).x−1, φ(gyg−1)(h−1).h and φ([g,y])(x−1).x belong to Hn+1 because h,x∈Vn, so they belong to Vn+1.
Arguing in a manner similar to that for part (1) from (3.3) onwards, it follows that [(h,g),(x,y)]∈Vn+1⋊φG(n) as required.
∎
The following lemma will help us to simplify some of the calculations in the following sections.
Lemma 3.4**.**
With the notation of Theorem 1.2, let G be a subgroup of G, let H be a subgroup of H, and let X (resp. Y) be a generating set of G (resp. H).
(1)
The subgroup
[TABLE]
is contained in the normal closure \bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}Z\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H} of
[TABLE]
in H. In particular, if this subgroup is a normal subgroup of G, it is equal to \bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}Z\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H}. Consequently, if X (resp. Y) is a generating set of Γn−1(G) (resp. of H) then to calculate the subgroup Kn, it suffices to compute the elements φ(g)(h).h−1, where g∈X and h∈Y.
2. (2)
Let W be a subset of H such that L_{n}=\bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}W\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H} (resp. V_{n}=\bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}W\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H}) is the normal closure of W in H. Let X (resp. Y) be a generating set of G (resp. of H). Then up to conjugacy and elements of [H,Ln] (resp. of [H,Vn]), Hn+1 (resp. Hn+1) is generated by the set
[TABLE]
Therefore:
[TABLE]
Remark 3.5*.*
With the notation of Lemma 3.4(1), we will say that the elements of Z are generators of the subgroup \bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}Z\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H}.
To prove the first part of the statement, note that it suffices to prove the result for elements of the subgroup of the form φ(g)(h).h−1, where g∈G and h∈H. If g∈G, there exist g1,…,gp∈G and ϵ1,…,ϵp,∈{1,−1} such that giϵi∈X for all i=1,…,p and g=g1ϵ1⋯gpϵp. Now:
[TABLE]
where for all i=1,…,p, h_{i}^{\prime}=\varphi\bigl{(}g_{i+1}^{\epsilon_{i+1}}\cdots g_{p}^{\epsilon_{p}}\bigr{)}(h). Further, for all h′∈H, there exist h1,…,hq∈H and δ1,…,δq∈{1,−1} such that hjδj∈Y for all j=1,…,q and h′=h1δ1⋯hqδq. Since
[TABLE]
for all g′∈G, the first part of the statement follows by combining (3.4) and (3.5). The second and third parts are consequences of the first part.
2. (2)
Let φ(g)(h).h−1∈Hn+1 (resp. Hn+1), where g∈G and h∈Ln (resp. Vn). As in (1) above, (3.4) holds. For all h′∈Ln (resp. Vn), there exist x1,…,xq∈W, δ1,…,δq∈{1,−1} and α1,…,αq∈H, such that xjδj∈W and h′=α1x1δ1α1−1⋯αqxqδqαq−1. Then we obtain an equation similar to (3.5), where for all j=1,…,q, hjδj is replaced by αjxjδjαj−1. Further, for all j=1,…,q, φ(g′)(αjxjδjαj−1).(αjxjδjαj−1)−1 is equal to:
[TABLE]
Part (1) then follows from (3.4), (3.5) and (3.6).∎
4. The case of the torus
In this section, we study the derived series of Bn(T), the aim being to prove Theorem 1.1. We shall consider two cases, n≤4 and n≥5.
Proposition 4.1**.**
If n≤4 then Bn(T) is residually soluble.
Proof.
If n≤4, the result follows by using the short exact sequence (1.1), Theorem 2.5, the solubility of Sn if n≤4, and the fact that Pn(T) is residually soluble for all n≥1 [5, Theorem 4].∎
To study the case n≥5, we start by exhibiting a presentation of (Bn(T))(1).
One applies the Reidemeister-Schreier rewriting process [22, Appendix 1] to the short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
using the presentation of the group Bn(T) given in Theorem 2.2, and taking the Schreier transversal to be {bkam;bkamσ1:k,m∈Z}. The details are left to the reader.∎
Proposition 4.3**.**
If n≥5, then Bn(T) is not residually soluble. Moreover, (Bn(T))(2)=(Bn(T))(3).
Theorem 1.1 then follows directly from Propositions 4.1 and 4.3.
The first step is a standard procedure that may be found in [14, Theorem 1.4, p. 3389], and uses just the Artin relations and some properties of the derived series. For future reference, we note that it may also be applied to the braid groups of non-orientable surfaces. If M is a compact surface, consider the following short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
where p is the canonical projection. Observe that for i=1,…,n−1, the (Bn(M))(2)-cosets of the σi coincide in Bn(M)/(Bn(M))(2), and are equal to an element that we denote by σ.
Now let M=T. Using relations (3) and (4) of Theorem 2.2, the (Bn(T))(2)-cosets of a and b commute with σ in Bn(T)/(Bn(T))(2). Using this fact and relations (5) and (8) of Theorem 2.2, it follows that σ−2=bab−1a−1 and σ2n=1, and so σ has order at most 2n. To show that the order of σ in Bn(T)/(Bn(T))(2) is exactly 2n, using Proposition 4.2, we note that:
[TABLE]
where Θ is the normal closure in (Bn(T))(1)/(Bn(T))(2) of the (Bn(T))(2)-cosets of the elements of the set {θi,k,m,k,m∈Z,i=1,…,n−1}.
Let q be the canonical projection of (Bn(T))(1)/(Bn(T))(2) onto Θ((Bn(T))(1)/(Bn(T))(2)). The order of σ in Bn(T)/(Bn(T))(2) is even because p(σ) is the generator of Z2. Suppose that the order of σ is 2r, where r<n. Then i(ρ1,0,0)=σ2, and i(ρ1,0,0r)=σ2r=1. Since i is injective, ρ1,0,0r=1, and it follows that 1=q(ρ1,0,0r)=ρ1,0,0r in Θ((Bn(T))(1)/(Bn(T))(2)). Thus ρ1,0,0 is of order r<n, which contradicts (4.1). Hence:
[TABLE]
To complete the proof, consider the short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
where p is the canonical projection. Then p(σi)=σ for all i=1,…,n−1, and as above, we see that for i=1,…,n−1, the (Bn(T))(3)-cosets of the σi coincide in Bn(T)/(Bn(T))(3), and are equal to an element that we denote by σ. Using the same relations of Bn(T) as before, it follows that the (Bn(T))(3)-cosets of a and b commute with σ in Bn(T)/(Bn(T))(3), [b,a]=σ−2 and σ2n=1, so p is an isomorphism, and hence (Bn(T))(2)=(Bn(T))(3). We conclude that Bn(T) is not residually soluble if n≥5, because (Bn(T))(2) is non trivial.
∎
5. The case of the Klein bottle
In this section, we study the lower central and derived series of the (pure) braid groups of the Klein bottle, and we prove Theorem 1.3. In Section 5.1, we exhibit an algebraic section of the Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence (1.2) for the Klein bottle, and we determine the centre of Bn(K). These results will be used in the rest of the section, but are interesting in their own right. In Section 5.2, we focus on the case n=2, and in Theorems 5.4 and 5.13, we describe the lower central and the lower F2-linear central filtration respectively of P2(K) in an explicit manner. In Section 5.4, we study the derived series of Pn(K), and in Section 5.5, we complete the proof of Theorem 1.3 by extending our results to Bn(K).
5.1. A section in the case of the Klein bottle
As we mentioned previously, the Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence (1.2) admits a section for geometric reasons. We start by giving an explicit section.
Proposition 5.1**.**
In terms of the presentation of Pn(K) given by Theorem 2.1, the map s:Pn(K)⟶Pn+1(K) defined on the generators of Pn(K) by:
[TABLE]
extends to an algebraic section for the Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence arising from equation (1.2):
[TABLE]
The geometric idea behind this section is to make use of the non-vanishing vector field in K to duplicate the last string of the elements of Pn(K).
In what follows, the numbers (1)–(8) refer to the relations of Pn(K) given by Theorem 2.1. The prove the proposition, it suffices to check that the images under s of these remain valid in Pn+1(K). We do this for relations (2) and (6).
For relation (2), which is ai−1bnai=bnanCi,n−1Ci+1,nan−1, we consider two cases.
•
If i+1=n then:
[TABLE]
where (∗) (resp. (∗∗)) is a consequence of relation (3) (resp. relations (2) and (3)).
•
If i+1<n then:
[TABLE]
where (∗) is a consequence of relation (3), similar to that in the case i+1=n,
and (∗∗) is the same relation as in the case i+1=n.
Thus s respects relation (2). For relation (6), which is bnbi=bibnCi,nCi+1,n−1, we also consider two cases.
•
if i+1=n then:
[TABLE]
•
if i+1<n:
[TABLE]
Thus s respects relation (6). The computations for the other relations are similar, and are left to the reader.∎
As we mentioned at the end of the introduction, for any compact surface M and for all n∈N, the centre Z(Bn(M)) of Bn(M) is known, with the exception of the Klein bottle and the Möbius band. The section given by Proposition 5.1 allows us to determine Z(Bn(M)) if M=K. For the sake of completeness, in Proposition A1 of the Appendix of this paper, we also compute the centre of the braid groups of the Möbius band.
Proposition 5.2**.**
For all n∈N, the centre of Bn(K) is equal to ⟨(bn⋯b1)2⟩, and is isomorphic to Z.
Proof.
The idea of the proof is similar to that of [28, Proposition 4.2]. Let βn=bn⋯b1, and let Zn=⟨βn2⟩. We will show by induction on n that Zn=Z(Bn(K)). Arguing as in [28, Proposition 4.2, step 4], we see that Z(Bn(K))⊂Pn(K), so Z(Bn(K))⊂Z(Pn(K)). Thus it suffices to show that Z(Pn(K))=Zn and Zn⊂Z(Bn(K)). We prove that Z(Pn(K))=Zn by induction on n. If n=1, by Theorem 2.1, we have:
[TABLE]
and it is well known that Z(π1(K))=Z1. Now suppose by induction that Z(Pn−1(K))=Zn−1 for some n≥2.
We first prove that Z(Pn(K))⊂Zn in a manner similar to that of [28, Proposition 4.2, step 3]. Let g∈Z(Pn(K)), and consider the Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence arising from (1.2):
[TABLE]
Since p∗ is surjective, p∗(g)∈Z(Pn−1(K))=Zn−1, and since p∗(Zn)=Zn−1, there exists h∈Zn such that p∗(h)=p∗(g). If g′=gh−1 then g′ belongs to Z(Pn(K)) and to the free group π1(K∖{x1,…,xn−1}) by exactness. Hence g′∈Z(π1(K∖{x1,…,xn−1}))={1}, so g′=1, and thus g=h∈Zn, which shows that Z(Pn(K))⊂Zn.
Still under the above induction hypothesis, we now prove that Zn⊂Z(Pn(K)). Using the section s:Pn−1(K)⟶Pn(K) given by Proposition 5.1, we have s(βn−12)=βn2. By the induction hypothesis,
βn−12ai=aiβn−12 and βn−12bi=biβn−12 for all 1≤i≤n−1, and βn−12Ci,j=Ci,jβn−12 for all 1≤i<j≤n−1 in Pn−1(K). Taking the image of both sides of these equations by s, we obtain the following relations:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Let us prove that an and bn commute with βn2, from which it will follow from (5.3) that βn2 commutes with ai and bi for all 1≤i≤n. Using relations (6)–(8) of Theorem 2.1, we have:
[TABLE]
for all i=1,…,n−1. To prove relation (5.5), notice that by relations (7) and (8) we have
[TABLE]
and taking the inverse of both sides, it follows that an−1bi=Ci,n−1biCi+1,nan−1. We thus obtain:
[TABLE]
To prove relation (5.6), one may use relation (6) and the fact that bi commutes with Ci+1,n by relation (8).
We now claim that:
[TABLE]
for all i=0,…,n−1. We shall prove the claim by reverse induction on i. First, we have anβn=an(bnbn−1⋯b1)=(\refit:puras5)(bnC1,nan−1)bn−1⋯b1 and bnβn=bnbn⋯b1, so the claim is valid if i=n−1. Suppose that it holds for some 1≤i≤n−1. Then:
[TABLE]
so the claim holds. Taking i=0, we obtain anβn=βnan−1 and bnβn=βnbnC1,n.
Hence anβn2=βnan−1βn=βn2an, and applying (5) with i=n twice, we obtain:
[TABLE]
Thus βn2 commutes with an and bn, and so with ai and bi for all i∈{1,…,n}.
Finally, by relation (5), C1,n=bn−1anbnan and Ci+1,n=Ci,nan−1bn−1ai−1bnaian by relation (2). Since βn2 commutes with ai and bi for all 1≤i≤n, it follows that βn2 commutes with C1,n by relation (5), and by induction that βn2 commutes with Ci,n for all 1≤i<n.
So by (5.4), βn2 commutes with Ci,j for all 1≤i<j≤n, and therefore commutes with all of the elements of a generating set of Pn(K), hence Zn=Z(Pn(K)).
To complete the proof of the proposition, it remains to show that Zn⊂Z(Bn(K)). To do so, from above, it suffices to prove that σi commutes with βn2 for all i=1,…,n−1.
One may see by Figure 2 that σi2=Ci,i+1. Further:
[TABLE]
The case j=i is illustrated in Figure 4, and if j=i+1 then
σi−1bi+1σi=σi−1.σi−1biσi.σi−2.σi=σi−2bi using the case j=i.
For i=1,…,n−1, using (5.7) and relation (6) of Theorem 2.1, we have:
[TABLE]
from which it follows that (bn⋯b1)2σi=σi(bn⋯b1)2 as required.
∎
Remark 5.3*.*
For n=2, we modify slightly the presentation of P2(K) given by Theorem 2.1 by removing the generator C1,2 using relation (5), so C1,2=b2−1a2b2a2. Hence P2(K) is generated by a1,a2,b1 and b2, subject to the relations:
(1)
a1−1a2a1=a2;
2. (2)
a1−1b2a1=a2−1b2a2−1;
3. (3)
b1−1a2b1=a2b2a2−1b2−1a2−1;
4. (4)
b1−1b2b1=a2b2a2;
5. (5)
b2−1a2b2a2=b1a1−1b1−1a1−1.
Using Proposition 5.1 and the Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence (5.1), Pn+1(K) may be written as a semi-direct product of the free group π1(K∖{x1,…,xn}) by s(Pn(K)) for all n∈N. In particular, if n=1 then:
[TABLE]
where π1(K∖{x1})=⟨a2,b2⟩ is a free group of rank 2,
[TABLE]
by (5.2), and where the action φ:s(P1(K))⟶Aut(π1(K∖{x1})) is given by:
In this section, we use Theorem 1.2 to calculate explicitly the lower central series of P2(K). This will enable us show that P2(K) is residually nilpotent.
Theorem 5.4**.**
Let n≥2. With the notation of Theorem 2.1, we have:
[TABLE]
where
φ is as defined in equation (5.9). Consequently, P2(K) is residually nilpotent.
The idea of the proof is to apply Theorem 1.2(1) to the semi-direct product structure of P2(K) given by (5.8). From now on, we shall make use of the notation of that theorem, taking H=π1(K∖{x1}), G=s(P1(K)) and P2(K)=H⋊φG. In the lemmas that follow, we first compute the subgroups Kn, Hn and Ln for these choices of G and H, and in Proposition 5.12, we calculate the subgroup Ln, which will enable us to prove Theorem 5.4.
We first we need to know the lower central series of P1(K). Applying Theorem 1.2 to the semi-direct product structure ⟨a1⟩⋊⟨b1⟩ of π1(K) given by (5.2), it is straightforward to see that K2=H2=L2=⟨a12⟩, and if n≥3, Kn={1} and H_{n}=L_{n}=\bigl{\langle}a^{2^{n-1}}_{1}\bigr{\rangle}, therefore the lower central series of s(P1(K)) is given by:
[TABLE]
for all n>1. We now turn to the case of P2(K), and we first determine Kn.
Lemma 5.5**.**
With the notation of Theorem 1.2, and taking H=π1(K∖{x1}), G=s(P1(K)) and P2(K)=H⋊φG, the subgroup Kn is equal to
⟨⟨a22,Γ2(H)⟩⟩H
if n=2, and to
\bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}a^{2^{n-1}}_{2}\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H}
if n≥3.
and so {a22,[a2−1,b2]}⊂K2. Since K2 is normal in H by Lemma 3.3, ⟨⟨a22,[a2−1,b2]⟩⟩H
is a subgroup of K2, and therefore ⟨⟨a22,Γ2(H)⟩⟩H⊂K2 because Γ2(H)=⟨⟨[a2−1,b2]⟩⟩H. For the other inclusion, (5.11) implies that φ(g)(h).h−1∈⟨⟨a22,Γ2(H)⟩⟩H for all h (resp. all g) belonging to the generating set {a2,b2} (resp. {a1a2,b2b1}) of H (resp. of G).
The inclusion K2⊂⟨⟨a22,Γ2(H)⟩⟩H then follows from Lemma 3.4(1). This proves the result for n=2.
Now suppose that n≥3. Then \Gamma_{n-1}(G)=\bigl{\langle}(a_{1}a_{2})^{2^{n-2}}\bigr{\rangle} by (5.10). Using (5.9), we have φ((a1a2)2n−2)(a2).a2−1=1 and:
[TABLE]
By induction, suppose that φ((a1a2)j)(b2)=a2−2jb2, for some j≥2. Then:
[TABLE]
In particular, if j=2n−2, we have φ((a1a2)2n−2)(b2).b2−1=(a2−2(2n−2)b2).b2−1=a2−2(n−1), and hence \bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}a^{2^{n-1}}_{2}\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H}\subset K_{n}. Conversely, taking G={(a1a2)2n−2} and H={a2,b2} in Lemma 3.4(1) and using (5.10), we obtain Kn⊂⟨⟨Z⟩⟩H, where:
[TABLE]
whence the inclusion K_{n}\subset\bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}a^{2^{n-1}}_{2}\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H}, and this proves the lemma.
∎
If β∈H then βa22β−1=[β,a22]a22∈⟨a22,Γ2(H)⟩, and since Γ2(H) is normal in H, it follows that the subgroup ⟨a22,Γ2(H)⟩ is also normal in H, so ⟨a22,Γ2(H)⟩=⟨⟨a22,Γ2(H)⟩⟩H. Using the relations K2=H2 and [H,L1]=Γ2(H), it follows from Lemma 5.5 that:
[TABLE]
Let W2=W2=L2, and for n≥3, define:
[TABLE]
Note that Wn is normal in H for all n≥2. This follows from the fact that Γn(H) is normal in H for all n≥2 and arguing by induction on n as follows. If n=2 then W2=L2 by Lemma 3.3, so suppose that n≥3, and that Wn−1 is normal in H. Then hxh−1∈Wn−1
for all x∈Wn−1 and h∈H, thus
hx2h−1=(hxh−1)2∈Wn, and Wn is normal in H as claimed. If x∈Γi(H) and 2≤i≤n, we will refer to the elements a22n−1 and x2n−i as generators of Wn. In order to prove Theorem 5.4, we will show in Proposition 5.12 that Ln=Wn=Wn for all n≥2. Supposing this to be the case, the following lemma implies that to determine the lower central series of P2(K) using Theorem 1.2, it is not necessary to calculate the subgroups Hn.
Lemma 5.6**.**
Suppose that Li=Wi=Wi for all 2≤i≤n. Then Hn+1⊂⟨Kn+1,[H,Ln]⟩. In particular, Ln+1=⟨Kn+1,[H,Ln]⟩.
Proof.
We prove the given inclusion by induction on n. If n=2, using (5.9) notice that:
φ(a1a2)([a2,b2])[b2,a2]=[a2−2,a2b2a2−1b2−1a2−1]∈[L2,H] by (5.12).
•
φ(b2b1)([a2,b2])[b2,a2]=∈[H,L2][b2,a22]∈Γ3(H)[a2,[a2,b2]]∈[L2,H] by (5.12).
Using these calculations and the description of L2 given in (5.12), it follows from the first part of Lemma 3.4(2) and Lemma 5.5 that:
[TABLE]
which proves the result if n=2.
Suppose now that the given inclusion holds for n−1 for some n≥3, and assume that Li=Wi=Wi for all 2≤i≤n. Let φ(g)(x).x−1 be an element of Hn+1, where g∈G and x∈Ln=⟨Kn,[H,Ln−1]⟩ by the induction hypothesis. We wish to show that φ(g)(x).x−1∈⟨Kn+1,[H,Ln]⟩. By Lemma 3.4(1), we only need to check the following two possibilities:
•
x=a22n−1. Then x∈Kn by Lemma 5.5, φ(a1a2)(x).x−1=1 and φ(b2b1)(x)x−1=a−2n∈Kn+1 by Lemma 5.5 and (5.11).
•
x=[h,l]∈[H,Ln−1], where h∈H and l∈Ln−1. Then φ(g)([h,l])[h,l]−1 may be written in the following form:
[TABLE]
To complete the proof, it suffices to show that the subgroup [L2,Ln−1] is contained in [H,Ln]. To do so, first note that [L2,Ln−1] is normal in H because Lj is normal in H for all j≥2 by Lemma 3.3. Using the fact that L2=⟨a22,Γ2(H)⟩ by (5.12), it suffices to show that the following elements belong to [H,Ln]:
•
[[y,z],l]∈[Γ2(H),Ln−1], where y,z∈H and l∈Ln−1. Then:
[TABLE]
because [H,Ln−1]⊂Ln. Thus [[y,z],l]∈[H,Ln] because [H,Ln] is a normal subgroup of H, and therefore [Γ2(H),Ln−1]⊂[H,Ln].
•
[a22,l]∈[⟨a22⟩,Ln−1], where l∈Ln−1. Then using (3.2), we have:
[TABLE]
since [H,Ln−1]⊂Ln. Further [a2,l]2∈[H,Ln] because l∈Ln−1=Wn−1 by hypothesis, so l2∈Wn=Ln, and
[TABLE]
by (3.2). So [l,a2]2∈[H,Ln], and thus [a22,l]∈[H,Ln] by (5.16). This shows that [L2,Ln−1]⊂[H,Ln], hence Hn+1⊂⟨Kn+1,[H,Ln]⟩ as desired, which concludes the proof of the first part of the statement. The second part follows from the first part and the definition of Ln+1.
∎
In order to prove Proposition 5.12, we shall require a couple of intermediate results. Let A be either the empty set or a normal subgroup of H, and for m≥1, let:
[TABLE]
For 1≤l≤m, let:
[TABLE]
In the case that A=∅, we will denote the subgroup El,m by El,m. This corresponds to taking k=0 in (5.17), so:
[TABLE]
If x=[x1,…,xi]∈Γi(H), the elements x2m−i−k (resp. x2m−i) of El,m (resp. of El,m) given in (5.17) (resp. in (5.18)) will be termed generators of El,m (resp. of El,m).
Note that Γm(H)=Em,m⊂El+1,m⊂El,m⊂E1,m=Bm
by [25, Problem 3, Section 5.3, p. 297] for all l=1,…,m−1, and that for all 1≤l≤m, El,m is normal in H, since if h∈H and x2m−i−k is a generator of El,m, where x=[x1,…,xi]∈Γi(H), then h[x1,…,xi]2m−i−kh−1=[hx1h−1,…,hxih−1]2m−i−k∈El,m because A is normal in H or is empty. In particular, taking A=∅, we have:
[TABLE]
and that El,m is normal in H for all 1≤l≤m.
Lemma 5.7**.**
Let y∈H, let m≥1, and let 1≤i≤m. If x=[x1,…,xi] is an element of Γi(H) for which x2m−i−k is a generator of Ei,m, where 0≤k≤m−i (resp. x2m−i is a generator of Ei,m), then:
[TABLE]
*respectively. *
Remark 5.8*.*
Let m≥1, and let 1≤i≤m. Since Ei+1,m+1⊂Bm+1 (resp. Ei+1,m+1⊂E2,m+1⊂Wm+1 by (5.14)), the congruence (5.20) (resp. (5.21)) is also valid modulo Bm+1 (resp. modulo Wm+1).
Proof.
It suffices to prove (5.20), since then the congruence (5.21) follows by taking A=∅.
We will do so by induction on m. If m=1 then i=1 and k=0, and the congruence is in fact an equality. If m=2, we consider two cases:
•
if i=2, or if i=k=1, then x∈Γ2(H), and the two sides of (5.20) are equal.
•
if i=1 and k=0 then x∈Γ1(H)=H. Thus [x2,y]=[x,x,y][x,y]2 by (3.2), and [x,x,y]∈Γ3(H), so [x,x,y]∈E2,3, and we obtain (5.20).
This proves the result if m=2. We now consider the general case.
Induction hypothesis 1: suppose that the congruence (5.20) holds for some m≥1.
Let us show by induction that the result holds for m+1i.e. if 1≤i≤m+1,
x∈Γi(H), x2m+1−i−k is a generator of Ei,m+1, 0≤k≤m+1−i and y∈H, then:
[TABLE]
This will be achieved by making a second induction hypothesis as follows.
Induction hypothesis 2: let 1≤i≤m+1 be such that:
[TABLE]
for all i≤j≤m+1, where x∈Γj(H), x2m+1−j−k is a generator of Ej,m+1, 0≤k≤m+1−j and y∈H. If i=m+1 then (5.23) holds trivially. So suppose that (5.23) is valid for some 2≤i≤m+1, and let us prove by reverse induction on i that it also holds for i−1. By induction hypothesis 2, it suffices to prove (5.23) for j=i−1. Let y∈H, and let x=[x1,…,xi−1]∈Γi−1(H), where x2m+1−(i−1)−k is a generator of Ei−1,m+1 and 0≤k≤m+1−(i−1). Then [x2(m+1)−(i−1)−k,y]=[x2m+2−i−k,y]. If k=m+2−i
then (5.23) is an equality. So assume that 0≤k≤m+1−i. By Proposition 3.1, [x2(m+1)−(i−1)−k,y] is equal to:
[TABLE]
Using induction hypotheses 1 and 2, we will first show that the expression (∗∗) is congruent to [x,y]2m+2−i−k modulo Ei,m+2, and then that the expression (∗) belongs to Ei,m+2, from which we will conclude by induction that [x2n+2−i−k,y]≡[x,y]2n+2−i−k modulo Ei,m+2 for all i=1,…,m+1.
To show that [x2m+1−i−k,y]2≡[x,y]2m+2−i−k modulo Ei,m+2, since x=[x1,…,xi−1]∈Γi−1(H) and x2m+1−(i−1)−k is a generator of Ei−1,m+1, there exist 1≤j1<⋯<jk≤i−1 such that xj1,…,xjk∈A, and therefore [x1,…,xi−1]2m−(i−1)−k is a generator of Ei−1,m.
Applying induction hypothesis 1, we have:
[TABLE]
It follows that there exist generators α1,…,αt
of Ei,m+1 and δ1,…,δt∈{1,−1} for which [x2m+1−i−k,y]=[x,y]2m+1−i−kα1δ1⋯αtδt, and so:
[TABLE]
We claim that:
(1)
α12δ1,…,αt2δt∈Ei,m+2.
2. (2)
[αs,θ],[αs−1,θ]∈Ei,m+2 for all s=1,…,t and all θ∈H.
3. (3)
\bigl{[}[x,y]^{-2^{m+1-i-k}},\theta\bigr{]}\in\mathcal{E}_{i,m+2} for all θ∈H.
Claim (1) follows from (5.17). To prove (2), let s∈{1,…,t}. Since αs is a generator of Ei,m+1, αs=β2m+1−l−k, where β=[β1,…,βl]∈Γl(H), βj1,…,βjk∈A, i≤l≤m+1 and 0≤k≤m+1−l.
By induction hypothesis 2,
[TABLE]
Moreover, [θ,β]=[θ,β1,…,βl]∈Γl+1(H), where βj1,…,βjk∈A, so [θ,β]2(m+2)−(l+1)−k∈El+1,m+2 since i≤l+1≤m+2 and 0≤k≤(m+2)−(l+1). Hence:
[TABLE]
The fact that El+1,m+2⊂Ei,m+2 implies that the congruence (5.26) is also valid modulo Ei,m+2, from which it follows using (5.26) that [αs,θ]∈El+1,m+2⊂Ei,m+2.
Further, [αs−1,θ]=αs−2[αs,θ](θαs2θ−1)∈Ei,m+2, using also (1) and the fact that Ei,m+2 is normal in H, which proves (2).
To prove (3), since x2m+1−(i−1)−k∈Ei−1,m+1, where x=[x1,…,xi−1]∈Γi−1(H) and 0≤k≤m+1−i, and there exist 1≤j1<⋯<jk≤i−1 such that xj1,…,xjk∈A, it follows that [y,x]=[y,x1,…,xi−1]∈Γi(H) and [y,x]2(m+1)−i−k∈Ei,m+1.
So applying induction hypothesis 2, we have:
[TABLE]
Now
[TABLE]
and since [θ,y,x1,…,xi−1]2(m+2)−(i+1)−k∈Ei+1,m+2, we conclude that \bigl{[}[x,y]^{-2^{m+1-i-k}},\theta\bigr{]}\in\mathcal{E}_{i+1,m+2}\subset\mathcal{E}_{i,m+2}, and this proves claim (3).
Thus it follows from (5.25) and claims (1), (2) and (3) that:
[TABLE]
which proves that the expression (∗∗) is congruent to [x,y]2m+2−i−k modulo Ei,m+2.
To see that the expression (∗) belongs to Ei,m+2, notice that each of its terms is a commutator, so can be written as a product of conjugates of the element \bigl{[}x^{2^{m-i-k}},[x^{2^{m+1-i-k}},y]\bigr{]} or its inverse. Since Ei,m+2 is normal in H, it thus suffices to show that \bigl{[}\theta,[x^{2^{m+1-i-k}},y]\bigr{]}^{-1}=\bigl{[}[x^{2^{m+1-i-k}},y],\theta\bigr{]}\in\mathcal{E}_{i,m+2} for all y,θ∈H and for all x=[x1,…,xi−1]∈Γi−1(H) for which x2m+1−(i−1)−k∈Ei−1,m+1, where i≥3, 0≤k≤m+1−i, xj1,…,xjk∈A and 1≤ji<⋯<jk≤i−1. To do so, note that x2m+1−i−k=x2m−(i−1)−k∈Ei−1,m, so [x2m+1−i−k,y]≡[x,y]2m+1−i−kmodEi,m+1 by induction hypothesis 1.
Thus there exist generators α1,…,αt of Ei,m+1, and δ1,…,δt∈{1,−1} such that [x2m+1−i−k,y]=[x,y]2m+1−i−kα1δ1⋯αtδt, and hence:
[TABLE]
Further, [α1δ1⋯αtδt,θ] belongs to the normal closure of \bigl{\{}\left[\alpha^{\delta_{1}}_{1},\theta\right],\ldots,\left[\alpha^{\delta_{t}}_{t},\theta\right]\bigr{\}} in H. This may be seen by applying reverse induction on 1≤s≤t, and by noting that for s≥2,
[TABLE]
Then \bigl{[}[x^{2^{n+1-i-k}},y],\theta\bigr{]}\in\bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}\bigl{[}[x,y]^{2^{n+1-i-k}},\theta\bigr{]},\left[\alpha^{\delta_{1}}_{1},\theta\right],\ldots,\left[\alpha^{\delta_{t}}_{t},\theta\right]\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H} by (5.28) and (5.29).
Now by claims (2) and (3), the elements
[α1δ1,θ],…,[αtδt,θ] and \bigl{[}[x,y]^{2^{m+1-i-k}},\theta\bigr{]} belong to Ei,m+2, and
since Ei,m+2 is normal in H, we conclude that the expression (∗) belongs to Ei,m+2. This completes the proof of (5.23) for i−1, and so by induction, (5.23) holds for all 1≤i≤m+1, which is exactly (5.22), By induction, we conclude that (5.20) holds, and this completes the proof of the lemma.
∎
For all 1≤l≤m, [El,m,H]⊂El+1,m+1 and [El,m,H]⊂El+1,m+1.
Proof.
Let l≤i≤m. First assume that x=[x1,…,xi]∈Γi(H) is such that x2m−i−k is a generator of El,m, and let y∈H. Then by (5.20), [x2m−i−k,y]≡[x,y]2m−i−k mod El+1,m+1. Since [y,x]=[y,x1,…,xi]∈Γi+1(H), it follows that [y,x]2(m+1)−(i+1)−k∈El+1,m+1, so [x2m−i−k,y]∈El+1,m+1.
Now suppose that x=α1δ1⋯αtδt, where for all i=1,…,t, αi is a generator of El,m, and δi∈{1,−1}. Then [x,y] belongs to the normal closure of {[αδi,y],i=1,…,t} in H by (5.29), and so [x,y]∈El+1,m+1 for all x∈El,m, y∈H by the first paragraph of the proof and the fact that El+1,m+1 is normal in H. Once more, the result for El,m is obtained from that for El,m by taking A=∅.
∎
Corollary 5.10**.**
If m≥2, then \widetilde{W}_{m}=\bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}a^{2^{m-1}}_{2},\,\widetilde{\mathcal{E}}_{2,m}\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H}.
Proof.
It suffices to prove that
[TABLE]
for all m≥2. If m=2, (5.30) follows from (5.12) and (5.18). Suppose by induction on m that (5.30) holds for some m≥2. It is clear from (5.18) that \widetilde{\mathcal{E}}_{2,m+1}\subset\bigl{\langle}x^{2^{m-i}}\,:\,x\in\Gamma_{i}(H),\,2\leq i\leq m\bigr{\rangle}. To prove the converse, let y=x2m+1−i, where x∈Γi(H) and 2≤i≤m+1. If i=m+1 then y∈Γm+1(H)⊂E2,m+1 by (5.19). So suppose that 2≤i≤m. Then x2m−i∈E2,m by the induction hypothesis, so x2m−i=α1δ1⋯αtδt, where for all i=1,…,t, αi is a generator of E2,m and δi∈{1,−1}. Hence:
[TABLE]
So y∈E2,m+1 because for all i=1,…,t, αi2δi∈E2,m+1 by (5.18), and [αi−δi,θ]∈[E2,m,H]⊂E3,m+1⊂E2,m+1 by Corollary 5.9 and (5.19). The inclusion \bigl{\langle}x^{2^{m-i}}\,:\,x\in\Gamma_{i}(H),\,2\leq i\leq m\bigr{\rangle}\subset\widetilde{\mathcal{E}}_{2,m+1} then follows.
∎
Corollary 5.11**.**
For all m≥2, [H,Wm]⊂Wm+1.
Proof.
Since [E2,m,H]⊂E2,m+1 using Corollary 5.9, by Corollary 5.10, it suffices to prove that [h,a22m−1]∈Wm+1 for all h∈H. To see this, observe that [h,a22m−1]≡[h,a2]2m−1modWm+1 by taking i=1 and x=a2 in (5.21) and using Remark 5.8. So there exists w∈Wm+1 such that [h,a22m−1]=[h,a2]2m−1.w. Now [h,a2]∈Γ2(H), hence [h,a2]2m−1∈Wm+1 by (5.14), and we conclude that [h,a22m−1]∈Wm+1 as required.∎
The following result will enable us to obtain the explicit characterisation of Γn(P2(K)) given in Theorem 5.4.
Proposition 5.12**.**
For all n≥2, Ln=Wn=Wn.
Proof.
If n=2, the statement is true by definition. So suppose by induction that Ln=Wn=Wn for some n≥2. Then we have the following inclusions:
•
Wn+1⊂Wn+1. To see this, let y∈Wn+1. If y is a generator of Wn+1, then by (5.14), y either belongs to Γn+1(H), and so belongs to Wn+1 by (5.13), or is of the form x2n+1−i, where 1≤i≤n, x∈Γi(H), and x=a2 if i=1. Hence x2n−i∈Wn=Wn by induction, and thus y=x2n+1−i=(x2n−i)2∈Wn+1 by (5.13). If y is an arbitrary element of Wn+1, it may be written as a product of conjugates of generators and their inverses, so it belongs to Wn+1 because Wn+1 is normal in H.
•
Ln+1⊂Wn+1, since Kn+1⊂Wn+1 by Lemma 5.5 and (5.14), and [H,Ln]=[H,Wn]⊂Wn+1 by induction and Corollary 5.11, so Ln+1=⟨Kn+1,[H,Ln]⟩⊂Wn+1
using Lemma 5.6.
•
Wn+1⊂Ln+1. First, Γn+1(H)=[H,Γn(H)]⊂[H,Wn]=[H,Ln]⊂Ln+1 by (5.13) and induction. Secondly, let x2∈Wn+1, where x∈Wn=Ln is a generator. If n=2, by (5.12), x=a22 or x=[b2,a2], then x2=a24∈K3⊂L3 by Lemma 5.5, or x2=[b2,∈L2a22][a2,∈L2[a2,b2]]∈[H,L2]⊂L3. So assume that n≥3. By Lemma 5.6, there are two possibilities for x:
–
if x∈Kn, then x=a22n−1 by Lemma 5.5, and x2=a22n∈Kn+1⊂Ln+1.
–
if x=[h,l]∈[H,Ln−1], where h∈H and l∈Ln−1=Wn−1, then x2=[h,l]2=[h,l2][l,[l,h]]. Now l2∈Wn=Ln by induction and [l,h]∈Ln, so [h,l2] and [l,[l,h]] belong to [H,Ln], which is contained in Ln+1.
Finally, let x2∈Wn+1, where x is an arbitrary element of Wn. Then there exists q∈N such that x=x1⋯xq, where for all i=1,…,q, xi is a generator of Wn=Ln. Then as in (5.25), we have:
[TABLE]
From the second case above, for all i=1,…,q, xi2∈Ln+1. Further, for all i=1,…,q−1, [xi−1,xi+1⋯xq]∈[Ln,H]⊂Ln+1. It then follows from (5.31) that x2∈Ln+1.
It follows from these three inclusions that Ln+1=Wn+1=Wn+1.
∎
Let n≥2. By Remark 5.14, it suffices to prove by induction on n that Un=γn2P2(K), where Un is defined by (5.32).
If n=2, U2⊂γ22P2(K) because b22 and (b2b1)2 belong to {x2:x∈P2(K)}, which is contained in γ22P2(K), Γ2(P2(K)) is contained in γ22P2(K), and γ22P2(K) is normal in P2(K).
For the converse inclusion, we know that Γ2(P2(K))⊂U2, that P2(K) is generated by {a2,a2a1,b2,b2b1} by Remark (5.3), and that the square of each element of this set belongs to U2, since by Theorem 5.4, a22∈Γ2(P2(K)) and (a2a1)2∈Γ2(s(π1(K)))⊂Γ2(P2(K)). Further, if x=x1⋯xq, where for i=1,…,q, xi∈{a2±1,(a2a1)±1,b2±1,(b2b1)±1}, then using the decomposition given in (5.31), we have x2∈U2 because xi2∈U2 for all 1≤i≤q and [xi−1,xi+1⋯xq]∈Γ2(P2(K))⊂U2 for all 1≤i≤q−1.
Thus γ22P2(K)⊂U2, and therefore γ22P2(K)=U2.
Now assume that n≥2, and suppose by induction that Ui=γi2P2(K) for all 2≤i≤n. Then Un+1⊂γn+12P2(K) since Γn+1(P2(K))⊂γn+12P2(K), Γn+1(P2(K)) and γn+12P2(K) are normal in P2(K), and if x∈{b2,b2b1} then x2n=(x2n−1)2, where x2n−1∈Un=γn2P2(K) by the induction hypothesis, so x2n∈γn+12P2(K).
To prove that γn+12P2(K)⊂Un+1, using the induction hypothesis and the fact that γn+12P2(K) is generated by [P2(K),γn2P2(K)]∪{x2:x∈γn2P2(K)}, it suffices to show that [P2(K),Un]⊂Un+1, and that x2∈Un+1 for all x∈Un. We first show that [P2(K),Un]⊂Un+1. Let x∈P2(K), and let u∈Un.
(1)
If u∈Γn(P2(K)) then [x,u]∈Un+1.
2. (2)
If u=(b2b1)2n−1 then [x,u]=1 because (b2b1)2n−1∈Z(P2(K)) by Proposition 5.2.
3. (3)
If u=b22n−1, we claim that [b22n−1,x]∈Ln+1 for all x∈{a2,(a2a1)−1,b2,(b2b1)−1}. The result is clear if x=b2, so we consider the three other cases. We proceed by induction on n. Suppose first that n=2.
If x=a2 then by (3.2), (5.13) and Proposition 5.12, we have:
[TABLE]
In the remaining two cases, by (5.9), (5.12), (5.14) and Proposition 5.12, we have:
[TABLE]
which proves the claim in the case n=2. Now suppose that [b22j−1,x]∈Lj+1 for all 2≤j≤n and x∈{a2,(a2a1)−1,b2,(b2b1)−1}. Then by Proposition 5.12 and (5.13), [b22n−1,x]∈Ln+1=Wn+1, and hence [b22n−1,x]2∈Wn+2=Ln+2. So by (3.2), we have:
[TABLE]
which proves the claim for all n≥2. Now let x be an arbitrary element of P2(K). Since the set {a2,(a2a1)−1,b2,(b2b1)−1} generates P2(K), for some t≥0, there exist x1,…,xt∈{a2,(a2a1)−1,b2,(b2b1)−1} and ε1,…,εt∈{1,−1} for which x=x1ε1x2ε2⋯xtεt.
As in (5.29), we have the following relation:
[TABLE]
Using the fact that Ln+1 is normal in H by Lemma 3.3, it follows from (5.33) that [b22n−1,x]∈Ln+1, and since Ln+1⊂Γn+1(P2(K)) by Theorem 1.2, we deduce that [b22n−1,x]∈Un+1.
This concludes the proof of the inclusion [P2(K),Un]⊂Un+1. It remains to prove that {x2:x∈Un}⊂Un+1. If x=b22n−1 or x=(b2b1)2n−1 then clearly x2∈Un+1. Using Theorems 1.2(1) and 5.4, if x\in\Gamma_{n}(P_{2}(\mathbb{K}))=L_{n}\rtimes\bigl{\langle}(a_{1}a_{2})^{2^{n-1}}\bigr{\rangle}, then in terms of this semi-direct product, x=(x1,x2), where x1∈Ln and x_{2}\in\bigl{\langle}(a_{1}a_{2})^{2^{n-1}}\bigr{\rangle}, and x2=(x1,x2)(x1,x2)=(x1.φ(x2)(x1),x22).
Now x^{2}_{2}\in\bigl{\langle}(a_{1}a_{2})^{2^{n}}\bigr{\rangle}, and since x1∈Ln=Wn, we have x12∈Wn+1=Ln+1 by Proposition 5.12, and therefore x1.φ(x2)(x1)=x12(φ(x2)(x1−1).x1)−1∈Ln+1 and x2∈Ln+1⋊⟨(a1a2)2n⟩=Γn+1(P2(K))⊂Un+1.
If x is a product of conjugates of generators of Un then x2∈Un+1 using (5.31). This shows that {x2:x∈Un}⊂Un+1. It follows that γn+12(P2(K))⊂Un+1, so γn+12(P2(K)=Un+1. Using the explicit characterisation of Γn(P2(K)) given by Theorem 5.4 and Remark 5.14, the first part of the statement follows. The second part follows from the fact that ⋂n≥2Un={1} using the first part.
∎
5.4. The derived series of Pn(K)
For n≥3, the situation is more complicated, and we did not succeed in computing the lower central series of Pn(K) as we did in Section 5.2 in the case n=2. Due to the complexity of the lower central series of P2(K), we were not able to find a suitable formula for φ(g)(h).h−1 for g∈Γm(Pn(K)) in order to apply Theorem 1.2(1), the idea being to use the Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence (5.1) and to calculate recursively Γm(Pn(K) for m≥1 and n≥3. Nevertheless, in this section, we will use Theorem 1.2(2) to estimate the derived series of Pn(K), and to show in Theorem 5.20 that this group is residually soluble for all n≥1.
With the notation of Theorem 1.2 and equation (5.1), we may write Pn+1(K)=H⋊φG, where H=π1(K∖{x1,…,xn}), G=s(Pn(K)), and s is the section for p∗ given by Proposition 5.1. In what follows, we will take G to be equipped with the generating set:
[TABLE]
In Pn+1(K), for 1≤j≤n, let Dj=Cj,n+1−1Cj+1,n+1. Since Cj,n+1=Dn−1⋯Dj+1−1Dj−1 for all j=1,…,n, the set:
[TABLE]
generates H,
and using Theorem 2.1, the action φ:s(Pn(K))⟶Aut(π1(K∖{x1,…,xn})) is given by:
[TABLE]
where:
[TABLE]
for all 1≤i≤k≤n−1 and 1≤j≤n, and where αj=an+1−1αn,j and δi,j=Cn,n+1Ci,n+1−1δi,j,n.
Our aim is to calculate the subgroups Vm that were defined in the statement of Theorem 1.2 for all m≥2. For i≥0, let
[TABLE]
If i=0, we write An=An1. To compute H2, first notice that by definition, H2=K2, so H2 is normal in H by Lemma 3.3.
Using (5.36), observe that φ(ai)(bn+1)bn+1−1=bn+1an+1Dian+1−1bn+1−1 for all 1≤i≤n−1, and φ(bnbn+1Cn,n+1)(bn+1)bn+1−1=bn+1Dn−1bn+1−1. So by normality of H2, Dj∈H2 for all 1≤j≤n, and
therefore An⊂H2 by (5.37). Moreover, φ(bnbn+1Cn,n+1)(an+1)an+1−1=Dnbn+1−1an+1bn+1an+1−1, so [bn+1−1,an+1]∈H2. Applying Lemma 3.4(1) with X and Y as defined in (5.34) and (5.35), we see that \widetilde{H}_{2}=\bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}A_{n},[a_{n+1},b_{n+1}]\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H}, and therefore:
[TABLE]
Let Y1=V1=H, and for m≥2, let:
[TABLE]
In what follows, we will refer to the elements of the set
[TABLE]
as generators of Ym.
Since (Pn+1(K))(m)⊂Vm+1⋊(Pn(K))(m) by Theorem 1.2(2), to prove that Pn+1(K) is residually soluble, it suffices to show that Vm⊂Ym for all m≥2, and then that ⋂m≥1Ym={1}.
Remark 5.15*.*
For all m≥1, Ym is a normal subgroup of H. Further, we claim that φ(g)(Yi)⊂Yi for all i≥1 and g∈G. To see this, note that φ(g)(Dj) is a conjugate of Dj or Dj−1 for all j=1,…,n by (5.36), so φ(g)(An2i)⊂An2i for all i≥1. Also, if yk∈Yk and yl∈Yl then φ(g)([yk,yl])=[φ(g)(yk),φ(g)(yl)], and the claim follows by induction on i.
Lemma 5.16**.**
For all m≥2, Vm⊂Ym.
Proof.
We argue by induction on m. If m=2, we saw above that V2=⟨Γ2(H),An⟩, and it then follows from (5.39) that V2=Y2.
So assume that m≥2, and suppose that Vi⊂Yi for all i=2,…,m. By definition, V_{m+1}=\bigl{\langle}\widetilde{H}_{m+1},[H,V_{m}]\bigr{\rangle}. From the induction hypothesis, it follows that [H,Vm]⊂[H,Ym]=[Y1,Ym]⊂Ym+1. Thus it suffices to show that Hm+1⊂Ym+1. To do so, suppose that x=φ(g)(h).h−1∈Hm+1, where g∈G and h∈Vm, so h∈Ym. By Lemma 3.4(2), we need only study the following cases where g∈X and h is a generator of Ym:
•
h=Dj2m−2, where j∈{1,…,n}. By (5.36), if j∈{1,…,n−1} then:
[TABLE]
because Dj2m−2∈Ym, and if j=n then:
[TABLE]
Similarly, by (5.36), one may check that if g is any other element of X then φ(g)(Dj2m−2).Dj−2m−2 is a commutator of Dn2m−2 with an element of H, and so belongs to [H,Ym], which is contained in Ym+1.
•
h=[yi,yk], where 1≤i≤k<m, i+k=m, yi∈Yi and yk∈Yk. If 1≤j<m, x∈Vj and g∈X, then φ(g)(x).x−1∈Hj+1⊂Vj+1⊂Yj+1 using the induction hypothesis, and φ(g)(Yl)⊂Yl for all l≥1 by Remark 5.15. So [(φ(g)(yk−1).yk)−1,φ(g)(yi−1)]∈[Yk+1,Yi]⊂Ym+1 and [(φ(g)(yi−1).yi)−1,yk]∈[Yi+1,Yk]⊂Ym+1 by (5.39), and writing φ(g)([yi,yk]).[yk,yi] in the form of (5.15), where we replace l by yk and h by yi, and using the fact that Ym+1 is normal in H, it follows that φ(g)([yi,yk]).[yk,yi]∈Ym+1.
Thus Hm+1⊂Ym+1, and hence Vm+1⊂Ym+1 as required.∎
It remains to prove that ⋂m≥1Ym={1}. To do so, we define two families (Zm)m≥1 and (Zm)m≥1 of subgroups of H as follows. Let Z1=Z1=H, Z2=V2=Y2, and if m≥3, let:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Note that if i=m (resp. k=0), the elements x1,…,xi of H that appear in the definition of Xm (resp. of Xm) are arbitrary.
If m≥3 (resp. m≥2), we will refer to the elements of Xm∪{x2:x∈Zm−1} (resp. of \widetilde{X}_{m}\cup\bigl{\{}D^{2^{m-2}}_{j}\,:\,j=1,\ldots,n\bigr{\}}) as generators of Zm (resp. of Zm).
Proposition 5.17**.**
Let m≥1. Then Zm⊂γ⌈m/2⌉2(H), where ⌈x⌉ denotes the least integer greater than or equal to x. In particular, ⋂m≥1Zm={1}.
Proof.
If m∈{1,2} then ⌈m/2⌉=1, γ12(H)=H and thus Zm⊂γ12(H). So suppose by induction on m that Zi⊂γ⌈i/2⌉2(H) for some m≥2 and all 1≤i≤m. Since γ⌈(m+1)/2⌉2(H) is normal in H, by (5.37) and (5.40), it suffices to show that {Dj2m−1:j=1,…,n}∪Xm+1⊂γ⌈(m+1)/2⌉2(H). If j=1,…,n then Dj2m−1=(Dj2m−2)2, and since Dj2m−2∈An2m−2 and An2m−2⊂Zm, it follows by the induction hypothesis that Dj2m−2∈γ⌈m/2⌉2(H), and hence Dj2m−1∈γ⌈m/2⌉+12(H). The fact that ⌈m/2⌉+1≥⌈(m+1)/2⌉ implies that γ⌈m/2⌉+12(H)⊂γ⌈(m+1)/2⌉2(H), whence Dj2m−1∈γ⌈(m+1)/2⌉2(H). Now let x∈Xm+1, and let x=[x1,…,xi]2m+1−i−k∈Γi(H), where 2≤i≤m+1 and there exist 1≤j1<⋯<jk≤i, such that xj1,…,xjk∈An, for all 0≤k≤m+1−i. If i=m+1 then x∈γm+12(H)⊂γ⌈(m+1)/2⌉2(H) because m+1≥⌈(m+1)/2⌉. So suppose that 2≤i≤m. If 0≤k≤m−i then x=\bigl{(}[x_{1},\ldots,x_{i}]^{2^{m-i-k}}\bigr{)}^{2}, where [x1,…,xi]2m−i−k∈Xm⊂γ⌈m/2⌉2(H) using the induction hypothesis, and thus x∈γ⌈m/2⌉+12(H)⊂γ⌈(m+1)/2⌉2(H). Finally, if k=m+1−i then x=[x1,…,xi]∈Γi(H). Since k≤i, we have i≥(m+1)/2≥⌈(m+1)/2⌉, and hence x∈Γi(H)⊂Γ⌈(m+1)/2⌉(H)⊂γ⌈(m+1)/2⌉2(H) as required, and this completes the proof of the inclusion {Dj2m−1:j=1,…,n}∪Xm+1⊂γ⌈(m+1)/2⌉2(H).
To finish, since H is finitely generated free group, H is residually 2-finite and ⋂m≥1γm2(H)={1}, then ⋂m≥1Zm={1}.
∎
The aim now is to prove that Ym=Zm=Zm for all m≥2, from which we will conclude that ⋂m≥1Ym={1} and that Pn+1(K) is residually soluble.
Remark 5.18*.*
Let m≥2. Taking A=An in (5.17), we have \bigl{\langle}\widetilde{X}_{m}\bigr{\rangle}=\mathcal{E}_{2,m}. Further, since Dj∈An for all j=1,…,n, we see that Dj2m−2∈E1,m, where we take i=k=1, so An2m−2⊂E1,m. Therefore Zm⊂E1,m, and Corollary 5.9 then implies that
[TABLE]
Note also that if m=1 then [H,\widetilde{Z}_{1}]=\Gamma_{2}(H)=\bigl{\langle}\widetilde{X}_{2}\bigr{\rangle}\subset\widetilde{Z}_{2}.
Lemma 5.19**.**
For all m≥1, Ym=Zm=Zm.
Proof.
If m=1, the given equality holds by definition. If m=2 then \bigl{\langle}\widetilde{X}_{2}\bigr{\rangle}=\Gamma_{2}(H), and \widetilde{Z}_{2}=\bigl{\langle}\!\bigl{\langle}A_{n}\cup\Gamma_{2}(H)\bigr{\rangle}\!\bigr{\rangle}_{H}=V_{2} using (5.38) and the fact that V2 is normal in H by Lemma 3.3.
So suppose by induction that:
[TABLE]
To prove that Zm+1⊂Zm+1, let us show that An2m−1 and Xm+1 are contained in Zm+1. For all j=1,…,n, we have Dj2m+1−2=(Dj2m−2)2 and Dj2m−2∈Zm=Zm by induction, so An2m−1⊂Zm+1 by (5.40). Now suppose that [x1,…,xi]2m+1−i−k∈Xm+1, so k elements of {x1,…,xi} belong to An, where 0≤k≤m+1−i. If m+1−i>k then [x1,…,xi]2m−i−k belongs to Zm=Zm by induction, so [x1,…,xi]2m+1−i−k=([x1,…,xi]2m−i−k)2 belongs to Zm+1. If m+1−i=k then [x1,…,xi]2m+1−i−k=[x1,…,xi]∈Γi(H), where k=(m+1)−i elements of this commutator belong to An, so [x1,…,xi]∈Zm+1. Hence Xm+1⊂Zm+1, and thus Zm+1⊂Zm+1.
We now show that Zm+1⊂Zm+1. First note that Xm+1⊂Xm+1, for if the commutator [x1,…,xi] belongs to Xm+1 then m+1−i of its elements belong to An, and so [x1,…,xi]=[x1,…,xi]2m+1−i−k∈Xm+1, where k=m+1−i.
Now let y∈Zm+1 be of the form y=x2, where x∈Zm=Zm by induction. If x is a generator of Zm then x2∈Zm+1 from the definition of Zm+1. If x=x1⋯xl, where xi is a generator of Zm for all 1≤i≤l, then making use of a decomposition of x analogous to that of (5.31),
the previous sentence and the fact that [H,Zm]⊂Zm+1 by Remark 5.18, it follows that y∈Zm+1. We conclude that Zm+1⊂Zm+1, and hence Zm+1=Zm+1.
To show that Zm+1⊂Ym+1, let y∈Zm+1. We first consider the following two possibilities:
(i)
y=x2, where x∈Zm=Ym by induction. If x=Dj2m−2 for some j=1,…,n, it follows from the definition of Ym+1 that y=x2=Dj2m−1∈Ym+1. If x=[xi,xj], where 1≤i≤j<m, i+j=m, xi∈Yi and xj∈Yj, then:
[TABLE]
Note that to obtain xi2∈Yi+1, we have i<m, so Yi=Zi and Yi+1=Zi+1 by the induction hypothesis.
Therefore y∈Ym+1 since Ym+1 is normal in H by Remark 5.15.
2. (ii)
y=[x1,…,xi]∈Γi(H), where 2≤i≤m+1, x1,…,xi∈H, and there exist 1≤j1<…<jm+1−i≤i such that xj1,…,xjm+1−i∈An. If j1=1, i.e.x1∈An, then x1∈Y2, [x2,…,xi]∈Γi−1(H), and m−i=(m−1)−(i−1) elements of {x2,…,xi} belong to An, so [x2,…,xi]∈Zm−1=Ym−1 by induction. Hence:
[TABLE]
If j1>1 then [x2,…,xi]∈Γi−1(H) and m+1−i=m−(i−1) elements of {x2,…,xi} belong to An. Therefore [x2,…,xi]∈Zm=Ym by induction, and thus:
[TABLE]
For the general case, if y is a product of conjugates of the two types of elements described in (i) and (ii) above, then y∈Ym+1 because Ym+1 is normal in H by Remark 5.15, and we conclude that Zm+1⊂Ym+1.
To complete the proof, it remains to see that Ym+1⊂Zm+1. From the definition of Zm+1 given in (5.40), it is clear that An2m−1⊂Zm+1. Applying the induction hypothesis, we have [Yi,Yj]=[Zi,Zj] for all 1≤i,j≤m for which i+j=m+1, so it suffices to show that [Zi,Zj]⊂Zi+j. We shall prove by induction on i that [Zi,Zj]⊂Zi+j for all 1≤i≤m and j≥1. The inclusion that we require then follows as a special case.
So let j≥1. If i=1 then [Z1,Zj]=[H,Zj]⊂Zj+1 by Remark 5.18.
So assume that 1<i≤m, and suppose by induction that:
[TABLE]
The aim is to prove that [Zi,Zj]⊂Zi+j. Let x∈Zi and y∈Zj. Then x∈Yi by the induction hypothesis (5.41) and the fact that 1<i≤m. Assume first that x is a generator of Yi, so that one of the following conditions holds:
(1)
x∈[Yl,Yk], where 1≤l≤k<i≤m and l+k=i. Then x∈[Zl,Zk] by the induction hypothesis (5.41).
2. (2)
x∈An2i−2,
and let us prove that [x,y]∈Zi+j.
In case (1), [25, Theorem 5.2] implies that:
[TABLE]
By the induction hypothesis (5.42) and the fact that k,l<m, we have:
[TABLE]
and thus [x,y]∈Zi+j for all y∈Zj using (5.43) and (5.44).
In case (2), let x=Dk2i−2, where k∈{1,…,n}. We consider the following cases:
•
i=2. Then x∈An. Let us show by induction on j that [An,Zj]⊂Zj+2, for all j≥1. Suppose first that j=1, let x∈An, and let y∈Z1=H. Then [x,y]∈Γ2(H), and the set {x,y} has one element, x, in An, therefore [x,y]∈X3⊂Z3, and thus [An,Z1]⊂Z3. Now suppose that j>1 and that [An,Zj−1]⊂Zj+1 by induction. Let x∈An, and let y∈Zj. First assume that y is a generator of Zj. If y=[y1,…,yl]∈Γl(H) belongs to Xj then j−l elements of {y1,…,yl} belong to An, therefore [x,y]∈Γl+1(H), where j−l+1=(j+2)−(l+1) elements of {x,y1,…,yl} belong to An. So [x,y]∈Xj+2⊂Zj+2. If y=z2,
where z∈Zj−1, then:
[TABLE]
by (3.2). Since [x,z]∈[An,Zj−1]⊂Zj+1 by induction, it follows that [x,z]2∈Zj+2 from the definition of Zj+2 in (5.40), and [[z,x],z]∈[Zj+1,H]⊂Zj+2 by Remark 5.18 and the fact that Zl=Zl for all l≥1. Therefore [x,y]∈Zj+2. Now if y=(α1y1δ1α1−1)⋯(αsysδsαs−1), where for all k=1,…,s, yk is a generator of Zj, αk∈H and δk∈{1,−1}, then applying (5.29) and induction on s, we see that [x,y] may be written as a product of conjugates of the [x,ykδk]. Then [x,y]∈Zj+2 using the above computations, the normality of Zj+2 in H, and the fact Zl=Zl for all l≥1 from the first part of the proof.
•
i≥3. Then:
[TABLE]
by (3.2). Now [Dk2i−3,y]∈[Zi−1,Zj]⊂Zi−1+j using (5.42), and thus [Dk2i−3,[Dk2i−3,y]]∈[H,Zi−1+j]⊂Zi+j by Remark 5.18. Since [Dk2i−3,y]∈Zi−1+j=Zi−1+j, we have [Dk2i−3,y]2∈Zi+j=Zi+j, so [x,y]∈Zi+j.
If now x∈Yi is a product of conjugates of generators of Yi, then [x,y]∈Zi+j using the above computations, (5.29), and the normality of Zi+j. This shows that [Zi,Zj]=[Yi,Zj]⊂Zi+j as claimed, and so Ym+1⊂Zm+1 as required.
∎
Theorem 5.20**.**
If n≥3, then (Pn+1(K))(m)⊂Zm+1⋊(Pn(K))(m) for all m≥1. In particular, Pn(K) is residually soluble for all n≥1.
Proof.
If n=1,2 then by (5.10) and Theorem 5.4, Pn(K) is residually nilpotent, and so is residually soluble. Suppose by induction on n that Pn(K) is residually soluble for some n≥2, and consider the Fadell-Neuwirth split short exact sequence (5.1). The result follows from Theorem 1.2, Lemmas 5.16 and 5.19, and the fact that ⋂m≥2Zm={1}. ∎
5.5. The case of the braid group Bn(K)
In this section, we prove Theorem 1.3. We start by giving two propositions in the cases where Bn(K) is not residually nilpotent or is not residually soluble.
Proposition 5.21**.**
If n≥3 then Bn(K) is not residually nilpotent. Further, for all i≥3, Γ2(Bn(K))=Γi(Bn(K))=⟨⟨σ2−1σ1⟩⟩Bn(K).
Proof.
In this proof, the relation numbers will refer to those of Theorem 2.2. Let n≥3, and consider the following short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
where p∗ is the canonical projection. Using relations (1) and (2), and arguing as in [15, p. 680] or [5, Proposition 3], it follows that the Γ3(Bn(K))-cosets of σ1,…,σn−1 in Bn(K)/Γ3(Bn(K)) are all identified to a single element, which we denote by σ.
Since n≥3, it follows from relations (3) and (4) that the Γ3(Bn(K))-cosets of a and b commute with σ. By relation (7) and (5.45), σ is of order 2, by relation (5), the Γ3(Bn(K))-coset of a commutes with that of b, and from relation (8), the Γ3(Bn(K))-coset of a is of order 2 in Bn(K)/Γ3(Bn(K)). By Remark 2.3, σ and the Γ2(Bn(K))-cosets of a and b are non trivial in Bn(K)/Γ2(Bn(K)), therefore σ and the Γ3(Bn(K))-cosets of a and b are also non trivial in Bn(K)/Γ2(Bn(K)) and satisfy the same relations in Bn(K)/Γ3(Bn(K)) as their images in Bn(K)/Γ2(Bn(K)) under p∗. Hence p∗ is a isomorphism, and Γ2(Bn(K))=Γ3(Bn(K)), so Γ2(Bn(K))=Γi(Bn(K)) for all i≥3. Since Γ2(Bn(K)) is non trivial, we see that Bn(K) is not residually nilpotent.
It remains to show that Γ2(Bn(K))=⟨⟨σ2−1σ1⟩⟩Bn(K). From relations (1) and (2), for all i=1,…,n−2, we have [σi,σi+1]=σiσi+1σi−1σi+1−1=σi+1−1σi, in particular, ⟨⟨σ2−1σ1⟩⟩Bn(K)⊂Γ2(Bn(K)). To prove the other inclusion, for all i=2,…,n−2, note that:
[TABLE]
It follows by induction on i that [σi,σi+1]∈⟨⟨σ2−1σ1⟩⟩Bn(K) for all i=1,…,n−2. Further,
[TABLE]
and similarly, [b,σ1]∈⟨⟨σ2−1σ1⟩⟩Bn(K) using relation (4). To see that [b,a]∈⟨⟨σ2−1σ1⟩⟩Bn(K), first note that:
by (5.46) and (5.47). Since the result is valid for the generators of Bn(K), the result follows for an arbitrary element of Γ2(Bn(K)) using the formula given by (5.29) and by the normality of ⟨⟨σ2−1σ1⟩⟩Bn(K).
We conclude that Γ2(Bn(K))⊂⟨⟨σ2−1σ1⟩⟩Bn(K), and hence that Γ2(Bn(K))=⟨⟨σ2−1σ1⟩⟩Bn(K).
∎
Proposition 5.22**.**
If n≥5 then Bn(K) is not residually soluble. Further, (Bn(K))(1)=(Bn(K))(i) for all i≥2.
Proof.
Let n≥5. Once more, the relation numbers will refer to those of Theorem 2.2. As in the case of the torus (Proposition 4.3), first consider the following short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
where p∗ is the canonical projection. Using relations (1) and (2), for all i=1,…,n−1, the σi belong to the same (Bn(K))(2)-coset, denoted by σ, in Bn(K)/(Bn(K))(2) (the hypothesis that n≥5 is used here, see [14, Theorem 1.4, p. 3389]). By Remark 2.3, σ and the (Bn(K)(2)-cosets of a and b are non trivial. From relations (3) and (4), the (Bn(K))(2)-cosets of a and b commute with σ. Relation (7) implies that σ is of order 2, and so from relation (5), the (Bn(K))(2)-coset of a commutes with that of b. By relation (8), the (Bn(K))(2)-coset of a is of order 2. So p∗ is a isomorphism, and (Bn(K))(1)=(Bn(K))(2). The second part then follows.
∎
By Proposition 5.21 (resp. Proposition 5.22), if n≥3 (resp. n≥5), Bn(K) is not residually nilpotent (resp. not residually soluble). Conversely, using Theorem 2.5, the short exact sequence (1.1),
and the fact that P2(K) is residually 2-finite by Theorem 5.13, B2(K) is residually 2-finite. In particular, B2(K) is residually nilpotent. By (5.10), B1(K)=π1(K) is residually nilpotent.
The fact that Pn(K) is residually soluble for all n≥1 by Theorem 5.20 implies that Bn(K) is residually soluble for all n≤4 using Theorem 2.5.
∎
6. The case of non-orientable surfaces of higher genus
In this short section, we prove Theorem 1.4, by generalising Propositions 5.21 and 5.22 to non-orientable surfaces of higher genus.
Theorem 6.1**.**
Let M be a compact, connected non-orientable surface without boundary and of genus g≥3. Then Bn(M) is not residually nilpotent if n≥3, and is not residually soluble if n≥5.
Proof.
The relation numbers will refer to those of Theorem 2.4. Using Theorem 2.4 it is easy to see that
[TABLE]
where σ denotes the Γ2(Bn(M))-coset of σi for all i=1,…,n−1. As in the proof of Proposition 5.21 (resp. Proposition 5.22), using relations (1) and (2), one may show that for all i=1,…,n−1, the σi belong to the same Γ3(Bn(M))-coset (resp. (Bn(M))(2)-coset), which we also denote by σ, in Bn(M)/Γ3(Bn(M)) (resp. in Bn(M)/(Bn(M))(2)). If n≥3 (resp. n≥5), by relation (3), the Γ3(Bn(M))-coset (resp. (Bn(M))(2)-coset) of ar commutes with σ for all 1≤r≤g. By relation (5), the Γ3(Bn(M))-coset (resp. (Bn(M))(2)-coset) of ar commutes with that of as for all 1≤r,s≤g. By (6), a12⋯ag2=σ2(n−1), and relation (4) does not give any new information. Thus Bn(M)/Γ3(Bn(M)) (resp. Bn(M)/(Bn(M))(2)) is isomorphic to Bn(M)Ab. Hence Bn(M) is not residually nilpotent if n≥3 (resp. is not residually soluble if n≥5).
∎
If M=K, the result follows from Theorem 1.3, and if M is a compact surface without boundary of genus g≥3, the conclusion follows from [4] and from Theorem 6.1. If M=RP2, by [17], Bn(RP2) is residually nilpotent if n≤3, and if n=4, Bn(RP2) is residually soluble if n<4.
The case n=4 may be obtained by using Theorem 2.5 and the following Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
where n≥2. Note that if n=2, P2(RP2) is the quaternion group of order 8 [31], which is 2-finite, and by [4], Pm(RP2∖{x1,…,xn}) is residually 2-finite. Therefore Pm+2(RP2) is residually 2-finite for all m≥1, in particular P4(RP2) is residually soluble. Applying Theorem 2.5 to the short exact sequence (1.1), we see that B4(RP2) is residually soluble.
∎
Appendix
Let M be the Möbius band, and let n≥1. The braid groups of M are those of RP2 with a single point removed [16, proof of Theorem 2(a)], and so Pn(M) is the group Γn,1(RP2) of [18, Proposition 11]. We use the notation and results of that proposition in what follows. In particular, Pn(M) is generated by the set \{A_{i,j},\rho_{j}\,\mid\,\text{1\leq i<jand2\leq j\leq n+1}\}.
Proposition A1**.**
Let n≥1. Then Z(Pn(M))=Z(Bn(M)) is infinite cyclic, generated by ρ2 if n=1, and by the full twist Δn+12 if n≥2.
Proof.
If n=1 then P1(M)=B1(M) is infinite cyclic, generated by ρ2, and the result follows in this case. So suppose that n≥2. We consider the following short exact sequence:
[TABLE]
Equation (A1) implies that Bn(M) is generated by {σ2,…,σn,ρ2,…,ρn+1}. The braid Δn+12 generates the centre of Bn+1, thus σi commutes with Δn+12 for all i=2,…,n. Further, using [18, Proposition 11, relation (V)], Δn+12 may be written in the following form:
[TABLE]
Since ρn+1 commutes with Ai,j for all 1≤i<j<n+1 [18, Proposition 11, relation (II)], it follows that ρn+1 commutes with Δn+12. Now the relation ρi+1=σi−1ρiσi−1 of [31, p. 83] for Bn+1(RP2) also holds in Bn(M) for all i=2,…,n, so ρi=σi⋯σnρn+1σn⋯σi, from which we conclude that ρi commutes with Δn+12. Thus Δn+12 commutes with all of the elements of a generating set of Bn(M), hence ⟨Δn+12⟩⊂Z(Bn(M)), and ⟨Δn+12⟩⊂Z(Pn(M)) since Δn+12∈Pn(M). We now consider the following two cases:
(a)
n=2. Let p:P2(M)⟶P1(M) denote the surjective homomorphism given geometrically by forgetting the second string. The kernel of p is a free group of rank 2 for which (A2,3,ρ3) is a basis, and P1(M)=⟨ρ2⟩ is infinite cyclic. Let Q=⟨ρ22⟩ be the index 2 subgroup of P1(M), and let G=p−1(Q) be the index 2 subgroup of P2(M). Then we have the following commutative diagram of short exact sequences:
[TABLE]
where q:P1(M)⟶Z2 is defined by q(ρ2)=1, and q′:P2(M)⟶Z2 is given by q′=q∘p. From (A2), we have Δ32=A1,2ρ3−2, and since A1,2=ρ2−1A2,3ρ2−1 by [18, Proposition 11, relation (V)], we see that:
[TABLE]
using exactness of (A3). So the restriction p\bigl{\lvert}_{G}\bigr{.}\colon\thinspace G\longrightarrow Q admits a section given by sending ρ22 to Δ3−2, and from this and the fact that Δ32∈Z(P2(M)), the upper row of (A3) splits as a direct product. In particular, G is the internal direct product of Ker(p) and ⟨Δ32⟩, and Z(G)=⟨Δ32⟩. Now P2(M) (resp. G) is an index 2 subgroup of B2(M) (resp. of P2(M)), and a transversal is given by {1,σ2} (resp. by {1,ρ2}). So every element z of B2(M) may be written as z=aρ2iσ2j, where a∈G and i,j∈{0,1} are unique. We shall refer to this expression as the normal form of z. Let z∈Z(B2(M)), and assume first that z∈/P2(M), so j=1. Consider the basis (u,v) of Ker(p), where u=A2,3ρ3 and v=ρ3. By [18, Proposition 11, relations (III) and (IV)], we have:
[TABLE]
Hence the action by conjugation of ρ2 on Ker(p) is given by composing the involution that exchanges u and v with conjugation by u−1. The relation ρ3=σ2−1ρ2σ2−1 implies that:
If i=1 then the left- and right-hand sides of (A6) are in normal form, and they clearly differ. If i=0 then using the fact that ρ22=u−1v−1Δ3−2∈G by (A4) and (A5), equation (A6) may be written as:
[TABLE]
Again the left- and right-hand sides are in normal form, and they differ also. In both cases, this contradicts the fact that z∈Z(B2(M)), and so we conclude that j=0. Hence z∈P2(M), and ⟨Δ32⟩⊂Z(B2(M))⊂Z(P2(M)). It remains to show that z∈⟨Δ32⟩. Suppose that i=1. Since z∈Z(P2(M)), z commutes with u, so:
[TABLE]
by (A5). Both sides are in normal form, and thus a=uau−1v−1u in Ker(p), which gives rise to a contradiction under Abelianisation in this free group. Hence i=0, and thus z∈G. So z∈Z(G), and therefore z∈⟨Δ32⟩. We conclude that ⟨Δ32⟩=Z(B2(M))=Z(P2(M)) as required.
2. (b)
n≥3. Then Z(Sn)={Id}, and since the homomorphism Bn(M)⟶Sn of (A1) is surjective, it follows that ⟨Δn+12⟩⊂Z(Bn(M))⊂Z(Pn(M)). The proof of the fact that Z(Pn(M))⊂⟨Δn+12⟩ is analogous to that of the inclusion Z(Pn(K))⊂Zn given in the second paragraph of Proposition 5.2, where the kernel of the Fadell-Neuwirth short exact sequence involving the pure braid groups of M is a free group with trivial centre.∎
Bibliography31
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] E. Artin, Theorie der Zöpfe, Abh. Math. Sem. Hamburg Univ. 4 (1926), 47–72.
2[2] V. G. Bardakov and P. Bellingeri, On residual properties of pure braid groups of closed surfaces, Comm. Alg. 37 (2009), 1481–1490.
3[3] P. Bellingeri, On presentations of surface braid groups, J. Algebra 274 (2004), 543–563.
4[4] P. Bellingeri and S. Gervais, On p 𝑝 p -almost direct products and residual properties of pure braid groups of nonorientable surfaces, Alg. Geom. Top. 16 (2016), 547–568.
5[5] P. Bellingeri, S. Gervais and J. Guaschi, Lower central series of Artin-Tits and surface braid groups, J. Algebra 319 (2008), 1409–1427.
6[6] J. S. Birman, On braid groups, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 22 (1969), 41–72.
7[7] W.-L. Chow, On the algebraical braid group, Ann. Math. 49 (1948), 654–658.
8[8] E. Fadell, Homotopy groups of configuration spaces and the string problem of Dirac, Duke Math. J. 29 (1962), 231–242.