Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T14:08:21.029Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A note on the topological sliceness of some 2-bridge knots

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2017

ALLISON N. MILLER*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712, U.S.A. Department of Mathematics, 2515 Speedway Austin TX 78712 e-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We use twisted Alexander polynomials to show that certain algebraically slice 2-bridge knots are not topologically slice, even though all prime power Casson–Gordon signatures vanish. We also provide some computations indicating the efficacy of Casson–Gordon signatures in obstructing the smooth sliceness of 2-bridge knots.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 2017 

References

REFERENCES

[1] Casson, A. and Gordon, C. Cobordism of classical knots. In A la Recherche de la Topologie Perdue (Guillou and Marin, editors), Progr. Math. vol. 62 (Birkhäuser Boston, 1986).Google Scholar
[2] Eisermann, M. and Lamm, C. For which triangles is Pick's formula almost correct? Experimental Mathematics 18 (2009), 187191.Google Scholar
[3] Herald, C., Kirk, P. and Livingston, C. Metabelian representations, twisted Alexander polynomials, knot slicing and mutation. Math Z. 265 (4) (2010), 925949.Google Scholar
[4] Kirk, P. and Livingston, C. Twisted Alexander invariants, Reidemeister torsion and Casson–Gordon invariants. Topology 38 (3) (1999), 635661.Google Scholar
[5] Levine, J. P. Knot cobordism groups in codimension two. Comm. Math. Helv. 44 (1969), 229244.Google Scholar
[6] Lisca, P. Lens spaces, rational balls and the ribbon conjecture. Geom.Topol. 11 (2007), 429473.Google Scholar
[7] Wada, M. Twisted Alexander polynomial for finitely presentable groups. Topology 33 (2) (1994), 241256.Google Scholar