Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-z8dg2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-05T15:55:09.352Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Canonical extensions for embeddings of topological spheres of any codimension

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

W. R. Brakes
Affiliation:
Ahmadu Bello University, Nigeria and University of Warwick

Extract

Given any embedding f:Sr × Bn−rSn, fSr × 0 can be extended to a homeomorphism of Sn, except when r = n − 2 and f is actually knotted (10). Is there any sense in which this extension can be chosen to vary continuously with respect to f? If r = n − 1, there certainly is: this is simply the canonical Schoenflies theorem, proved in varying (but equivalent) forms in (6), (5) and (1). One of the principal results of this paper provides an affirmative answer to this question when r < n − 1. In the usual fashion of such canonical extension theorems, we look for a local version; that is attempt to find a neighbourhood of the inclusion in E(Sr × Bnr, Sn) on which a map F can be defined with each F(f) a homeomorphism of Sn which extends f and F (inclusion) = identity. Now if the neighbourhood is sufficiently small, any element of it can be viewed as an embedding Sr × BnrSr × Rnr, still close to the inclusion, by removing a standard Snr−1 from the image space. There are known methods for extending such embeddings. It would not be hard to adapt Kister's methods (8) for extending embeddings of Bk in Rk canonically to homeomorphisms (approximately the method that is sketched for the r = n − 1 case in (5)). Alternatively the existence of a canonical extension in this situation follows explicitly from the more general Theorem 5 of (1). Unfortunately both methods extend the embedding in a ‘radial’ fashion, with the result that there is little control over the extension towards infinity, and the final homeomorphism cannot necessarily be further extended over the missing Snr−1 to yield a homeomorphism of Sn. In fact this failure is due to the extension map F, derived in either of these ways, being continuous with respect to the compact-open topology on the image space, H(Sr × Rnr). The extension map to be constructed here is continuous with respect to the uniform topology on the image space, and so the homeomorphisms F(f) of Sr × Rnr are bounded and can thus be extended over all of Sn by setting F(f) ∣ Snr−1 equal to the identity.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

(1)Brakes, W. R.An improved version of the non-compact canonical Schoenflies theorem. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 212 (1975), 19.Google Scholar
(2)Brown, M.Locally flat imbeddings of topological manifolds. Ann. of Math. 75 (1962), 331341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3)Brown, M.A proof of the generalised Schoenflies theorem. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 66 (1960), 7476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Brown, M. and Gluck, H.Stable structures on manifolds I. Ann. of Math. 79 (1964), 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(5)Edwards, R. D. and Kirby, R. C.Deformations of spaces of imbeddings. Ann. of Math. 93 (1971), 6388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6)Huebsch, W. and Morse, M.The dependence of the Schoenflies extension on an accessory parameter. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 50 (1963), 10361037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Kirby, R. C.Stable homeomorphisms and the annulus conjecture. Ann. of Math. 89 (1969), 575582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(8)Kister, J. M.Microbundles are fiber bundles. Ann. of Math. 80 (1964), 190199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(9)Smith, A.Extending embeddings of R n−1 in Rn. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 71 (1972), 518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(10)Stallings, J. R.On topologically unknotted spheres. Ann. of Math. 77 (1963), 490503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar