Transversality in Generalized Manifolds
Transversality in Generalized Manifolds
disjoint disks property, and M and Q are topological m- and q-manifolds, respectively, 1-LCC embedded in X , with n , m 3 and n , q 3. We de ne what it means for M to be stably transverse to Q in X . In the metastable range, 3m 2n , 1 and 3m + q 4n , 1, we show that there is an arbitrarily small homotopy of M to a 1-LCC embedding that is stably transverse to Q.
1. Introduction In this paper we introduce a notion of transversality for submanifolds of a generalized n-manifold. One of the major di culties in arriving at suitable criteria for transversality is that a generalized submanifold M of a generalized manifold X may not have a stable euclidean normal microbundle neighborhood in X. This situation occurs, for example, when M is a topological manifold, which has Quinn index 22
M = 1, and X is a generalized manifold with
X 6= 1. Examples of generalized manifolds X with
X 6= 1 were constructed in 4 . An embryonic form of transversality was established in 5 for codimension three topological submanifolds M and Q of a generalized manifold X having complementary dimensions in X. Speci cally, it was shown that if m q n , 3, m + q = n 6, and M and Q are orientable topological manifolds of dimensions m and q, respectively, tamely embedded in an orientable generalized n-manifold X with the disjoint disks property, then there is an arbitrarily small homotopy of M to a tame embedding f : M ! X such that fM Q is a nite set and the intersection number of fM Q at each point of intersection is 1. Assuming the metastable codimension restriction 3m 2n , 1, 3m + q 4n , 1, we nd a small homotopy of M to a tame embedding f : M ! X such that fM and Q are stably transverse, in an sense to be described. In fact, we need only assume that Q is a generalized q-manifold with the disjoint disks property. In particular, fM Q will be a tame topological submanifold of fM and Q of the expected dimension, m+q , n. The proof makes use of the transversality theorems of Kirby-Siebenmann 15 and Marin 16 , the Main Construction of 5 , and a splitting theorem of 7 . Map transversality, which can be obtained from submanifold transversality, has beeen studied by Johnston 14 in the special case where the homology submanifold has a bundle neighborhood . 2. Definitions A generalized n-manifold n-gm without boundary is a locally compact euclidean neighborhood retract ENR X such that for each x 2 X,
1991 Mathematics Subject Classi cation. Primary: 57N35; Secondary: 57P99. Key words and phrases. generalized manifolds,embeddings,transversality. Partially supported by NSF grant DMS-9626624. 1
0; otherwise. Following Mitchell 19 we say that an ENR X is an n-gm with boundary if the condition HnX; X r fxg; Z Zis replaced by HnX; X r fxg; Z Zor 0, and = = if bdX = fx 2 X : HnX; X r fxg; Z 0g is an n , 1-gm embedded in X as a = Z-set. In 19 Mitchell shows that bdX is a homology n , 1-manifold. Recall that Y is a Z-set in X if, for each open set U in X, the inclusion U r Y ! U is a homotopy equivalence. A n-gm X, n 5, has the disjoint disks property DDP if every pair of maps of the 2-cell B 2 into X can be approximated arbitrarily closely by maps that have disjoint images. A subset A of X is 1-LCC in X if for each x 2 A and neighborhood U of x in X, there is a neighborhood V of x in X lying in U such that the inclusion induced homomorphism 1V r A ! 1 U r A is trivial. An ENR A in X of codimension at least three will be called tame in X if it is 1-LCC in X. Given an n-gm X, a manifold approximate bration with ber F MAF over X is an approximate bration p: N ! X, where N is a topological manifold and the homotopy ber of p is homotopy equivalent to F. Equivalently, each p,1 x has the shape of the space F. See 8 , 13 . If Q is a topological or generalized manifold in X and p: N ! X is a MAF, then p is said to be split over Q if pjp,1Q: p,1Q ! Q is also a MAF. Suppose that Mp is the mapping cylinder of a MAF p: N ! X with ber a sphere and mapping cylinder projection : Mp ! X. If Mp is a topological manifold, then we will call : Mp ! X or, sometimes, just Mp a manifold stabilization of X. As the following proposition shows, this last condition is almost always satis ed. Proposition 2.1. Suppose that N is a topological n-manifold, X is a generalized manifold, and Mp is the mapping cylinder of a MAF p: N ! X with ber a ksphere and mapping cylinder projection : Mp ! X . If n 5, then Mp is a topological manifold. If, in addition, k 2, then X is 1-LCC embedded in Mp . Proof. That Mp is a homology manifold follows easily from results of Gottlieb 11 and Quinn 20 . Since Mp has manifold points, Mp has a resolution 22 , and, hence, by a theorem of Edwards see 9 , it su ces to observe that Mp has the DDP. We consider three cases. Case 1. k 2. In this case it enough to show that X is 1-LCC in Mp , since we can then use ordinary general position in Mp r X. Suppose then that f : B 2 ! Mp and T is a ne triangulation of B 2 . By Alexander duality, X is 0-LCC in Mp ; hence, we may assume that, if T 1 denotes the 1-skeleton of T, then fT 1 X = . Let be a 2-simplex of T with boundary , such that f X 6= . By a small homotopy of f j in Mp r X, we can assume that f lies in some t-level Nt of the mapping cylinder near X. Since j is null-homotopic in X, we can use the approximate lifting property of p to assume that f lies near a ber of p in Nt . Since the bers have the shape of S k , k 2, we can homotope f j to a constant in a neighborhood of a ber in Nt . Thus there is a small homotopy of f j to a map of into Mp r X. Case 2. k = 1. Since X is 0-LCC in Mp , we can begin as in Case 1. Given f : B 2 ! Mp , we can assume that fT 1 X = , where T is a ne triangulation of B 2 . If f X 6= , for some 2-simplex of T with boundary , then we
Hk X; X r fxg; Z =
Z; if k = n,
may assume that f lies near a ber of p in some t-level Nt of Mp , as above. Thus, there is a small homotopy of f j to f 0 : ! Mp such that f 0 X is a single point. This process gives a small homotopy of f to f 0 : B 2 ! Mp such that f 0 B 2 X is a nite set. Given another mapping g: B 2 ! X, we can get a small homotopy of g to g0 such that gB 2 X is a nite set disjoint from f 0 B 2 X. We can then use general position in Mp r X to get f 0 B 2 and g0 B 2 disjoint. Case 3. k = 0. In this case X locally separates Mp , and the approximate lifting property of p implies that X is 1-LCC in Mp . If f : B 2 ! Mp , and T is a ne triangulation of B 2 , then it is easy to get a small homotopy of f to f 0 such that dimf 0 B 2 X 1. Since dimX 4, f 0 B 2 X is 0-LCC in X. Thus, if g: B 2 ! Mp is another mapping, then there is a small homotopy of g to g0 such that g0 B 2 f 0 B 2 X = . We can then use general position in Mp r X to get f 0 B 2 and g0 B 2 disjoint as before. Suppose M; Q N are topological manifolds without boundary of dimensions m, q, and n, respectively. Let p = m + q , n. Then M and Q are locally transverse if, for each x 2 M Q, there is a neighborhood W of x in N, with W M = U and W Q = V , such that W; U; V; U V Rn; Rm,p Rp 0; 0 Rp Rq,p; 0 Rp 0: = This implies, in particular, that P = M Q is a p-dimensional submanifold of both M and Q. If M or Q has boundary, and x 2 bdM or x 2 bdQ, then local transversality at x can be described by replacing Rm by Rm,1 R+, or Rq by R+ Rq,1, and Rp by the appropriate intersection. Following 15 , we say that M is stably microbundle transverse to Q in N if M and Q are locally transverse and, for some integer s 0, there exists a normal microbundle to Q 0 in N Rs so that M Rs is embedded microbundle transverse to in N Rs. That is, M Q has a normal microbundle in M each of whose bers lies in a ber of . Marin shows that this relation is symmetric 16 and, with help from Scharlemann 23 when p = 4, that local transversality implies stable microbundle transversality, provided n , m 3 and n , q 3. With these ideas in mind, we make the following de nition. De nition 2.2. Given a topological manifold M and generalized manifold Q in a generalized manifold X, Q is stably locally transverse to M if there is a manifold stabilization : Mp ! X of X, split over Q, such that ,1Q and M are locally transverse in Mp . 3. Transversality in the Metastable Range Theorem 3.1. Suppose that X is an n-gm with the DDP , n 5, M is a topological m-manifold embedded in X with or without boundary, and Q is either a topological q-manifold or a q-gm with the DDP if q 5, 1-LCC embedded in X , such that n , q 3, 3m 2n , 1, and 3m + q 4n , 1. Then for every 0 there is an -homotopy of the inclusion of M in X to a 1-LCC embedding f : M ! X such that Q is stably locally transverse to fM in X . The following corollary is a consequence of Theorem 3.1 and Corollary 1.3 of 5 . Corollary 3.2. Suppose that M and Q are topological m- and q-manifolds, respectively, in an n-gm X , n 5, with the DDP , such that 3m 2n , 1, 3q 2n , 1, 3m + q 4n , 4. Then there are arbitrarily small homotopies of the inclusions
to 1-LCC embeddings f : M ! X and g: Q ! X such that fM is stably locally transverse to gQ in X .
The proof of Theorem 3.1 ultimately depends upon a transversality theorems of Kirby-Siebenmann 15 and Marin 16 . One of the main ingredients of the proof is the following splitting theorem proved in 7 . Theorem 3.3 7 . Suppose that X is an n-gm without boundary, n 5, and Q X is an q-gm with or without boundary, n , q 3, 1-LCC in X . Assume Q is a topological manifold if q 4. Then there is a manifold stabilization : Mp ! X of X of dimension n + 3 that is split over Q. The manifold stabilization X of Theorem 3.3 is obtained in 7 by rst taking a mapping cylinder neighborhood Mp of X is some euclidean space 18 , 25 , where p0 : N ! X is a MAF with homotopy ber a sphere, and then homotoping p0 to a MAF p: N ! X such that p,1 M is a topological manifold. A similar argument can be found in 6 , wherein X is a topological manifold. Another important ingredient is the Main Construction of 5 . It can be summarized in the following theorem. Theorem 3.4 5 . Suppose that M is a topological m-manifold and X is an n-gm with the DDP , n 5, 3m 2n , 1. Then for every 0 there is a 0 such that if f : M ! X is a ,2m , n + 1-connected map, then f is -homotopic to a 1-LCC embedding. Moreover, the homotopy is supported in a neighborhood of a 1-LCC subset of X of dimension 2m , n + 2. A map f : M ! X is ; k-connected if the pair Mf ; X is ; i-connected for 0 i k. If M, in 3.3 or 3.4, is not compact, then f should be a proper map and and should be interpreted as positive, continuous functions on M. The moreover" part of Theorem 3.4 has the following consequence, which will be important for us here. Addendum. If P is a closed ANR in M , with dimP m, such that f jf ,1 fP is a 1-LCC embedding, then we can arrange to have the homotopy ft , t 2 0; 1 , of f to an embedding satisfy ft jP = f jP and ft,1 ft P = P for all t 2 0; 1 .
0
Proof of Theorem 3.1. Suppose that X, M, and Q are given as in the hypothesis
of Theorem 3.1. By Theorem 3.3, there is a manifold stabilization : Mp ! X of X of dimension n + k, with k 3, that is split over Q. Let W = ,1Q. Choose k large enough so that, by 2.1, W is a topological q + k-manifold. Since Q is 1-LCC in X, W is 1-LCC in Mp , hence, locally at 3 . Thus, by 15 , 16 , and 23 , there is an arbitrarily small ambient isotopy of the inclusion of M in Mp to a locally at embedding h: M ! Mp such that hM and W are locally transverse. Let P = hM W. Then P is a manifold of dimension p = m + q , n, locally atly embedded in hM and in W. The next step is to push hM down into X, sending P into Q and hM , P into X , Q, to a 1-LCC embedding close to M. Observe that jhM has all but the last of these properties. The rst step is to observe that the inequalities 3m 2n , 1, 3m + q 4n , 1 imply 2p + 1 q. General position then implies that jP : P ! Q can be approximated by a 1-LCC embedding. If Q is a manifold, this is immediate. If Q is a q-gm with the DDP , then the general position results of 2 and 24 may be applied. Since k 3, there is a small ambient isotopy of W taking P to this
embedding 1 , which can be extended to Mp by 12 . After composing with , we get a map h0 : M; M r h,1 P ! X; X r Q such that h0 approximates the inclusion of M into X and h0 jP is a 1-LCC embedding into Q. Finally, as long as h0 is a su ciently close approximation to the inclusion of M in X, it will have the desired connectivity properties to apply Theorem 3.4. Thus we can get a small homotopy of h0 rel P to a 1-LCC embedding in X. According to Theorem 3.4, this homotopy is supported on a 1-LCC set of dimension 2m , n + 2, and our dimension restrictions imply that 2m , n + 2 + q n. By the general position results of 2 and 24 , we can assume that these supports can be made to miss Q. Thus, the homotopy of h0 to a 1-LCC embedding can be constructed so as not to introduce any new intersections of M with Q as guaranteed by the Addendum to Theorem 3.4. This nal adjustment provides the map f : M ! X promised in the theorem.
1 R. H. Bing and J. M. Kister, Taming complexes in hyperplanes, Duke Math. J. 311964, 491-511. 2 J. Bryant, General position theorems for generalized manifolds, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 98 1986, 667-670. 3 J. Bryant and C. Seebeck, Locally nice embeddings in codimension three, Quart. J. of Math. Oxford 21 1970, 265 272. 4 J. Bryant, S. Ferry, W. Mio, and S. Weinberger, Topology of homology manifolds, Ann. of Math.2 143 1996, 435-467. 5 J. Bryant and W. Mio, Embeddings in generalized manifolds, preprint. 6 , Embeddings of homology manifolds in codimensions 3, preprint. 7 J. Bryant and P. Kirby, Splitting approximate brations over generalized manifolds, in preparation. 8 D. Coram and P. Duvall, Approximate brations, Rocky Mountain J. Math. 71977, 275 288. 9 R. J. Daverman, Decompositions of Manifolds, Academic Press, Orlando, FL, 1986. 10 M. Freedman and F. Quinn, Topology of 4-Manifolds, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1990. 11 D. H. Gottlieb, Poincar duality and brations, Proc. A. M. S. 76 1979, 148-149. e 12 J. F. P. Hudson and E. C. Zeeman, On combinatorial isotopy, Publ. I. H. E. S. Paris 19 1964, 69-94. 13 C. B. Hughes, L. R. Taylor, and E. B. Williams, Bundle theories for topological manifolds, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 319 1990, 1 65. 14 H. Johnston, Transversality for homology manifolds, preprint. 15 R. Kirby and L. Siebenmann, Foundational Essays on Topological Manifolds, Smoothings, and Triangulations, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N. J., 1977. 16 A. Marin, La transversalit topologique, Ann. of Math. 2 1061977, 269 293. e 17 R. Miller, Close isotopies on piecewise-linear manifolds, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 1511970, 597-628. 18 R. Miller, Mapping cylinder neighborhoods of some ANR's, Ann. of Math. 2 1031976, 417 427. 19 W.J.R. Mitchell, De ning the boundary of a homology manifold, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 1101990, no. 2, 509-513. 20 F. Quinn, Ends of maps I, Ann. of Math. 1101979, 275-331. , The topological characterization of manifolds, Invent. Math. 72 1983, 267-284. 21 22 , An obstruction to the resolution of homology manifolds, Mich. Math. J. 34 1987, 285-292. 23 M. Scharlemann, Transversality theories at dimension 4, Inventiones Math. 331976, 1-14. 24 J. Walsh, General position properties of generalized manifolds: a primer, Proc. Idaho State Topology Conf., 1985.
References
25 J. E. West, Mapping Hilbert cube manifolds to ANR's: a solution to a conjecture of Borsuk, Ann. of Math. 106 1977, 1 18.
Department of Mathematics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306