20.07.2013 Views

Gauge theory for embedded surfaces, II

Gauge theory for embedded surfaces, II

Gauge theory for embedded surfaces, II

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Gauge</strong> <strong>theory</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>embedded</strong> <strong>surfaces</strong>, <strong>II</strong> 35<br />

Corollary 5.13. Let (X,Σ) satisfy the conditions of Theorem 5.10 and let k be<br />

in the stable range. Then qk,l is zero unless l lies in the range<br />

2(Σ·Σ) − (2g − 2) ≤ 4l ≤ (2g − 2).<br />

Proof. The upper and lower bounds on l come from the criterion in the previous<br />

proposition, on letting α tend to 0 and 1<br />

2 respectively. ⊓⊔<br />

6. Proof of the main theorem<br />

We shall now give the proof of Theorem 1.1 assuming one result whose proof<br />

begins in the following section and occupies the rest of the main body of this<br />

paper. Recall that the integer invariant p0,l is associated to a cylindrical end<br />

manifold W o , the total space of a line bundle of degree n over a surface of genus<br />

g; it is defined whenever n is positive and g is odd and at least 3. The result we<br />

shall at present assume is the following:<br />

Theorem 6.1. For all positive self-intersection numbers n and all odd genera g<br />

greater than 1, the integer invariant p0,l is equal to 2 g .<br />

(i) New <strong>surfaces</strong> from old.<br />

We need a few elementary constructions <strong>for</strong> combining and modifying <strong>embedded</strong><br />

<strong>surfaces</strong>. Let S and T be oriented <strong>embedded</strong> <strong>surfaces</strong>, intersecting transversely<br />

inside an oriented 4-manifold X. There is a canonical way to modify the <strong>surfaces</strong><br />

in the neighbourhood of each intersection point so as to smooth out the<br />

self-intersections: each intersection is replaced by a handle. There are actually<br />

two ways of doing this, only one of which will be compatible with the orientation<br />

of the two <strong>surfaces</strong>: the local models <strong>for</strong> the two possible modifications are<br />

illustrated in the way that the singular complex curve xy = 0 in the complex<br />

plane C 2 can be de<strong>for</strong>med either into the smooth curve xy = ɛ or, if the two<br />

components are oppositely oriented, into the ‘curve’ x¯y = ɛ (which is not holomorphic).<br />

We shall denote by S + T the smooth <strong>embedded</strong> surface obtained by<br />

making the appropriate modification at each point.<br />

Lemma 6.2. The self-intersection number of S + T is S·S +2S·T+T·T.Ifall<br />

the intersection points have positive sign, then the genus of S + T is<br />

g(S + T )=g(S)+g(T)+S·T−1.<br />

Proof. The <strong>for</strong>mula <strong>for</strong> the self-intersection is an immediate consequence of the<br />

fact that S +T represents the homology class [S]+[T]. For the second <strong>for</strong>mula, it<br />

is easiest first to calculate the Euler characteristic of S +T as χ(S)+χ(T)−2S·T

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!