This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Essential tori in 3–manifolds not detected in any characteristic

Grace S. Garden    Benjamin Martin and Stephan Tillmann Grace S. Garden
School of Mathematics and Statistics F07, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
[email protected]
—–
Benjamin Martin
Department of Mathematics, University of Aberdeen, King’s College, Aberdeen AB24 3UE, United Kingdom
[email protected]
—–
Stephan Tillmann
School of Mathematics and Statistics F07, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
[email protected]
Abstract

Infinite families of 3–dimensional closed graph manifolds and closed Seifert fibered spaces are exhibited, each member of which contains an essential torus not detected by ideal points of the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters over any algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F}.

keywords:
3–manifold, character variety, variety of characters, detected surface, positive characteristic
\primaryclass

57M05, 57K31, 57K35 \secondaryclass20C99

\makeshorttitle

1 Introduction

The ground-breaking work of Culler and Shalen [6] detects essential surfaces in a 3–manifold by studying ideal points of curves in their SL2()\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{C})–character variety. Not all essential surfaces can be detected in this manner (see [4, 19]). Much work has been done to further characterise which surfaces are detected by which curves (for example, see [3, 7, 21, 24, 25, 26]). The theory also applies to so-called algebraic non-integral (ANI) representations, whose interplay with essential surfaces was crucial in the final resolution of the Smith conjecture [18]. These representations have also been shown not to detect all essential surfaces [2]. More recently, the theory was generalised to SLn()\operatorname{SL}_{n}(\mathbb{C})–character varieties [12], where it was shown that for every essential surface in a 3–manifold MM, there is some nn such that it is detected by the SLn()\operatorname{SL}_{n}(\mathbb{C})–character variety [10]. The theory is extended in another way in [11] by replacing the underlying field \mathbb{C} with an arbitrary algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F} with characteristic pp and studying instead the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters, which is closely related to the character variety.

The motivating question for this paper is: given an essential surface SS in a compact 3–manifold MM, is SS detected by an ideal point of the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters of MM for some algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F}? The answer to this question is unfortunately no for closed hyperbolic 3–manifolds. A closed, Haken, hyperbolic 3–manifold with no detected essential surface is given in [11]. However, essential spheres and tori have abelian fundamental group and may therefore be easier to detect because representations restricted to the surface are centralised by nontrivial 1–parameter groups.

This paper analyses an infinite family of manifolds NΦN_{\Phi} that consist of a twisted II–bundle over the Klein bottle (Section 3) glued to the complement of the right-handed trefoil (Section 4). These manifolds are either graph manifolds or Seifert fibered with base orbifolds S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) or 2(2,3)\mathbb{RP}^{2}(2,3). The essential surfaces in NΦN_{\Phi} are classified (up to isotopy) in Section 5, and we determine which surfaces are detected in which characteristic in Section 5. Observations that follow from this analysis are:

Theorem 1.

There are infinitely many graph manifolds with the property that they each contain (up to isotopy) a single connected essential surface, the single connected essential surface is a torus, and it is not detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters for any algebraically closed field 𝔽.\mathbb{F}.

Theorem 2.

There are infinitely many graph manifolds with the property that they each contain (up to isotopy) a single connected essential surface, the single connected essential surface is a torus, and it is detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters for an algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F} if and only if the characteristic of 𝔽\mathbb{F} is 2.

Theorem 3.

There are infinitely many graph manifolds that contain (up to isotopy) two essential surfaces, a torus and a genus two surface, each of which is detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters for an algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F} if and only if the characteristic of 𝔽\mathbb{F} is 2.

Theorem 4.

There are infinitely many graph manifolds that contain (up to isotopy) two essential surfaces, a torus and a non-separating genus two surface, and with:

  • the torus not detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters for any algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F}, and

  • the non-separating genus two surface detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters for every algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F}.

The second part of the above theorem follows because each non-separating orientable surface is Poincaré dual to an epimorphism from the fundamental group of the ambient 3–manifold to the integers, and hence detected by a curve of reducible representations.

Theorem 5.

There are infinitely many Seifert fibered 3–manifolds with base 2(2,3)\mathbb{RP}^{2}(2,3) and that contain (up to isotopy) exactly two connected essential surfaces, both vertical tori, with:

  • one torus is not detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters for any algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F}, and

  • the other torus is detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters for an algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F} if and only if the characteristic of 𝔽\mathbb{F} is 2.

Theorem 6.

There are infinitely many Seifert fibered 3–manifolds with base S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) and that contain infinitely many pairwise non-isotopic essential tori, all of which are detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters for every algebraically closed field 𝔽\mathbb{F}.

For Theorem 6, we remark that the theorem is not proved for all essential tori in the stated Seifert fibered 3–manifolds, but that we only prove it for an infinite family thereof.

Theorems 2, 3 and 5 give examples of manifolds with an essential surface that is not detected by the SL2()\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{C})}–character variety but is detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}–characters for p=2p=2; Theorems 1, 4 and 5 give examples of manifolds with an essential surface that is not detected by the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}–characters for all pp.

Acknowledgements. Research of the first author is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program scholarship. The second author thanks Xingru Zhang for useful discussions and the School of Mathematics and Physics at the University of Queensland for hospitality. Research of the third author is supported in part under the Australian Research Council’s ARC Future Fellowship FT170100316. The authors thank Eric Chesebro and Daniel Mathews for helpful comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript.

For the purpose of open access, the authors have applied a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.

2 Preliminaries

For the remainder of the paper, let 𝔽\mathbb{F} be an algebraically closed field of characteristic p0.p\geq 0. We review the extension of Culler–Shalen theory presented in [11]. This outlines how to detect essential surfaces in a 3–manifold by studying ideal points of curves in the variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})–characters.

We write 𝔽=𝔽p\mathbb{F}=\mathbb{F}_{p} if we want to emphasise the characteristic and p\mathbb{Z}_{p} for the finite field of pp elements.

2.1 The variety of characters

Let MM be an orientable, compact 33–manifold. The variety of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}–characters of MM is written X(M,𝔽)X(M,\mathbb{F}). We use EE to denote the identity matrix in SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}. See [11] for a detailed discussion of X(M,𝔽);X(M,\mathbb{F}); this paper only requires a few facts that are familiar from the standard material [22] which we now summarise.

The SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}–representation variety of Γ\Gamma is the space of representations ρ\coΓSL2(𝔽)\rho\co\Gamma\to\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})},

R(Γ,𝔽)=Hom(Γ,SL2(𝔽)).R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})=\operatorname{Hom}(\Gamma,\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}). (2.1)

Given a finite, ordered generating set (γ1,,γn)(\gamma_{1},\ldots,\gamma_{n}) of Γ,\Gamma, the Hilbert basis theorem implies that we can imbue R(Γ,𝔽)R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) with the structure of an affine algebraic subset of SL2(𝔽)n𝔽4n\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}^{n}\subset\mathbb{F}^{4n} via the natural embedding

φ\coR(Γ,𝔽)\displaystyle\varphi\co R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) SL2(𝔽)n𝔽4n\displaystyle\hookrightarrow\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}^{n}\subset\mathbb{F}^{4n}
ρ\displaystyle\rho (ρ(γ1),,ρ(γn)).\displaystyle\mapsto(\rho(\gamma_{1}),\ldots,\rho(\gamma_{n})).

In particular, we identify R(Fn,𝔽)R(F_{n},\mathbb{F}) with SL2(𝔽)n\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}^{n}, where FnF_{n} is the free group on generators γ1,,γn\gamma_{1},\ldots,\gamma_{n}. The Zariski topology on 𝔽4n\mathbb{F}^{4n} induces a topology on R(Γ,𝔽).R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}).

The group SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})} acts by conjugation on SL2(𝔽)n.\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}^{n}. The action preserves the natural embedding of R(Γ,𝔽)R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) and is algebraic. Since SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})} is reductive, we can form the quotient variety R(Γ,𝔽)//SL2(𝔽)R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}){/\!\!/}\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}. The co-ordinate ring 𝔽[R(Γ,𝔽)//SL2(𝔽)]\mathbb{F}[R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}){/\!\!/}\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}] is the ring of invariants 𝔽[R(Γ,𝔽)]SL2(𝔽)\mathbb{F}[R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})]^{\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}}.

Given γΓ\gamma\in\Gamma, define Iγ𝔽[R(Γ,𝔽)]I_{\gamma}\in\mathbb{F}[R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})] by

Iγ\coR(Γ,𝔽)𝔽ρtr(ρ(γ)).\begin{split}I_{\gamma}\co R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})&\to\mathbb{F}\\ \rho&\mapsto\operatorname{tr}(\rho(\gamma)).\end{split}

Let 𝒯Γ{\mathcal{T}}_{\Gamma} be the subring of 𝔽[R(Γ,𝔽)]SL2(𝔽)\mathbb{F}[R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})]^{\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}} generated by the IγI_{\gamma}. It can be shown that 𝔽[R(Γ,𝔽)]SL2(𝔽)\mathbb{F}[R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})]^{\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}} is finite as a 𝒯Γ{\mathcal{T}}_{\Gamma}-module; in particular, 𝒯Γ{\mathcal{T}}_{\Gamma} is finitely generated as a kk-algebra [16, Theorem 1.4]. Hence there is an affine variety X(Γ,𝔽)X(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) whose co-ordinate ring is 𝒯Γ{\mathcal{T}}_{\Gamma}. The inclusion of 𝒯Γ{\mathcal{T}}_{\Gamma} in 𝔽[R(Γ,𝔽)]SL2(𝔽)\mathbb{F}[R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})]^{\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}} gives rise to a morphism of varieties qΓ:R(Γ,𝔽)q_{\Gamma}\colon R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) to X(Γ,𝔽)X(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}). If p=0p=0 or if Γ=Fn\Gamma=F_{n} for some nn\in\mathbb{N} then 𝒯Γ=𝔽[R(Γ,𝔽)]SL2(𝔽){\mathcal{T}}_{\Gamma}=\mathbb{F}[R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})]^{\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}}, so in this case we may identify X(Γ,𝔽)X(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) with R(Γ,𝔽)//SL2(𝔽)R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}){/\!\!/}\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}. For more details and further discussion, see [11] and [17].

We say that ρ,σR(Γ,𝔽)\rho,\sigma\in R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) are closure-equivalent if the Zariski closures of their orbits intersect; we write ρcσ\rho\sim_{c}\sigma. The character of a representation ρ\rho is the trace function

τρ\coΓ𝔽γtr(ρ(γ)).\begin{split}\tau_{\rho}\co\Gamma&\to\mathbb{F}\\ \gamma&\mapsto\operatorname{tr}(\rho(\gamma)).\end{split} (2.2)

The next result is [11, Corollary 16].

Corollary 7.

Let Γ\Gamma be a finitely generated group. Suppose ρ,σR(Γ,𝔽).\rho,\sigma\in R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}). Then the following four statements are equivalent:

  1. 1.

    τρ=τσ\tau_{\rho}=\tau_{\sigma};

  2. 2.

    τρ\tau_{\rho} and τσ\tau_{\sigma} agree on all ordered products of distinct generators;

  3. 3.

    τρ\tau_{\rho} and τσ\tau_{\sigma} agree on all ordered single, double and triple products of distinct generators;

  4. 4.

    ρ\rho and σ\sigma are closure-equivalent.

It follows from Corollary 7 that we may identify X(Γ,𝔽)X(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) with the quotient space of the equivalence relation c\sim_{c}. The map qΓq_{\Gamma} factorises as jΓπΓj_{\Gamma}\circ\pi_{\Gamma}, where πΓ:R(Γ,𝔽)R(Γ,𝔽)//SL2(𝔽)\pi_{\Gamma}\colon R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})\to R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}){/\!\!/}\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})} is the canonical projection and jΓ:R(Γ,𝔽)//SL2(𝔽)X(Γ,SL2(𝔽))j_{\Gamma}\colon R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}){/\!\!/}\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}\to X(\Gamma,\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}) is a morphism. It follows from the above discussion that jΓj_{\Gamma} is finite and bijective, so jΓj_{\Gamma} is a homeomorphism. By standard geometric invariant theory, πΓ\pi_{\Gamma} maps closed SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}–stable subsets of R(Γ,𝔽)R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) to closed subsets of R(Γ,𝔽)//SL2(𝔽)R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}){/\!\!/}\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}, so jΓj_{\Gamma} maps closed SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}–stable subsets of R(Γ,𝔽)R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) to closed subsets of X(Γ,𝔽)X(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}).

We say that a subgroup of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})} is reducible if its action on 𝔽2\mathbb{F}^{2} has an invariant 1–dimensional subspace. Otherwise it is irreducible. We call a representation (or equivalently an nn–tuple of matrices) irreducible (resp. reducible) if it generates an irreducible (resp. reducible) subgroup of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}. We say that a character is irreducible (resp. reducible) if it is associated with an irreducible (resp. reducible) nn–tuple of matrices.

In particular, all abelian subgroups of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})} are reducible. We call a representation (or equivalently an nn–tuple of matrices) abelian if it generates an abelian subgroup of SL2(𝔽).\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}.

We define

Rred(Γ,𝔽)={ρR(Γ,𝔽)|ρ is reducible}.R^{\rm red}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})=\{\rho\in R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})\,|\,\mbox{$\rho$ is reducible}\}.

Define Rirr(Γ,𝔽)R^{\rm irr}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) to be the closure of the complement of Rred(Γ,𝔽)R^{\rm red}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) in R(Γ,SL2(𝔽))R(\Gamma,\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}). Similarly, define Xred(Γ,𝔽)=qΓ(Rred(Γ,𝔽))X^{\rm red}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})=q_{\Gamma}(R^{\rm red}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})) and Xirr(Γ,𝔽)=qΓ(Rirr(Γ,𝔽))X^{\rm irr}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})=q_{\Gamma}(R^{\rm irr}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F})).

The results above imply that both Xred(Γ,𝔽)X^{\rm red}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) and Xirr(Γ,𝔽)X^{\rm irr}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) are closed. One can show using the discussion in [16, §8] that if ρR(Γ,𝔽)\rho\in R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) is irreducible then jΓ(ρ)Xred(Γ,𝔽)j_{\Gamma}(\rho)\not\in X^{\rm red}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}); hence Xirr(Γ,𝔽)X^{\rm irr}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) is the closure of the complement of Xred(Γ,𝔽)X^{\rm red}(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) in X(Γ,SL2(𝔽))X(\Gamma,\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}).

We will use the following result [11, Lemma 7] repeatedly.

Lemma 8.

Let A,BSL2(𝔽)A,B\in\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}. Then AA and BB generate a reducible subgroup of SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})} if and only if tr[A,B]=2\operatorname{tr}[A,B]=2.

If Γ=π1(M)\Gamma=\pi_{1}(M) for a compact manifold MM, then we also write R(M,𝔽)=R(Γ,𝔽)R(M,\mathbb{F})=R(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}) and X(M,𝔽)=X(Γ,𝔽)X(M,\mathbb{F})=X(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}); likewise for the respective irreducible and reducible components.

2.2 Essential surfaces

We define essential surfaces following standard terminology from Jaco [15]. A surface SS in a compact 3–manifold MM will always mean a 2–dimensional piecewise linear submanifold properly embedded in MM. That is, a closed subset of MM with S=SM\partial S=S\cap\partial M. If MM is not compact, we replace it by a compact core.

An embedded sphere S2S^{2} in a 3–manifold MM is called incompressible or essential if it does not bound an embedded ball in MM, and a 3–manifold is irreducible if it contains no incompressible 2–spheres. An orientable surface SS without 2–sphere or disc components in an orientable 3–manifold MM is called incompressible if for each disc DMD\subset M with DS=DD\cap S=\partial D there is a disc DSD^{\prime}\subset S with D=D\partial D^{\prime}=\partial D. Note that every properly embedded disc in MM is incompressible.

A surface SS in a 3–manifold MM is \partial–compressible if either

  1. 1.

    SS is a disc and SS is parallel to a disc in M,\partial M, or

  2. 2.

    SS is not a disc and there exists a disc DMD\subset M such that DS=αD\cap S=\alpha is an arc in D,\partial D, DM=βD\cap\partial M=\beta is and arc in D,\partial D, with αβ=α=β\alpha\cap\beta=\partial\alpha=\partial\beta and αβ=D\alpha\cup\beta=\partial D and either α\alpha does not separate SS or α\alpha separates SS into two components and the closure of neither is a disc.

Otherwise SS is \partial–incompressible.

Definition 9.

[22] A surface SS in a compact, irreducible, orientable 3–manifold is said to be essential if it has the following properties:

  1. 1.

    SS is bicollared;

  2. 2.

    the inclusion homomorphism π1(Si)π1(M)\pi_{1}(S_{i})\to\pi_{1}(M) is injective for every component SiS_{i} of SS;

  3. 3.

    no component of SS is a 2–sphere;

  4. 4.

    no component of SS is boundary parallel;

  5. 5.

    SS is non-empty.

In the first condition, bicollared means SS admits a map h\coS×[1,1]Mh\co S\times[-1,1]\to M that is a homeomorphism onto a neighbourhood of SS in MM such that h(x,0)=xh(x,0)=x for every xSx\in S and h(S×[1,1])M=h(S×[1,1])h(S\times[-1,1])\cap\partial M=h(\partial S\times[-1,1]). The surface SS being bicollared in orientable MM implies SS is orientable. The second condition is equivalent to saying that there are no compression discs for the surface (cf. [14, Lemma 6.1]). Hatcher [13, Lemma 1.10] implies that if each boundary component of the essential surface SS lies on a torus boundary component of MM, then SS is both incompressible and \partial–incompressible.

A compact, irreducible 3–manifold that contains an essential surface is called Haken.

Essential surfaces in Seifert fibered manifolds can be described more explicitly. In any connected, compact, irreducible Seifert fibered manifold MM, Hatcher shows [13, Proposition 1.11] that each essential surface is isotopic to either a vertical surface (a union of regular fibres) or a horizontal surface (transverse to the fibration, giving a branched covering of the base orbifold with branch points corresponding to the intersections with singular fibres).

Let the base orbifold of MM be QQ and let Q^\hat{Q} denote the surface obtained by removing regular neighbourhoods of cone points in QQ. By a result of Schultens,  [20, Lemma 39], vertical essential surfaces are in bijective correspondence with the isotopy classes of simple closed curves in Q^\hat{Q}.

2.3 Essential surfaces detected by ideal points

Let CC be a closed irreducible curve in 𝔽m\mathbb{F}^{m} for some mm. We define the projective completion CC^{\prime} of CC to be the closure of the image of CC under the map J:𝔽m𝔽PmJ:\mathbb{F}^{m}\to\mathbb{F}P^{m} defined by J(z1,,zm)=[1,z1,,zm]J(z_{1},\ldots,z_{m})=[1,z_{1},\ldots,z_{m}]. We define C~\tilde{C} to be the normalisation of the projective completion of CC; then C~\tilde{C} is a smooth irreducible projective curve. Let f:C~Cf\colon\tilde{C}\to C^{\prime} be the normalisation map. The ideal points of CC are the points ξC~\xi\in\tilde{C} such that f(ξ)J(C)¯J(C)f(\xi)\in\overline{J(C)}-J(C). It can be shown that C~\tilde{C} and the notion of an ideal point do not depend on the choice of embedding of CC in 𝔽m\mathbb{F}^{m}. Note that the function fields 𝔽(C~)\mathbb{F}(\tilde{C}) and 𝔽(C)\mathbb{F}(C) are isomorphic.

Below we consider closed irreducible curves CC in irreducible components of X(M,𝔽).X(M,\mathbb{F}). Of course, if an irreducible component of X(M,𝔽)X(M,\mathbb{F}) has dimension 0 (resp., dimension 1) then there are no such curves (resp., exactly one such curve).

Take an ideal point ξC~\xi\in\tilde{C}. This defines a discrete rank 1 valuation on 𝔽(C)\mathbb{F}(C) via

vξ\co𝔽(C){}vξ(f)={qf has a zero of order q at ξ,f=0,qf has a pole of order q at ξ.\begin{split}v_{\xi}\co\mathbb{F}(C)&\to\mathbb{Z}\cup\{\infty\}\\ v_{\xi}(f)&=\begin{cases}q&f\text{ has a zero of order }q\text{ at }\xi,\\ \infty&f=0,\\ -q&f\text{ has a pole of order }q\text{ at }\xi.\end{cases}\end{split} (2.3)

Write Γ=π1(M)\Gamma=\pi_{1}(M). Following Culler and Shalen, we assume that CC maps to a curve in X(M,𝔽).X(M,\mathbb{F}). Further, we assume that ξ\xi maps to an ideal point of that curve. This implies that there is an element γΓ\gamma\in\Gamma such that vξ(Iγ)<0.v_{\xi}(I_{\gamma})<0. We can now use the valuation to construct the Bass-Serre tree 𝐓ξ\mathbf{T}_{\xi} with an action of SL2(𝔽(C))\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}(C)). We can then use the tautological representation

𝒫\coπ1(M)SL2(𝔽(C)),𝒫(γ)=(abcd) for ρ(γ)=(a(ρ)b(ρ)c(ρ)d(ρ))\begin{split}\mathcal{P}\co\pi_{1}(M)&\to\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F}(C)),\\ \mathcal{P}(\gamma)&=\begin{pmatrix}a&b\\ c&d\end{pmatrix}\text{ for }\rho(\gamma)=\begin{pmatrix}a(\rho)&b(\rho)\\ c(\rho)&d(\rho)\end{pmatrix}\end{split} (2.4)

to get an action of π1(M)\pi_{1}(M) on 𝐓ξ\mathbf{T}_{\xi}. The following is [22, Property 5.4.2], note the proof applies verbatim.

Proposition 10.

Let CC be a curve in X(Γ,𝔽).X(\Gamma,\mathbb{F}). To each ideal point ξ\xi of C~,\tilde{C}, one can associate a splitting of Γ\Gamma with the property that for each element γΓ,\gamma\in\Gamma, the following are equivalent:

  1. 1.

    vξ(Iγ)0v_{\xi}(I_{\gamma})\geq 0

  2. 2.

    A vertex of the Bass-Serre tree 𝐓ξ\mathbf{T}_{\xi} is fixed by γ.\gamma.

A construction by Stallings [23] can now be used to associate an essential surface SS to the ideal point ξ\xi (see [22] for details). The surface is not unique and we usually identify parallel components. If a given essential surface SS can be associated to an ideal point ξ,\xi, then we say that SS is detected by ξ.\xi. The components of a detected surface SS and the complementary components MSM\setminus S satisfy a number of key properties. For instance, Proposition 10 directly implies:

Corollary 11.

If SS is detected by the ideal point ξ\xi, then

  1. (i)

    for each component MiM_{i} of MSM-S, the subgroup im(π1(Mi)π1(M))\text{im}(\pi_{1}(M_{i})\to\pi_{1}(M)) of π1(M)\pi_{1}(M) is contained in the stabiliser of a vertex of 𝐓ξ\mathbf{T}_{\xi}; and

  2. (ii)

    for each component SjS_{j} of SS, the subgroup im(π1(Sj)π1(M))\text{im}(\pi_{1}(S_{j})\to\pi_{1}(M)) of π1(M)\pi_{1}(M) is contained in the stabiliser of an edge of 𝐓ξ\mathbf{T}_{\xi}.

A boundary slope is the slope of the boundary curve of an essential surface SS in MM that has non-empty intersection with M\partial M. The relationship between boundary slopes of essential surfaces in MM and valuations of trace functions of peripheral elements is given in the following reformulation of [5, Proposition 1.3.9].

Proposition 12.

Let MM be a compact, orientable, irreducible 3–manifold with M\partial M a torus. Let CC be a curve in the variety of characters with an ideal point ξ\xi. We have the following mutually exclusive cases.

  1. 1.

    If there is an element γ\gamma in im(π1(M)π1(M))\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(\partial M)\to\pi_{1}(M)) such that vξ(Iγ)<0v_{\xi}(I_{\gamma})<0, then up to inversion there is a unique primitive element αim(π1(M)π1(M))\alpha\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(\partial M)\to\pi_{1}(M)) such that vξ(Iα)0v_{\xi}(I_{\alpha})\geq 0. Then every essential surface SS detected by ξ\xi has non-empty boundary and α\alpha is parallel to its boundary components.

  2. 2.

    If vξ(Iγ)0v_{\xi}(I_{\gamma})\geq 0 for all γim(π1(M)π1(M))\gamma\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(\partial M)\to\pi_{1}(M)), then an essential surface SS detected by ξ\xi may be chosen that is disjoint from M\partial M.

3 The Klein bottle group

We consider the Klein bottle group via a well-known presentation,

ΓK=a,baba1b=1.\Gamma_{K}=\langle a,b\mid aba^{-1}b=1\rangle. (3.1)
Refer to caption
Figure 1: Generators for the twisted II–bundle over the Klein bottle.

The following result is proven in [9].

Proposition 13 ([9]).

Let 𝕂\mathbb{K} be a field and ΓK\Gamma_{K} the Klein bottle group as in Equation 3.1. Suppose σ:ΓKSL2(𝕂)\sigma\colon\Gamma_{K}\to\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{K}) is a representation. If σ(b)±E\sigma(b)\neq\pm E, then one of the following occurs:

  1. (i)

    σ\sigma factors through the abelianization of ΓK\Gamma_{K}.

  2. (ii)

    σ(a2)=±E\sigma(a^{2})=\pm E.

In particular, ΓK\Gamma_{K} does not admit faithful representations into SL2(𝕂)\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{K}) for any field 𝕂\mathbb{K}.

Note, σ(a2)=σ(a)2=±E\sigma(a^{2})=\sigma(a)^{2}=\pm E implies either σ(a)=±E\sigma(a)=\pm E or tr(σ(a))=0\operatorname{tr}(\sigma(a))=0.

Consider the variety of characters X(K,𝔽)X(K,\mathbb{F}). We can easily compute the subvarieties Xirr(K,𝔽)X^{\text{irr}}(K,\mathbb{F}) and Xred(K,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(K,\mathbb{F}) respectively. The main observation is that in characteristic 2 there are infinitely many elements in SL2(𝔽)\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})} with order two and, as a result, we find infinitely many non-conjugate abelian representations for ΓK\Gamma_{K}.

Each irreducible representation is conjugate to the form

ρ(a)=(0110),ρ(b)=(y00y1),y𝔽{0}.\rho(a)=\begin{pmatrix}0&-1\\ 1&0\end{pmatrix},\quad\rho(b)=\begin{pmatrix}y&0\\ 0&y^{-1}\end{pmatrix},\quad y\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}. (3.2)

By Lemma 8, this representation is indeed irreducible if and only if

0tr[ρ(a),ρ(b)]2=y22+y2.0\neq\operatorname{tr}[\rho(a),\rho(b)]-2=y^{2}-2+y^{-2}.

Hence the representation is irreducible if and only if y21.y^{2}\neq 1. Letting t=y+y1,t=y+y^{-1}, the map

ρ(tr(ρ(a)),tr(ρ(b)),tr(ρ(ab)))𝔽3\rho\mapsto\left(\operatorname{tr}(\rho(a)),\operatorname{tr}(\rho(b)),\operatorname{tr}(\rho(ab))\right)\in\mathbb{F}^{3}

gives

Xirr(K,𝔽)={(0,t,0)t𝔽}.X^{\text{irr}}(K,\mathbb{F})=\{(0,t,0)\mid t\in\mathbb{F}\}.

From the trace condition on the commutator, we know Xirr(K,𝔽)Xred(K,𝔽)={(0,±2,0)}X^{\text{irr}}(K,\mathbb{F})\cap X^{\text{red}}(K,\mathbb{F})=\{(0,\pm 2,0)\}. We now determine all reducible representations up to conjugacy. A reducible representation is conjugate to either

ρ(a)\displaystyle\rho(a) =(x10x1),ρ(b)=(±100±1),x𝔽{0}, or\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}x&1\\ 0&x^{-1}\end{pmatrix},\quad\rho(b)=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&0\\ 0&\pm 1\end{pmatrix},\quad x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\},\text{ or} (3.3)
ρ(a)\displaystyle\rho(a) =(xu0x),ρ(b)=(±110±1),u𝔽,x𝔽{0},x2=1.\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}x&u\\ 0&-x\end{pmatrix},\quad\rho(b)=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&1\\ 0&\pm 1\end{pmatrix},\quad u\in\mathbb{F},\>x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\},\>x^{2}=-1. (3.4)

Here we have ρ(b)=±E\rho(b)=\pm E for the representations in Equation 3.3 and tr(ρ(a))=0\operatorname{tr}(\rho(a))=0 for the representations in Equation 3.4.

In characteristic p=2p=2,

Xred(K,𝔽)={(s,0,s)s𝔽}X^{\text{red}}(K,\mathbb{F})=\{(s,0,s)\mid s\in\mathbb{F}\}

and the matrix pair in Equation 3.4 splits into infinitely many conjugacy classes,

ρ(a)=(1u01),ρ(b)=(1101),u𝔽.\displaystyle\rho(a)=\begin{pmatrix}1&u\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad\rho(b)=\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad u\in\mathbb{F}. (3.5)

In characteristic p2p\neq 2,

Xred(K,𝔽)={(s,2,s)s𝔽}{(s,2,s)s𝔽}X^{\text{red}}(K,\mathbb{F})=\{(s,2,s)\mid s\in\mathbb{F}\}\cup\{(s,-2,-s)\mid s\in\mathbb{F}\}

and the matrix pair in Equation 3.4 is conjugate to

ρ(a)=(x00x),ρ(b)=(±110±1),x𝔽{0},x2=1.\rho(a)=\begin{pmatrix}x&0\\ 0&-x\end{pmatrix},\quad\rho(b)=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&1\\ 0&\pm 1\end{pmatrix},\quad x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\},\>x^{2}=-1. (3.6)

Let K×~I{K\tilde{\times}I} be a twisted II–bundle over the Klein bottle with ΓK×~I\Gamma_{K\tilde{\times}I} the associated fundamental group,

ΓK×~I=ΓK=a,baba1b.\Gamma_{K\tilde{\times}I}=\Gamma_{K}=\left\langle a,b\mid aba^{-1}b\right\rangle.

Then the variety of characters of K×~IK\tilde{\times}I is the same as that of KK,

Xirr(K×~I,𝔽)=Xirr(K,𝔽),Xred(K×~I,𝔽)=Xred(K,𝔽).\begin{split}X^{\text{irr}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F})&=X^{\text{irr}}(K,\mathbb{F}),\\ X^{\text{red}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F})&=X^{\text{red}}(K,\mathbb{F}).\end{split}

We note from the above calculations that in any characteristic p0p\geq 0, the variety Xirr(K×~I,𝔽)X^{\text{irr}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}) is a curve with a single ideal point, and Xred(K×~I,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}) consists of either a single curve with a single ideal point (if p=2p=2) or two disjoint curves, each with a single ideal point (if p2p\neq 2).

The peripheral subgroup for ΓK×~I\Gamma_{K\tilde{\times}I} is

PK×~I=a2,b.P_{K\tilde{\times}I}=\langle a^{2},b\rangle.

The twisted II–bundle over the Klein bottle has two Seifert fibrations. See [1, §1.5] for a succinct discussion; we summarise the points needed for our application and use the above description of the variety of characters to determine which components of X(K×~I,𝔽)X(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}) detect which essential surface.

The two Seifert fibrations of K×~I{K\tilde{\times}I} have base orbifolds D2(2,2)D^{2}(2,2) and the Möbius band (with no cone points) respectively. We know there are two types of connected surfaces in K×~IK\tilde{\times}I: vertical and horizontal. The fibration over the Möbius band shows that there is one connected horizontal surface that arises from an unbranched double cover of the Möbius band (a separating annulus 𝒜\mathcal{A} with boundary slope a2a^{2}) and one connected vertical surface (a non-separating annulus \mathcal{B} with boundary slope bb). Note that these surfaces cannot be isotoped to be disjoint. It follows that an essential surface in K×~I{K\tilde{\times}I} consists either of parallel copies of 𝒜\mathcal{A} or of parallel copies of \mathcal{B}. Moreover, an essential surface in K×~I{K\tilde{\times}I} is uniquely determined by its boundary curves.

The slope a2a^{2} is a regular fibre in the Seifert fibration of K×~I{K\tilde{\times}I} with base orbifold D2(2,2)D^{2}(2,2). The annulus 𝒜\mathcal{A} is foliated by regular fibres and decomposes K×~I{K\tilde{\times}I} into two solid tori with Seifert structures over the base orbifold D2(2).D^{2}(2). Hence, 𝒜\mathcal{A} is an essential annulus in the boundary of the two solid tori. The presentation of the fundamental group corresponding to this is a free product with amalgamation of the form

cc2=d2d.\langle c\rangle\star_{c^{2}=d^{2}}\langle d\rangle.

Here, c2=d2c^{2}=d^{2} corresponds to the regular fibre. An isomorphism to the presentation given in Equation 3.1 is:

caanddb1a.c\mapsto a\qquad\text{and}\qquad d\mapsto b^{-1}a.

Note that this gives c2=d2a2c^{2}=d^{2}\mapsto a^{2} as claimed.

For any characteristic p0p\geq 0, the restriction of IaI_{a} (and hence of Ia2I_{a^{2}}) to the curve

Xirr(K×~I,𝔽)={(0,t,0)t𝔽}X^{\text{irr}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F})=\{(0,t,0)\mid t\in\mathbb{F}\}

is constant equal to zero while the trace function IbI_{b} has a pole of order one at the ideal point. It follows from Proposition 12 and the above classification of essential surfaces that 𝒜\mathcal{A} is detected by the curve Xirr(K×~I,𝔽)X^{\text{irr}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}) and it also follows that \mathcal{B} is not detected by this curve. Also note that the fundamental groups of the complementary solid tori are generated by a\langle a\rangle and b1a\langle b^{-1}a\rangle respectively. Now the trace functions IaI_{a} and Ib1aI_{b^{-1}a} are constant equal to zero on Xirr(K×~I,𝔽),X^{\text{irr}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}), thus verifying the splitting detected at the ideal point.

Refer to caption
(a) Image of 𝒜\mathcal{A} in D2(2,2)D^{2}(2,2)
Refer to caption
(b) Image of \mathcal{B} in the Möbius band
Figure 2: Essential annuli in the twisted II–bundle over the Klein bottle.

The slope bb is a regular fibre in a Seifert fibration with base orbifold the Möbius band (with no cone points). The non-separating annulus \mathcal{B} is foliated by regular fibres in this fibration, hence im(π1()π1(K×~I))=b.\operatorname{im}\left(\pi_{1}(\mathcal{B})\to\pi_{1}(K\tilde{\times}I)\right)=\langle b\rangle. Now the trace function IbI_{b} is constant on each component of Xred(K×~I,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}) (there is one curve for p=2p=2 and two curves for p2p\neq 2) and the trace function IaI_{a} has a pole. In particular, Proposition 12 implies that \mathcal{B} is detected by each curve in Xred(K×~I,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}) and 𝒜\mathcal{A} is not detected by the curves in Xred(K×~I,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}). Note that this is related to the fact that \mathcal{B} is dual to the epimorphism π1(K×~I)\pi_{1}(K\tilde{\times}I)\to\mathbb{Z} defined by a1a\mapsto 1 and b0.b\mapsto 0.

4 The right-handed trefoil group

We consider the complement of the right-handed trefoil MM, and the associated fundamental group via a well-known presentation,

ΓM=g,hghg=hgh.\Gamma_{M}=\left\langle g,h\mid ghg=hgh\right\rangle.

The peripheral subgroup for ΓM\Gamma_{M} is

PM=g,g4hg2hP_{M}=\langle g,g^{-4}hg^{2}h\rangle

with gg a standard meridian and g4hg2hg^{-4}hg^{2}h a standard longitude.

Refer to caption
(a) Generators;
Refer to caption
(b) Seifert surface;
Refer to caption
(c) Möbius band;
Refer to caption
(d) Seifert fibration.
Figure 3: Generators of the trefoil complement and elements in complementary regions of the annuli.

As for the previous manifold, we apply [13, Proposition 1.11] to show that that there are exactly two connected essential surfaces in MM. The right-handed trefoil is Seifert fibered with the curve of slope g2hg2hg^{2}hg^{2}h a regular fibre and base orbifold D2(2,3)D^{2}(2,3). In this case, there is a vertical annulus \mathcal{R} with boundary slope g2hg2hg^{2}hg^{2}h, separating the trefoil knot complement into two solid tori with fibrations D2(2)D^{2}(2) and D2(3)D^{2}(3) respectively. This is the only connected vertical surface. The unique connected horizontal surface is a once-punctured torus arising from a branched covering of D2(2,3).D^{2}(2,3). This is a Seifert surface 𝒮\mathcal{S} for the trefoil knot with boundary slope g4hg2h.g^{-4}hg^{2}h. Since the slopes of the two surfaces are not parallel, any essential surface in MM either consists of parallel copies of \mathcal{R} or of parallel copies of 𝒮.\mathcal{S}. Moreover, the surfaces are again uniquely determined by their boundary curves.

Consider the variety of characters X(M,𝔽)X(M,\mathbb{F}). We compute the subvarieties Xirr(M,𝔽)X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F}) and Xred(M,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F}) respectively.

Each irreducible representation is conjugate to

ρ(g)\displaystyle\rho(g) =(x10x1),ρ(h)=(x101x),x𝔽{0}.\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}x&1\\ 0&x^{-1}\end{pmatrix},\quad\rho(h)=\begin{pmatrix}x^{-1}&0\\ -1&x\end{pmatrix},\quad x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}. (4.1)

By Lemma 8, this representation is irreducible if and only if

0tr[ρ(g),ρ(h)]2=x21+x2.0\neq\operatorname{tr}[\rho(g),\rho(h)]-2=x^{2}-1+x^{-2}.

Letting s=x+x1,s=x+x^{-1}, we map ρ(tr(ρ(g)),tr(ρ(h)),tr(ρ(gh)))𝔽3\rho\mapsto\left(\operatorname{tr}(\rho(g)),\operatorname{tr}(\rho(h)),\operatorname{tr}(\rho(gh))\right)\in\mathbb{F}^{3} giving

Xirr(M,𝔽)={(s,s,1)s𝔽}.X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F})=\{(s,s,1)\mid s\in\mathbb{F}\}.

This is a curve with a single ideal point. For each ρXirr(M,𝔽)\rho\in X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F}), we have ρ(g2hg2h)=E.\rho(g^{2}hg^{2}h)=-E. In particular, Ig2hg2hI_{g^{2}hg^{2}h} is constant. Now

Ig4hg2h=(x6+x6)=s6+6s49s2+2I_{g^{-4}hg^{2}h}=-(x^{6}+x^{-6})=-s^{6}+6s^{4}-9s^{2}+2

has a pole of order 6 at the ideal point of Xirr(M,𝔽).X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F}). Hence Proposition 12 implies that \mathcal{R} is detected by this ideal point and 𝒮\mathcal{S} is not. We remark that the order of the pole is related to the fact that the boundary slopes of \mathcal{R} and 𝒮\mathcal{S} have intersection number 6.

The reducible representations are conjugate to the forms

ρ(g)\displaystyle\rho(g) =(±110±1)=ρ(h),\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&1\\ 0&\pm 1\end{pmatrix}=\rho(h), (4.2)
ρ(g)\displaystyle\rho(g) =(x00x1)=ρ(h),x𝔽{0},\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}x&0\\ 0&x^{-1}\end{pmatrix}=\rho(h),\quad x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}, (4.3)
ρ(g)\displaystyle\rho(g) =(x00x1),ρ(h)=(x10x1),x𝔽,x2+x2=1.\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}x&0\\ 0&x^{-1}\end{pmatrix},\quad\rho(h)=\begin{pmatrix}x&1\\ 0&x^{-1}\end{pmatrix},\quad x\in\mathbb{F},\ x^{2}+x^{-2}=1. (4.4)

The representations in Equations 4.2 and 4.3 are abelian, and Equation 4.4 defines reducible non-abelian representations.

In characteristic p=2p=2,

Xred(M,𝔽)={(s,s,s2)s𝔽}.\begin{split}X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F})=\{(s,s,s^{2})\mid s\in\mathbb{F}\}.\end{split}

Here, Xirr(M,𝔽)Xred(M,𝔽)={(1,1,1)}X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F})\cap X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F})=\{(1,1,1)\}. The character in the intersection represents reducible representations conjugate to any of the above forms in Equations 4.1, 4.3 and 4.4 with x2+x2=1x^{2}+x^{-2}=1.

In characteristic p2p\neq 2,

Xred(M,𝔽)={(s,s,s22)s𝔽}.\begin{split}X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F})=\{(s,s,s^{2}-2)\mid s\in\mathbb{F}\}.\end{split}

Here, Xirr(M,𝔽)Xred(M,𝔽)={(±3,±3,1)}X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F})\cap X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F})=\{(\pm\sqrt{3},\pm\sqrt{3},1)\}. The characters in the intersection represents reducible representations conjugate to any of the above forms in Equations 4.1, 4.3 and 4.4 with x2+x2=1x^{2}+x^{-2}=1.

The Seifert surface 𝒮\mathcal{S} is Poincaré dual to the epimorphism π1(M)\pi_{1}(M)\to\mathbb{Z} and hence detected by the curve Xred(M,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F}) for any characteristic p0.p\geq 0. This is consistent with the observation that the restriction of Ig4hg2hI_{g^{-4}hg^{2}h} to Xred(M,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F}) is constant equal to 2 (since all characters on Xred(M,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F}) are reducible and the boundary curve of 𝒮\mathcal{S} is a commutator). Moreover,

Ig2hg2h=x6+x6=s66s4+9s22I_{g^{2}hg^{2}h}=x^{6}+x^{-6}=s^{6}-6s^{4}+9s^{2}-2

and hence Ig2hg2hI_{g^{2}hg^{2}h} has a pole at the ideal point of Xred(M,𝔽).X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F}). Thus Proposition 12 implies that 𝒮\mathcal{S} is detected by the ideal point of Xred(M,𝔽)X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F}) and \mathcal{R} is not.

5 Families of graph manifolds and Seifert fibered manifolds

Suppose

Φ=(klmn)SL2().\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&l\\ m&n\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}). (5.1)

Let NΦN_{\Phi} be the closed orientable 3–manifold obtained by gluing K×~I{K\tilde{\times}I} to MM via Φ\Phi so that

g=(a2)kblandg4hg2h=(a2)mbn.g=\left(a^{2}\right)^{k}b^{l}\quad\text{and}\quad g^{-4}hg^{2}h=\left(a^{2}\right)^{m}b^{n}. (5.2)

Then ΓΦ=π1(NΦ)=a,b,g,hghg=hgh,aba1b=1,g=(a2)kbl,g4hg2h=(a2)mbn\Gamma_{\Phi}=\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})=\langle\;a,b,g,h\;\mid\;ghg=hgh,\;aba^{-1}b=1,\;g=\left(a^{2}\right)^{k}b^{l},\;g^{-4}hg^{2}h=\left(a^{2}\right)^{m}b^{n}\;\rangle.

Note that the abelianisation of ΓΦ\Gamma_{\Phi} is

H1(NΦ)=a,b,g,hab=ba,b2=1,g=h,g=a2kbl,1=a2mbn,=a,bab=ba,b2=1,1=a2mbn,={22mif n=0(mod 2),4mif n=1(mod 2)\begin{split}H_{1}(N_{\Phi})&=\langle a,b,g,h\mid ab=ba,b^{2}=1,g=h,g=a^{2k}b^{l},1=a^{2m}b^{n}\rangle,\\ &=\langle a,b\mid ab=ba,b^{2}=1,1=a^{2m}b^{n}\rangle,\\ &=\begin{cases}\mathbb{Z}_{2}\oplus\mathbb{Z}_{2m}&\text{if $n=0\ (\mathrm{mod}\ 2)$},\\ \mathbb{Z}_{4m}&\text{if $n=1\ (\mathrm{mod}\ 2)$}\end{cases}\end{split}

where 0=.\mathbb{Z}_{0}=\mathbb{Z}. In particular, H1(NΦ)H_{1}(N_{\Phi}) is infinite if and only if m=0m=0 and k=n=±1.k=n=\pm 1.

5.1 Essential surfaces in NΦN_{\Phi}

We determine all the possible essential surfaces in NΦN_{\Phi}.

  1. (S1)

    The splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} between MM and K×~IK\tilde{\times}I. This occurs in NΦN_{\Phi} for all ΦSL2()\Phi\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}) and is an essential separating surface since both MM and K×~IK\tilde{\times}I have incompressible boundary.

We claim that all other essential surfaces SS can be moved via isotopy such that they only have nontrivial intersection with the splitting torus. Indeed, consider SS with no intersections with the splitting torus. Then it is a closed, orientable, incompressible surface either in MM or in K×~IK\tilde{\times}I. This implies that its components are parallel to 𝒯\mathcal{T}. Thus every other essential surface SS must meet the splitting torus in at least one essential curve. Since we can remove annuli parallel to annuli on 𝒯\mathcal{T} by isotopy, it follows that if SS is isotoped to have minimal number of intersection curves with 𝒯\mathcal{T}, then S(K×~I)S\cap(K\tilde{\times}I) must be an essential surface in K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and SMS\cap M must be an essential surface in MM. The only options for essential surfaces in each manifold K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are given in Sections 3 and 4 respectively.

Using this we can list all connected essential surfaces in NΦN_{\Phi} up to isotopy by considering how the boundary curves match up. Since each of K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM has two boundary slopes of essential surfaces, this gives four possibilities. Matching up one boundary curve from each boundary component of K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM leaves one degree of freedom in the gluing map. We thus have:

  1. (S2)

    [𝒮𝒜]\partial\mathcal{S}\leftrightarrow\partial\mathcal{A}] Matching up the boundary slope g4hg2hg^{-4}hg^{2}h with the boundary slope a2a^{2} forces

    Φ=(k±110)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1&0\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z})

    where kk\in\mathbb{Z} is arbitrary. All resulting manifolds NΦN_{\Phi} are graph manifolds and not Seifert fibered. Any copy of 𝒜\mathcal{A} in K×~IK\tilde{\times}I matches up with two parallel copies of the Seifert surface in MM giving a connected separating genus-2 surface. Any two surfaces obtained this way are isotopic in NΦN_{\Phi} since M𝒮𝒮×(0,1)M\setminus\mathcal{S}\cong\mathcal{S}\times(0,1). We write S2=(2𝒮)𝒜S_{2}=(2\mathcal{S})\cup\mathcal{A} for the separating genus-2 surface.

    Refer to caption
    Figure 4: Separating genus-2 surface arising in S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) from S2S_{2}.
  2. (S3)

    [𝒮]\partial\mathcal{S}\leftrightarrow\partial\mathcal{B}] Matching up the boundary slope g4hg2hg^{-4}hg^{2}h with the boundary slope bb forces

    Φ=(±1l0±1)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&l\\ 0&\pm 1\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z})

    where ll\in\mathbb{Z} arbitrary. All resulting manifolds NΦN_{\Phi} are graph manifolds and not Seifert fibered. Any copy of \mathcal{B} in K×~IK\tilde{\times}I matches up with two parallel copies of the Seifert surface in MM giving a connected surface. Since \mathcal{B} is non-separating in K×~IK\tilde{\times}I, this is a non-separating genus-2 surface, written S3=(2𝒮)S_{3}=(2\mathcal{S})\cup\mathcal{B}. Any two such surfaces are parallel since M𝒮𝒮×(0,1)M\setminus\mathcal{S}\cong\mathcal{S}\times(0,1).

  3. (S4)

    [𝒜]\partial\mathcal{R}\leftrightarrow\partial\mathcal{A}] Recall that the slopes of \partial\mathcal{R} and 𝒜\partial\mathcal{A} are regular fibres in Seifert fibrations of MM and K×~IK\tilde{\times}I respectively. The identification forces

    Φ=(k±116k6)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z})

    where kk\in\mathbb{Z} is arbitrary. This is a family of Seifert fibered manifolds with base orbifold S2(2,2,2,3).S^{2}(2,2,2,3).

    Any combination of surfaces \mathcal{R} and 𝒜\mathcal{A} will be vertical in the Seifert fibration. Schultens [20] says vertical essential surfaces are in bijective correspondence with isotopy classes of simple closed curves on the four-punctured sphere, which are, in turn, in bijection with isotopy classes of simple closed curves on the torus (see  [8, §2.2.5]).

    Fix meridian α\alpha and longitude β\beta for the torus. For q,rq,r\in\mathbb{Z}, a simple closed curve on the torus is a (q,r)(q,r)-curve if it intersects α\alpha qq times and β\beta rr times. We can construct a similar classification of simple closed curves on the four-punctured sphere using the bijection, which proves the simple closed curves are defined by primitive pairs (q,r)2(q,r)\in\mathbb{Z}^{2}. Thus, the vertical essential surfaces are defined by primitive (q,r)2(q,r)\in\mathbb{Z}^{2} and will correspond to some combination of copies of \mathcal{R} and 𝒜\mathcal{A}.

    We assume that the basis is chosen such that 𝒯\mathcal{T} corresponds to the (1,0)(1,0)-curve under the map NΦS2(2,2,2,3)N_{\Phi}\to S^{2}(2,2,2,3). Our convention for the (0,1)(0,1)-curve is given in Figure 5. We write S4(q,r)=𝒜(q,r)S_{4}(q,r)=\mathcal{R}\cup\mathcal{A}(q,r) for the essential surface 𝒜\mathcal{R}\cup\mathcal{A} associated with the (q,r)(q,r)-curve. This will be a connected, separating torus and for distinct coprime pairs (q1,r1)(q_{1},r_{1}) and (q2,r2)(q_{2},r_{2}) the surfaces will be distinct and not isotopic. No horizontal essential surfaces arise in S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3).

    Refer to caption
    (a) S4(0,1)S_{4}{(0,1)}
    Refer to caption
    (b) S4(1,1)S_{4}{(1,1)}
    Refer to caption
    (c) S4(2,1)S_{4}{(2,1)}
    Figure 5: Example tori arising in S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) from S4(q,r)S_{4}(q,r).
    Refer to caption
    Figure 6: Example arcs for a general tori arising in S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) from S4(q,r)S_{4}(q,r). There are rr copies of \mathcal{R} and rr copies of 𝒜\mathcal{A} twisted so that qq arcs go around the cone point labelled aa and |qr|\lvert q-r\rvert arcs go around the cone point labelled b1ab^{-1}a.
  4. (S5)

    []\partial\mathcal{R}\leftrightarrow\partial\mathcal{B}] Recall that the slopes of \partial\mathcal{R} and \partial\mathcal{B} are regular fibres in Seifert fibrations of MM and K×~IK\tilde{\times}I respectively. The identification forces

    Φ=(±1l6±16l)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&l\\ \mp 6&\pm 1-6l\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z})

    where ll\in\mathbb{Z} is arbitrary. This is a family of Seifert fibered manifolds with base orbifold 2(2,3).\mathbb{RP}^{2}(2,3).

    Any combination of surfaces \mathcal{R} and \mathcal{B} will be vertical in the Seifert fibration. Note that \mathcal{R}\cup\mathcal{B} gives an embedded Klein bottle in NΦN_{\Phi} and hence is not an essential surface. Taking two copies of each gives a separating torus, written S5.S_{5}. Any two such tori are parallel. Now the core Klein bottle in K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and the Klein bottle \mathcal{R}\cup\mathcal{B} represent the same element in H2(NΦ,2).H^{2}(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{Z}_{2}). However, the tori 𝒯\mathcal{T} and S5=(2)(2)S_{5}=(2\mathcal{R})\cup(2\mathcal{B}) are nevertheless not isotopic. This can be seen by considering the geometric intersection number with a curve represented by a.a. No horizontal essential surfaces arise in 2(2,3)\mathbb{RP}^{2}(2,3).

5.2 Curves in the variety of characters of NΦN_{\Phi}

Let rK\coX(NΦ,𝔽)X(K×~I,𝔽)r_{K}\co X(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F})\to X({K\tilde{\times}I},\mathbb{F}) and rM\coX(NΦ,𝔽)X(M,𝔽)r_{M}\co X(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F})\to X(M,\mathbb{F}) be the restriction maps arising from the inclusions π1(K×~I)π1(NΦ)\pi_{1}({K\tilde{\times}I})\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi}) and π1(M)π1(NΦ)\pi_{1}(M)\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi}) respectively. Suppose CX(NΦ,𝔽)C\subset X(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F}) is a curve. We have the following possibilities for CC:

  1. (C1)

    Both rK(C)r_{K}(C) and rM(C)r_{M}(C) are curves. It follows from the description of the curves in X(K×~I,𝔽)X({K\tilde{\times}I},\mathbb{F}) and X(M,𝔽)X(M,\mathbb{F}) that for each ideal point ξ\xi of CC, there is a unique primitive class αim(π1(𝒯)π1(NΦ))\alpha\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(\mathcal{T})\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})) with vξ(Iα)0v_{\xi}(I_{\alpha})\geq 0 and all other primitive classes γim(π1(𝒯)π1(NΦ))\gamma\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(\mathcal{T})\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})) satisfy vξ(Iγ)<0.v_{\xi}(I_{\gamma})<0. Hence none of these classes γ\gamma are contained in an edge stabiliser of the action on the Bass-Serre tree associated with the ideal point, and hence none of these are homotopic to a curve on the surface detected by ξ.\xi. It follows that any essential surface detected by CC is as listed in (S2)–(S5). Except for the case (S4), the detected surface is uniquely determined by this information (up to taking parallel copies).

  2. (C2)

    One of rK(C)r_{K}(C) and rM(C)r_{M}(C) is a curve and the other is a point. In this case, the curve again forces that for each ideal point ξ\xi of CC there is a primitive class γim(π1(𝒯)π1(NΦ))\gamma\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(\mathcal{T})\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})) with vξ(Iγ)<0.v_{\xi}(I_{\gamma})<0. However, since the other projection is a point, all representations with character on CC have constant trace functions IβI_{\beta} for all βim(π1(𝒯)π1(NΦ)).\beta\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(\mathcal{T})\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})). This implies vξ(Iγ)0,v_{\xi}(I_{\gamma})\geq 0, a contradiction.

  3. (C3)

    Each of rK(C)r_{K}(C) and rM(C)r_{M}(C) is a point. In this case, all representations with character on CC have constant trace functions IγI_{\gamma} for all γim(π1(𝒯)π1(NΦ)),\gamma\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(\mathcal{T})\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})), for all γim(π1(K×~I)π1(NΦ)),\gamma\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(K\tilde{\times}I)\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})), and for all γim(π1(M)π1(NΦ)).\gamma\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(M)\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})). It follows that we may choose the splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} to be an essential surface detected by ξ.\xi. To rule out that any of the essential surfaces SS listed in (S2)–(S5)  is also detected by CC, according to Proposition 10 we need to exhibit an element γim(π1(NΦ)π1(NΦ))\gamma\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(N^{\prime}_{\Phi})\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})) with vξ(Iγ)<0v_{\xi}(I_{\gamma})<0 for NΦN^{\prime}_{\Phi} a component of NΦS.N_{\Phi}\setminus S.

In the following sections we determine when essential surfaces are detected by curves in the variety of characters of NΦN_{\Phi}, broken into cases for detecting: the splitting torus as in (S1); additional surfaces in the graph manifold as in (S2) and (S3); additional surfaces in the Seifert fibration with base orbifold S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) as in (S4); and additional surfaces in the Seifert fibration with base orbifold 2(2,3)\mathbb{RP}^{2}(2,3) as in (S5).

The approach for proving each result is similar. For ease of notation write

(A,B,G,H)=(ρ(a),ρ(b),ρ(g),ρ(h))SL2(𝔽)4.\left(A,B,G,H\right)=\left(\rho(a),\rho(b),\rho(g),\rho(h)\right)\in\operatorname{\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{F})}^{4}.

We analyse the variety of characters of NΦN_{\Phi} for each case and outline when a curve appears, up to conjugacy. We start with the options for representations of K×~I{K\tilde{\times}I} outlined in Section 3. To extend the representations to NΦN_{\Phi}, the matrices must satisfy the gluing equations

G=A2kBl,G4HG2H=A2mBn.G=A^{2k}B^{l},\quad G^{-4}HG^{2}H=A^{2m}B^{n}. (5.3)

If B=±EB=\pm E, as in Equation 3.3, the equations simplify to

G=A2k(±1)l,HA4kH=(±1)nA8k+2m.G=A^{2k}(\pm 1)^{l},\quad HA^{4k}H=(\pm 1)^{n}A^{8k+2m}.

If B±EB\neq\pm E, from Proposition 13 either ρ\rho factors through the abelianisation of NΦN_{\Phi} or A2=±EA^{2}=\pm E. We have A2=±EA^{2}=\pm E in the case of Equations 3.2 and 3.4. Here, the equations simplify to

G=(±1)kBl,HB2lH=(±1)mB4l+n.G=(\pm 1)^{k}B^{l},\quad HB^{2l}H=(\pm 1)^{m}B^{4l+n}.

The resulting matrices must also satisfy group relation for MM,

GHG=HGH.GHG=HGH. (5.4)

The general procedure is as follows. Matrix GG is defined by Equation 5.3. Write

H=(efgh),ehfg=1.H=\begin{pmatrix}e&f\\ g&h\end{pmatrix},\quad eh-fg=1. (5.5)

Expanding the powers of AA and BB, Equation 5.3 gives four equations for the entries of HH in terms of the other variables in addition to the determinant condition. Outside of the cases where there is a curve, we either find a contradiction in these equations, a contradiction when considering the group relation Equation 5.4, a contradiction to the gluing matrix ΦSL2()\Phi\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}), or that all variables are specified and so we have at most some 0–dimensional components.

Where a curve is possible, we write for ease of notation tγ=Iγ(ρ)=tr(ρ(γ))t_{\gamma}=I_{\gamma}(\rho)=\operatorname{tr}(\rho(\gamma)) for γπ1(NΦ)\gamma\in\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi}) and ρR(NΦ,𝔽)\rho\in R(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F}). The variety Xp(NΦ)X_{p}(N_{\Phi}) has as coordinates the traces of ordered single, double and triple products of the generators in any characteristic (see Corollary 7). These coordinates are

(ta,tb,tg,th,tab,tag,tah,tbg,tbh,tgh,tabg,tabh,tagh,tbgh)𝔽14.\left(t_{a},t_{b},t_{g},t_{h},t_{ab},t_{ag},t_{ah},t_{bg},t_{bh},t_{gh},t_{abg},t_{abh},t_{agh},t_{bgh}\right)\in\mathbb{F}^{14}.

In order to determine what surface is detected by a curve, we appeal to Propositions 10 and 12, the discussions of essential surfaces in K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM in Sections 3 and 4, the classification of connected essential surfaces in NΦN_{\Phi} given by (S1)–(S5), and the classification of the types of curves that appear in (C1)–(C3).

5.3 Detecting the splitting torus

The manifold NΦN_{\Phi} always contains the splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} for all ΦSL2()\Phi\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}). We get two results for when the splitting torus is detected over characteristic p2p\neq 2 and over characteristic 2.

Lemma 14.

Let 𝔽\mathbb{F} be an algebraically closed field of characteristic p2p\neq 2. There is a curve in X(NΦ,𝔽)X(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F}) that detects the splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} if and only if Φ\Phi==(k±116k6)SL2()\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}) for kk\in\mathbb{Z}. Moreover, there are infinitely many such curves whenever Φ\Phi is of this form.

Lemma 15.

Let 𝔽\mathbb{F} be an algebraically closed field of characteristic 22. There is a curve in X(NΦ,𝔽)X(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F}) that detects the splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} if and only if Φ=(k110)(mod 2)\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&1\\ 1&0\end{pmatrix}\ (\mathrm{mod}\ 2) SL2(/2)\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}) for k{0,1}k\in\{0,1\}.

Moreover, the curve is unique unless Φ\Phi==(k±116k6)SL2()\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}) for kk\in\mathbb{Z}, in which case there are infinitely many curves.

Theorem 1 now follows by taking (for instance) the family Φk=(1+6kk61)\Phi_{k}=\begin{pmatrix}1+6k&k\\ 6&1\end{pmatrix} and Theorem 2 by taking (for instance) the family Φk=(k1+6k16)\Phi^{\prime}_{k}=\begin{pmatrix}k&1+6k\\ -1&-6\end{pmatrix} for k.k\in\mathbb{N}. These families have been chosen such that no other essential surfaces are present. We have Φk\Phi_{k} clearly does not satisfy the requirement for Lemmas 14 and 15 and Φk\Phi^{\prime}_{k} only satisfies Lemma 15 but not Lemma 14.

Proof of Lemma 14.

Assume p2p\neq 2. We follow the approach described in Section 5.2. The splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} can only be detected by a curve of type (C3)  where the restrictions to the variety of characters of K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are points. We will see that there are two ways to get such a curve in characteristic p2p\neq 2, one of which comes from a 2–dimensional component that will give infinitely many curves.

Consider the options for matrix pairs (A,B)\left(A,B\right) from Equations 3.2, 3.3 and 3.6 in turn.

We find one way to extend the representation from Equation 3.2 to NΦN_{\Phi} with a curve of type (C3). For gluing matrix Φ=(k±116k6)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}) we get a 2–dimensional component of representations

A=(0110),B=(y00y1),G=(1)k(y±100y1),H=((1)ky2yy1fy2+1y2f(yy1)2±(1)ky±2yy1),f,y𝔽{0}.\begin{split}A=\begin{pmatrix}0&-1\\ 1&0\end{pmatrix},&\quad B=\begin{pmatrix}y&0\\ 0&y^{-1}\end{pmatrix},\\ G=(-1)^{k}\begin{pmatrix}y^{\pm 1}&0\\ 0&y^{\mp 1}\end{pmatrix},&\quad H=\begin{pmatrix}\frac{\mp(-1)^{k}y^{\mp 2}}{y-y^{-1}}&f\\ \frac{-y^{2}+1-y^{-2}}{f(y-y^{-1})^{2}}&\frac{\pm(-1)^{k}y^{\pm 2}}{y-y^{-1}}\end{pmatrix},\quad f,y\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}.\end{split}

The corresponding traces give a 2-dimensional component of the variety of characters,

CΦ={(0,y+y1,(1)k(y+y1),(1)k(y+y1),0,0,y21+y2f(yy1)2+f,(1)k(y1±1+y11),±(1)ky1±2y12yy1,1,0,y21+y2fy(yy1)2+fy,(1)k(y21+y2fy±1(yy1)2+fy±1),±y1±1y11yy1)|f,y𝔽{0}}\begin{split}C_{\Phi}=&\left\{\left(0,y+y^{-1},(-1)^{k}(y+y^{-1}),(-1)^{k}(y+y^{-1}),0,0,\frac{y^{2}-1+y^{-2}}{f(y-y^{-1})^{2}}+f,\right.\right.\\ &\hskip 28.45274pt\left.\left.(-1)^{k}(y^{1\pm 1}+y^{-1\mp 1}),\pm(-1)^{k}\frac{y^{-1\pm 2}-y^{1\mp 2}}{y-y^{-1}},{1},0,\frac{y^{2}-1+y^{-2}}{fy(y-y^{-1})^{2}}+fy,\right.\right.\\ &\hskip 28.45274pt\left.\left.(-1)^{k}\left(\frac{y^{2}-1+y^{-2}}{fy^{\pm 1}(y-y^{-1})^{2}}+fy^{\pm 1}\right),\pm\frac{y^{-1\pm 1}-y^{1\mp 1}}{y-y^{-1}}\right)\ \Big{|}\ f,y\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}\right\}\end{split} (5.6)

for l=±1l=\pm 1 and kk\in\mathbb{Z} even or odd.

Fix y𝔽{0}y\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\} to be constant. This defines curves Cy±(k)C_{y}^{\pm}(k) inside CΦC_{\Phi} since IahI_{ah} is not constant. The restrictions to K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are points,

rK(Cy±(k))\displaystyle r_{K}\left(C_{y}^{\pm}(k)\right) =(0,y+y1,0)Xirr(K×~I,𝔽p),\displaystyle=(0,y+y^{-1},0)\in X^{\text{irr}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}_{p}),
rM(Cy±(k))\displaystyle r_{M}\left(C_{y}^{\pm}(k)\right) ={((1)k(y+y1),(1)k(y+y1),1)k}Xirr(M,𝔽p),\displaystyle=\left\{\left((-1)^{k}(y+y^{-1}),(-1)^{k}(y+y^{-1}),1\right)\mid k\in\mathbb{Z}\right\}\subset X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F}_{p}),

so it is of is of type (C3). There are infinitely many such curves for y𝔽{0}y\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\} that are distinct for each y+y1y+y^{-1}. We deduce the curve detects 𝒯\mathcal{T} whenever Φ=(k±116k6)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}).

We find no ways to extend the representation from Equation 3.3 to get a curve of type (C3) when p2p\neq 2.

We find one way to extend the representation from Equation 3.6 to NΦN_{\Phi} with a curve of type (C3). For gluing matrix Φ=(k±116k6)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}) we get the curves of representations

A=(x00x),B=(s10s),x𝔽{0},x2=1G=(1)k(s±10s),H=(e(1)k(1+2s(1)kee2)(1)k2s(1)ke),s{1,1},e𝔽.\begin{split}A=\begin{pmatrix}x&0\\ 0&-x\end{pmatrix},&\quad B=\begin{pmatrix}s&1\\ 0&s\end{pmatrix},\quad x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\},\;x^{2}=-1\\ G=(-1)^{k}\begin{pmatrix}s&\pm 1\\ 0&s\end{pmatrix},&\quad H=\begin{pmatrix}e&\mp(-1)^{k}(-1+2s(-1)^{k}e-e^{2})\\ \mp(-1)^{k}&2s(-1)^{k}-e\end{pmatrix},\;s\in\{-1,1\},e\in\mathbb{F}.\end{split}

The condition on Φ\Phi arises again from the gluing equation, which requires n=6ln=-6l when p2p\neq 2.

The corresponding traces give curves

C𝒯,2={(0,2s,2(1)ks,2(1)ks,0,0,(1)k+2(e(1)ks)x,2(1)k,(1)k(21),1,0,2((1)k+es)x(1)k(s+x),(1)k(±(1)ks+3(1)kx2esx),s(11))|e𝔽}\begin{split}{C_{\mathcal{T},2}}&=\left\{\left(0,2s,2(-1)^{k}s,2(-1)^{k}s,0,0,\mp(-1)^{k}+2(e-(-1)^{k}s)x,2(-1)^{k},(-1)^{k}(2\mp 1),1,0,\right.\right.\\ &\hskip 22.76228pt\left.\left.2(-(-1)^{k}+es)x\mp(-1)^{k}(s+x),-(-1)^{k}(\pm(-1)^{k}s+3(-1)^{k}x-2esx),s(1\mp 1)\right)\ \Big{|}\ e\in\mathbb{F}\right\}\end{split} (5.7)

for kk\in\mathbb{Z} even or odd, l=±1l=\pm 1, s=±1s=\pm 1, and x𝔽{0},x2=1x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\},\ x^{2}=-1.

These clearly define curves since IahI_{ah} is not constant. The restrictions to K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are points,

rK(C𝒯,2)\displaystyle r_{K}\left(C_{\mathcal{T},2}\right) ={(0,2s,0)|s=±1}Xirr(K×~I,𝔽p)Xred(K×~I,𝔽p),\displaystyle=\left\{(0,2s,0)\ |\ s=\pm 1\right\}\subset X^{\text{irr}}({K\tilde{\times}I},\mathbb{F}_{p})\cap X^{\text{red}}({K\tilde{\times}I},\mathbb{F}_{p}),
rM(C𝒯,2)\displaystyle r_{M}\left(C_{\mathcal{T},2}\right) ={(2(1)ks,2(1)ks,1)|k,s=±1}Xirr(M,𝔽p),\displaystyle=\left\{(2(-1)^{k}s,2(-1)^{k}s,1)\ |\ k\in\mathbb{Z},\ s=\pm 1\right\}\in X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F}_{p}),

so it is of type (C3). We deduce the curves C𝒯,2C_{\mathcal{T},2} detect 𝒯\mathcal{T} whenever Φ=(k±116k6)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}).

No other curves of type (C3) are found for any gluing matrix and other representations when p2p\neq 2. This proves the result. ∎

The proof of the result over characteristic 2 is similar.

Proof of Lemma 15.

Assume p=2p=2. We follow the approach described in Section 5.2. The splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} can only be detected by a curve of type (C3)  where the restrictions to the variety of characters of K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are points. We will see that there are two ways to get such a curve in characteristic 2, one arises when Φ=(k±116k6)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}), which comes from a 2–dimensional component that will give infinitely many curves, and the other arises when Φ=(k110)(mod 2)SL2(/2)\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&1\\ 1&0\end{pmatrix}\ (\mathrm{mod}\ 2)\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}).

Consider the options for matrix pairs (A,B)\left(A,B\right) from Equations 3.2, 3.3 and 3.5 in turn.

We find one way to extend the representation from Equation 3.2 to NΦN_{\Phi} with a curve of type (C3) using the 2–dimensional component CΦC_{\Phi} given in Equation 5.6 found in the proof of Lemma 14. The same result follows and we get there are infinitely many such curves that detect 𝒯\mathcal{T} whenever Φ=(k±116k6)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}).

We find no ways to extend the representation from Equation 3.3 to get a curve of type (C3) when p=2p=2.

We find one way to extend the representation from Equation 3.5 to NΦN_{\Phi} with a curve of type (C3). For gluing matrix is Φ=(klm2q)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&l\\ m&2q\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}), we get the curve of representations

A=(1u01),B=(1101),G=(1101),H=(1011),u𝔽.\begin{split}A=\begin{pmatrix}1&u\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},&\quad B=\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},\\ G=\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},&\quad H=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\ 1&1\end{pmatrix},\quad u\in\mathbb{F}.\end{split}

Note the determinant condition in \mathbb{Z} forces l=1(mod 2)l=1\ (\mathrm{mod}\ 2) and m=1(mod 2)m=1\ (\mathrm{mod}\ 2). The condition on Φ\Phi arises from the gluing equation. We have

HB2lHBn+4l=(e(e+h)f(e+h)+ng(e+h)h(e+h))HB^{2l}H-B^{n+4l}=\begin{pmatrix}e(e+h)&f(e+h)+n\\ g(e+h)&h(e+h)\end{pmatrix}

evaluating to the zero matrix, which forces n=0(mod 2)n=0\ (\mathrm{mod}\ 2).

The representation is conjugate to the form,

A=(1u01),B=(1101),G=(1101),H=(e1+e21e),u𝔽,\begin{split}A=\begin{pmatrix}1&u\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},&\quad B=\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},\\ G=\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},&\quad H=\begin{pmatrix}e&1+e^{2}\\ 1&e\end{pmatrix},\quad u\in\mathbb{F},\end{split} (5.8)

which is useful when comparing to the p2p\neq 2 case.

The corresponding traces give the curve

C𝒯,1={(0,0,0,0,0,0,u,0,1,1,0,u+1,u+1,0)u𝔽}.C_{\mathcal{T},1}=\left\{\left(0,0,0,0,0,0,u,0,1,1,0,u+1,u+1,0\right)\mid u\in\mathbb{F}\right\}. (5.9)

This clearly defines a curve since IahI_{ah} is not constant. The restrictions to K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are points,

rK(C𝒯,1)\displaystyle r_{K}\left(C_{\mathcal{T},1}\right) =(0,0,0)Xirr(K×~I,𝔽2)Xred(K×~I,𝔽2),\displaystyle=(0,0,0)\in X^{\text{irr}}({K\tilde{\times}I},\mathbb{F}_{2})\cap X^{\text{red}}({K\tilde{\times}I},\mathbb{F}_{2}),
rM(C𝒯,1)\displaystyle r_{M}\left(C_{\mathcal{T},1}\right) =(0,0,1)Xirr(M,𝔽2),\displaystyle=(0,0,1)\in X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F}_{2}),

so it is of is of type (C3). We deduce the curve detects 𝒯\mathcal{T} whenever Φ=(k110)(mod 2)\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&1\\ 1&0\end{pmatrix}\ (\mathrm{mod}\ 2) SL2(/2)\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}) for k{0,1}k\in\{0,1\}.

The representations and associated curves correspond to C𝒯,2C_{\mathcal{T},2} in Equation 5.7 found when p2p\neq 2 in the proof of Lemma 14, just for more restrictive gluing matrices. Reducing the above representations modulo 2 is the same as the representation in Equation 5.8 with u=0u=0 and reducing the curve C𝒯,2C_{\mathcal{T},2} modulo 2 is the same as the curve C𝒯,1C_{\mathcal{T},1} with u=1u=1. We find that if p2p\neq 2 the remaining degree of freedom, ee, cannot be removed by conjugation and is in fact necessary to find a curve in the variety of characters.

No other curves of type (C3) are found for any gluing matrix and other representations when p=2p=2. This proves the result. ∎

5.4 Curves in the graph manifolds

The manifold NΦN_{\Phi} forms a graph manifold if and only if

Φ=(klmn)SL2(),m±6n.\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&l\\ m&n\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}),\quad m\neq\pm 6\neq n.

The classification of essential surfaces in NΦN_{\Phi} in Section 5.1 shows only the cases (S1), (S2), and (S3) can appear. The case (S1) is already covered in Lemmas 14 and 15. The other cases (S2) and (S3) and related curves in the variety of characters of the graph manifold are covered in the next result.

Lemma 16.

Let 𝔽\mathbb{F} be an algebraically closed field of characteristic pp. Consider NΦN_{\Phi} a graph manifold with gluing matrix Φ=(klmn)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&l\\ m&n\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}), m±6nm\neq\pm 6\neq n. Curves that detect (S2) and (S3) in X(NΦ,𝔽)X(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F}) are characterised by the following.

  • In case (S2), for Φ=(k±110)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1&0\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}), there is a curve that detects S2S_{2} if p=2p=2 and no curve that detects S2S_{2} if p2p\neq 2;

  • In case (S3), for Φ=(±1l0±1)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&l\\ 0&\pm 1\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}), there is a curve that detects S3S_{3}.

In particular, S2S_{2} is only detected in characteristic 22 and S3S_{3} is detected whenever it appears.

Recall from Lemmas 14 and 15, the splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} is detected in case (S2) in characteristic p=2p=2 and is never detected otherwise. Thus, Lemmas 14, 15 and 16 give the statement of Theorem 3. Similarly, Lemmas 14, 15 and 16 give the statement of Theorem 4.

Proof.

We follow the approach described in Section 5.2. The essential surface S2S_{2} can only be detected by either a curve of type (C1) where the restriction to the variety of characters of K×~IK\tilde{\times}I detects 𝒮\mathcal{S} and the restriction to the variety of characters of MM detects 𝒜\mathcal{A} or a curve of type (C3) that has non-negative valuation on all simple closed curves in components of NΦS2N_{\Phi}\setminus S_{2}. Similarly, the essential surface S3S_{3} can only be detected by either a curve of type (C1) where the restriction to the variety of characters of K×~IK\tilde{\times}I detects 𝒮\mathcal{S} and the restriction to the variety of characters of MM detects \mathcal{B} or a curve of type (C3) that has non-negative valuation on all simple closed curves in components of NΦS3N_{\Phi}\setminus S_{3}.

Consider first the options for matrix pairs (A,B)\left(A,B\right) from Equations 3.2, 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6 in turn that could give appropriate curves of type (C1) that detect S2S_{2}.

For characteristic 22 we find one way to extend the representation from Equation 3.2 to NΦN_{\Phi} with a curve of type (C1). For gluing matrix Φ=(k±110)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1&0\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}) we get the curve of representations

A=(0110),B=(y00y1),G=(y±100y1),H=(y±100y1),y𝔽{0}.\begin{split}A=\begin{pmatrix}0&1\\ 1&0\end{pmatrix},&\quad B\ =\begin{pmatrix}y&0\\ 0&y^{-1}\end{pmatrix},\\ G=\begin{pmatrix}y^{\pm 1}&0\\ 0&y^{\mp 1}\end{pmatrix},&\quad H=\begin{pmatrix}y^{\pm 1}&0\\ 0&y^{\mp 1}\end{pmatrix},\quad y\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}.\end{split}

The corresponding traces give curves

CS2={(0,y+y1,y+y1,y+y1,0,0,0,y1±1+y11,y1±1+y11,y2+y2,0,0,0,y1±2+y12)y𝔽{0}}\begin{split}C_{S_{2}}&=\left\{\left(0,y+y^{-1},y+y^{-1},y+y^{-1},0,0,0,y^{1\pm 1}+y^{-1\mp 1},\right.\right.\\ &\hskip 28.45274pt\left.\left.y^{1\pm 1}+y^{-1\mp 1},y^{2}+y^{-2},0,0,0,y^{1\pm 2}+y^{-1\mp 2}\right)\mid y\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}\right\}\end{split}

for l=±1l=\pm 1. The restrictions to K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are curves,

rK(CS2)\displaystyle r_{K}\left(C_{S_{2}}\right) =Xirr(K×~I,𝔽2)={(0,t,0)t=y+y1,y𝔽2},\displaystyle=X^{\text{irr}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}_{2})=\{(0,t,0)\ \mid\ t=y+y^{-1},\ y\in\mathbb{F}_{2}\},
rM(CS2)\displaystyle r_{M}\left(C_{S_{2}}\right) =Xred(M,𝔽2)={(s,s,s2)s=y+y1,y𝔽2},\displaystyle=X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F}_{2})=\{(s,s,s^{2})\ \mid\ s=y+y^{-1},\ y\in\mathbb{F}_{2}\},

so CS2C_{S_{2}} is of type (C1).

In Section 3, rK(CS2)r_{K}\left(C_{S_{2}}\right) is shown to detect 𝒜\mathcal{A}; in Section 4, rM(CS2)r_{M}\left(C_{S_{2}}\right) is shown to detect 𝒮\mathcal{S}. We deduce both curves detect S2S_{2} whenever Φ=(k±110)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1&0\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}).

No other curves of type (C1) that could give appropriate curves are found for any gluing matrix and other representations.

Now consider the options for matrix pairs (A,B)\left(A,B\right) from Equations 3.2, 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6 that could give appropriate curves of type (C3). We show there are simple closed curves in components of NΦS2N_{\Phi}\setminus S_{2} that give negative valuation for each curve, proving the surface cannot be detected.

We have already classified these options in the proof of Lemmas 14 and 15 and only C𝒯,1C_{\mathcal{T},1} could appear for the case (S2). Consider [gh1,a]im(π1(NΦS2)π1(NΦ))[gh^{-1},a]\in\operatorname{im}(\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi}\setminus S_{2})\to\pi_{1}(N_{\Phi})).

Using C𝒯,1C_{\mathcal{T},1} from Equation 5.9 with ξ\xi the ideal point uu\to\infty gives

I[gh1,a]=u2 and vξ(I[gh1,a])=2<0,I_{[gh^{-1},a]}=u^{2}\text{ and }v_{\xi}(I_{[gh^{-1},a]})=-2<0,

which proves S2S_{2} is not detected by C𝒯,1C_{\mathcal{T},1}. This proves the result for S2S_{2}.

Consider now the options for matrix pairs (A,B)\left(A,B\right) from Equations 3.2, 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6 in turn that could give appropriate curves of type (C1) that detect S3S_{3}.

We find no ways to extend the representation from Equation 3.2 to get a curve of type (C1) that detect S3S_{3} in any characteristic.

For general characteristic pp we find one way to extend the representation from Equation 3.3 to NΦN_{\Phi} with a curve of type (C1). For gluing matrix Φ=(±1l01)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&l\\ 0&\mp 1\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}) we get the curve of representations

A=(x10x1),B=(1001),G=(x±2±(x+x1)0x2),H=(x±2±(x+x1)0x2),x𝔽{0,1,1}.\begin{split}A=\begin{pmatrix}x&1\\ 0&x^{-1}\end{pmatrix},&\quad B=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},\\ G=\begin{pmatrix}x^{\pm 2}&\pm(x+x^{-1})\\ 0&x^{\mp 2}\end{pmatrix},&\quad H=\begin{pmatrix}x^{\pm 2}&\pm(x+x^{-1})\\ 0&x^{\mp 2}\end{pmatrix},\quad x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0,1,-1\}.\end{split}

The corresponding traces give curves

CS3=\displaystyle C_{S_{3}}= {(x+x1,2,x2+x2,x2+x2,x+x1,x1±2+x12,x1±2+x12,x2+x2,x2+x2,\displaystyle\left\{\left(x+x^{-1},2,x^{2}+x^{-2},x^{2}+x^{-2},x+x^{-1},x^{1\pm 2}+x^{-1\mp 2},x^{1\pm 2}+x^{-1\mp 2},x^{2}+x^{-2},x^{2}+x^{-2},\right.\right.
x4+x4,x1±2+x12,x1±2+x12,x1±4+x14,x4+x4)|x𝔽{0,1,1}}\displaystyle\hskip 22.76228pt\left.\left.x^{4}+x^{-4},x^{1\pm 2}+x^{-1\mp 2},x^{1\pm 2}+x^{-1\mp 2},x^{1\pm 4}+x^{-1\mp 4},x^{4}+x^{-4}\right)\ \big{|}\ x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0,1,-1\}\right\}

for k=±1k=\pm 1. The restrictions to K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are curves,

rK(CS3)\displaystyle r_{K}\left(C_{S_{3}}\right) =Xred(K×~I,𝔽p)={(s,2,s)s=x+x1,x𝔽p},\displaystyle=X^{\text{red}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}_{p})=\left\{\left(s,2,s\right)\ \mid\ s=x+x^{-1},x\in\mathbb{F}_{p}\right\},
rM(CS3)\displaystyle r_{M}\left(C_{S_{3}}\right) =Xred(M,𝔽p)={(s,s,s22)s=x2+x2,x𝔽p},\displaystyle=X^{\text{red}}(M,\mathbb{F}_{p})=\left\{\left(s,s,s^{2}-2\right)\ \mid\ s=x^{2}+x^{-2},x\in\mathbb{F}_{p}\right\},

so CS3C_{S_{3}} is of type (C1).

In Section 3, rK(CS3)r_{K}\left(C_{S_{3}}\right) is shown to detect \mathcal{B}; in Section 4, rM(CS3)r_{M}\left(C_{S_{3}}\right) is shown to detect 𝒮\mathcal{S}. We deduce both curves detect S3S_{3} whenever Φ=(±1l0±1)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&l\\ 0&\pm 1\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}).

No other curves of type (C1) that could give appropriate curves are found for any gluing matrix and other representations.

Now consider the options for matrix pairs (A,B)\left(A,B\right) from Equations 3.2, 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6 that could give appropriate curves of type (C3). We have already classified these options in the proof of Lemmas 14 and 15, which do not appear in case (S3). Therefore they could not detect S3S_{3}. This proves the result. ∎

5.5 Curves in the Seifert fibered space with base orbifold S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3)

The manifold NΦN_{\Phi} forms a Seifert fibered space with base orbifold S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) if and only if

Φ=(k±116k6)SL2().\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}).

The classification of essential surfaces in NΦN_{\Phi} in Section 5.1 shows only the cases (S1) and (S4) can appear. The case (S1) is already covered in Lemmas 14 and 15. The remaining case (S4) and related curves in the character variety are covered in the next result.

Lemma 17.

Let 𝔽\mathbb{F} be an algebraically closed field of characteristic pp. Consider NΦN_{\Phi} a Seifert fibered space with base orbifold S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) and gluing matrix Φ\Phi == (k±116k6)SL2().\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}). There is a 2–dimensional component CΦX(NΦ,𝔽)C_{\Phi}\subset X(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F}) and for each qq\in\mathbb{Z}, CΦC_{\Phi} contains a curve that detects S4(q,1)S_{4}(q,1).

Recall from Lemmas 14 and 15, the splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} is always detected in the Seifert fibered space with base orbifold S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3). Then Lemmas 14, 15 and 17 prove Theorem 6.

Proof.

We follow the approach described in Section 5.2. We previously saw the existence of the 2–dimensional component CΦC_{\Phi} in Equation 5.6 as part of the proof of Lemma 14. We had, for the gluing matrix Φ=(k±116k6)SL2(),\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}), the 2–dimensional components given by

CΦ={(0,y+y1,(1)k(y+y1),(1)k(y+y1),0,0,y21+y2f(yy1)2+f,(1)k(y1±1+y11),±(1)ky1±2y12yy1,1,0,y21+y2fy(yy1)2+fy,(1)k(y21+y2fy±1(yy1)2+fy±1),±y1±1y11yy1)|f,y𝔽{0}}\begin{split}C_{\Phi}=&\left\{\left(0,y+y^{-1},(-1)^{k}(y+y^{-1}),(-1)^{k}(y+y^{-1}),0,0,\frac{y^{2}-1+y^{-2}}{f(y-y^{-1})^{2}}+f,\right.\right.\\ &\hskip 28.45274pt\left.\left.(-1)^{k}(y^{1\pm 1}+y^{-1\mp 1}),\pm(-1)^{k}\frac{y^{-1\pm 2}-y^{1\mp 2}}{y-y^{-1}},{1},0,\frac{y^{2}-1+y^{-2}}{fy(y-y^{-1})^{2}}+fy,\right.\right.\\ &\hskip 28.45274pt\left.\left.(-1)^{k}\left(\frac{y^{2}-1+y^{-2}}{fy^{\pm 1}(y-y^{-1})^{2}}+fy^{\pm 1}\right),\pm\frac{y^{-1\pm 1}-y^{1\mp 1}}{y-y^{-1}}\right)\ \Big{|}\ f,y\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}\right\}\end{split} (5.10)

for kk\in\mathbb{Z} even or odd, l=±1l=\pm 1.

We previously considered the case where yy is constant and obtained a curve that detects the splitting torus. The restrictions of the component CΦC_{\Phi} to K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are curves,

rK(CΦ)\displaystyle r_{K}\left(C_{\Phi}\right) =Xirr(K×~I,𝔽p)={(0,s,0)s=y+y1,y𝔽p},\displaystyle=X^{\text{irr}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}_{p})=\left\{\left(0,s,0\right)\mid s=y+y^{-1},\ y\in\mathbb{F}_{p}\right\},
rM(CΦ)\displaystyle r_{M}\left(C_{\Phi}\right) =Xirr(M,𝔽p)={(s,s,1)s=(1)k(y+y1),y𝔽p,k}.\displaystyle=X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F}_{p})=\left\{\left(s,s,1\right)\mid s=(-1)^{k}(y+y^{-1}),\ y\in\mathbb{F}_{p},\ k\in\mathbb{Z}\right\}.

In Section 3, rK(CΦ)r_{K}\left(C_{\Phi}\right) is shown to detect 𝒜\mathcal{A}; in Section 4, rM(CΦ)r_{M}\left(C_{\Phi}\right) is shown to detect \mathcal{R}. We deduce that each curve in CΦC_{\Phi} with the property that IbI_{b} is non-constant detects S4(q,r)S_{4}(q,r) for some (q,r)(q,r).

Now let f=tuf=t^{u}, y=tvy=t^{v} for t𝔽{0}t\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}, u,vu,v\in\mathbb{Z}. For each pair (u,v)(u,v) of co-prime integers, this gives a curve C(u,v)C(u,v) inside CΦC_{\Phi} with different valuations. The curves are given by

C(u,v)={(0,tv+tv,(1)k(tv+tv),(1)k(tv+tv),0,0,t2v1+t2vtu(tvtv)2+tu,(1)k(tv(1±1)+tv(1±1)),±(1)ktv(1±2)tv(1±2)tvtv,1,0,t2v1+t2vtu+v(tvtv)2+tu+v,(1)k(t2v1+t2vtu±v(tvtv)2+tu±v),±tv(1±1)tv(1±1)tvtv)|t𝔽{0}}.\begin{split}C(u,v)=&\left\{\left(0,t^{v}+t^{-v},(-1)^{k}(t^{v}+t^{-v}),(-1)^{k}(t^{v}+t^{-v}),0,0,\frac{t^{2v}-1+t^{-{2v}}}{t^{u}(t^{v}-t^{-v})^{2}}+t^{u},\right.\right.\\ &\hskip 28.45274pt\left.\left.(-1)^{k}(t^{v(1\pm 1)}+t^{-v(1\pm 1)}),\pm(-1)^{k}\frac{t^{v(-1\pm 2)}-t^{-v(-1\pm 2)}}{t^{v}-t^{-v}},{1},0,\frac{t^{2v}-1+t^{-2v}}{t^{u+v}(t^{v}-t^{-v})^{2}}+t^{u+v},\right.\right.\\ &\hskip 28.45274pt\left.\left.(-1)^{k}\left(\frac{t^{2v}-1+t^{-2v}}{t^{u\pm v}(t^{v}-t^{-v})^{2}}+t^{u\pm v}\right),\pm\frac{t^{v(-1\pm 1)}-t^{-v(-1\pm 1)}}{t^{v}-t^{-v}}\right)\ \Big{|}\ t\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0\}\right\}.\end{split} (5.11)

Consider the recurrence relation

αk=αk11αk2αk1 with initial values α0=b1a,α1=a.\alpha_{k}=\alpha_{k-1}^{-1}\alpha_{k-2}\alpha_{k-1}\text{ with initial values }\alpha_{0}=b^{-1}a,\ \alpha_{1}=a. (5.12)

The projection of the surface S4(q,1)S_{4}(q,1) onto the base orbifold S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) is the curve ghgαqghg\alpha_{q} (see Figure 5 for examples that give an idea of the pattern). For S4(q,1)S_{4}(q,1) to be detected at the ideal point ξ\xi, ghgαqghg\alpha_{q} must have non-negative valuation at ξ\xi. Consider the curve C(u,v)C(u,v) with ideal point ξ\xi, t+t1t+t^{-1}\to\infty. We have

Ighgαq=tutv(q+1)+tv(q1)tu(t2v1+t2vt2v2+t2v) and vξ(Ighgαq)0 if u=v(q1).\begin{split}I_{ghg\alpha_{q}}&=t^{u}t^{v(-q+1)}+\frac{t^{v(q-1)}}{t^{u}}\left(\frac{t^{-2v}-1+t^{2v}}{t^{2v}-2+t^{-2v}}\right)\\ \text{ and }v_{\xi}(I_{ghg\alpha_{q}})&\geq 0\text{ if }u=v(q-1).\end{split}

For example, v=1v=1, u=q1u=q-1 suffices. Therefore the curve C(q1,1)C(q-1,1) in CΦC_{\Phi} defined by taking f=tq1f=t^{q-1}, y=ty=t, t𝔽t\in\mathbb{F}, detects S4(q,1)S_{4}(q,1). ∎

We conjecture that we can extend this result to detect all of the surfaces S4(q,r)S_{4}(q,r) using this 2–dimensional component and have made some additional calculations in this direction.

Conjecture 18.

Let 𝔽\mathbb{F} be an algebraically closed field of characteristic pp. Consider NΦN_{\Phi} a Seifert fibered space with base orbifold S2(2,2,2,3)S^{2}(2,2,2,3) and gluing matrix Φ\Phi == (k±116k6)SL2().\begin{pmatrix}k&\pm 1\\ \mp 1-6k&\mp 6\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}). There is a curve in X(NΦ,𝔽)X(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F}) that detects S4(q,r)S_{4}(q,r). Specifically, S4(q,r)S_{4}(q,r) is detected by C(qr,r)C(q-r,r) given in Equation 5.11.

Remark 19.

We have calculated several (coprime) families (q,r)(q,r) where we can prove 18, including: (2a+1,2)(2a+1,2), (3a+1,3)(3a+1,3), (3a+2,3)(3a+2,3). This is done using similar techniques as in the proof of Lemma 17.

5.6 Curves in the Seifert fibered space with base orbifold 2(2,3)\mathbb{RP}^{2}(2,3)

The manifold NΦN_{\Phi} forms a Seifert fibered space with base orbifold 2(2,3)\mathbb{RP}^{2}(2,3) if and only if

Φ=(±1l6±16l)SL2().\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&l\\ \mp 6&\pm 1-6l\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}).

The classification of essential surfaces in NΦN_{\Phi} in Section 5.1 shows only the cases (S1) and (S5) can appear. The case (S1) is already covered in Lemmas 14 and 15. The remaining case (S5) and related curves in the character variety are covered in the next result.

Lemma 20.

Let 𝔽\mathbb{F} be an algebraically closed field of characteristic pp. Consider NΦN_{\Phi} a Seifert fibered space with base orbifold 2(2,3)\mathbb{RP}^{2}(2,3) and gluing matrix Φ\Phi == (±1l6±16l)\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&l\\ \mp 6&\pm 1-6l\end{pmatrix} \in SL2()\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}). There is a curve in X(NΦ,𝔽)X(N_{\Phi},\mathbb{F}) that detects S5S_{5} if p=2p=2 and no curve that detects S5S_{5} if p2p\neq 2.

Recall from Lemmas 14 and 15, the splitting torus 𝒯\mathcal{T} is never detected in the Seifert fibered space with base orbifold 2(2,3)\mathbb{RP}^{2}(2,3). Thus, Lemmas 14, 15 and 20 give the statement of Theorem 5.

Proof.

We follow the approach described in Section 5.2. The essential surface S5S_{5} can only be detected by either a curve of type (C1) where the restriction to the variety of characters of K×~IK\tilde{\times}I detects \mathcal{R} and the restriction to the variety of characters of MM detects \mathcal{B} or a curve of type (C3) that has non-negative valuation on all simple closed curves in components of NΦS5N_{\Phi}\setminus S_{5}.

Consider first the options for matrix pairs (A,B)\left(A,B\right) from Equations 3.2, 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6 in turn that could give appropriate curves of type (C1).

We find no ways to extend the representation from Equation 3.2 to get a curve of type (C1) that detect S5S_{5} in any characteristic.

For characteristic 22 we find one way to extend the representation from Equation 3.3 to NΦN_{\Phi} with a curve of type (C1). For gluing matrix Φ=(±1l6±16l)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&l\\ \mp 6&\pm 1-6l\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}) we get the curve of representations

A=(x10x1),B=(1001),x𝔽{0,1}G=(x±2x+x10x2),H=(x201x+x1x±2),x𝔽{0,1}.\begin{split}A=\begin{pmatrix}x&1\\ 0&x^{-1}\end{pmatrix},&\quad B=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\ 0&1\end{pmatrix},\quad x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0,1\}\\ G=\begin{pmatrix}x^{\pm 2}&x+x^{-1}\\ 0&x^{\mp 2}\end{pmatrix},&\quad H=\begin{pmatrix}x^{\mp 2}&0\\ \frac{1}{x+x^{-1}}&x^{\pm 2}\end{pmatrix},\quad x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0,1\}.\end{split}

The corresponding traces give curves

CS5=\displaystyle C_{S_{5}}= {(x+x1,0,x2+x2,x2+x2,x+x1,x1±2+x12,x12+x1±2+1x+x1,x2+x2,\displaystyle\left\{\left(x+x^{-1},0,x^{2}+x^{-2},x^{2}+x^{-2},x+x^{-1},x^{1\pm 2}+x^{-1\mp 2},x^{1\mp 2}+x^{-1\pm 2}+\frac{1}{x+x^{-1}},x^{2}+x^{-2},\right.\right.
x2+x2,1,x1±2+x12,x12+x1±2+1x+x1,x2x+x1+x1,1)|x𝔽{0,1}}\displaystyle\hskip 22.76228pt\left.\left.x^{2}+x^{-2},1,x^{1\pm 2}+x^{-1\mp 2},x^{1\mp 2}+x^{-1\pm 2}+\frac{1}{x+x^{-1}},\frac{x^{\mp 2}}{x+x^{-1}}+x^{-1},1\right)\ \Big{|}\ x\in\mathbb{F}\setminus\{0,1\}\right\}

for k=±1k=\pm 1. The restrictions to K×~IK\tilde{\times}I and MM are curves,

rK(CS5)\displaystyle r_{K}\left(C_{S_{5}}\right) =Xred(K×~I,𝔽2)={(s,0,s)s=x+x1,x𝔽2},\displaystyle=X^{\text{red}}(K\tilde{\times}I,\mathbb{F}_{2})=\{(s,0,s)\mid s=x+x^{-1},x\in\mathbb{F}_{2}\},
rM(CS5)\displaystyle r_{M}\left(C_{S_{5}}\right) =Xirr(M,𝔽2)={(s,s,1)s=x2+x2,x𝔽2},\displaystyle=X^{\text{irr}}(M,\mathbb{F}_{2})=\{(s,s,1)\mid s=x^{2}+x^{-2},x\in\mathbb{F}_{2}\},

so CS5C_{S_{5}} is of type (C1).

In Section 3, rK(CS5)r_{K}\left(C_{S_{5}}\right) is shown to detect \mathcal{B}; in Section 4, rM(CS5)r_{M}\left(C_{S_{5}}\right) is shown to detect \mathcal{R}. We deduce both curves detect S5S_{5} whenever Φ=(±1l6±16l)SL2()\Phi=\begin{pmatrix}\pm 1&l\\ \mp 6&\pm 1-6l\end{pmatrix}\in\operatorname{SL}_{2}(\mathbb{Z}).

No other curves of type (C1) that could give appropriate curves are found for any gluing matrix and other representations.

Now consider the options for matrix pairs (A,B)\left(A,B\right) from Equations 3.2, 3.3, 3.5 and 3.6 that could give appropriate curves of type (C3). We have already classified these options in the proof of Lemmas 14 and 15, which do not appear in case (S5). Therefore they could not detect S5S_{5}. This proves the result. ∎

References

  • [1] Matthias Aschenbrenner, Stefan Friedl, and Henry Wilton. 3–manifold groups. EMS Series of Lectures in Mathematics. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2015.
  • [2] Alex Casella, Charles Katerba, and Stephan Tillmann. Ideal points of character varieties, algebraic non-integral representations, and undetected closed essential surfaces in 3–manifolds. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 148(5):2257–2271, 2020.
  • [3] Eric Chesebro. Closed surfaces and character varieties. Algebraic and Geometry Topology, 13:2001–2037, 2013.
  • [4] Eric Chesebro and Stephan Tillmann. Not all boundary slopes are strongly detected by the character variety. Communications in Analysis and Geometry, 15(4):695–723, 2007.
  • [5] Marc Culler, Cameron McA. Gordon, John Luecke, and Peter B. Shalen. Dehn surgery on knots. Ann. of Math. (2), 125(2):237–300, 1987.
  • [6] Marc Culler and Peter B. Shalen. Varieties of group representations and splittings of 33–manifolds. Ann. of Math. (2), 117(1):109–146, 1983.
  • [7] Nathan M. Dunfield and Stavros Garoufalidis. Incompressibility criteria for spun-normal surfaces. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 364(11):6109–6137, 2012.
  • [8] Benson Farb and Dan Margalit. A primer on mapping class groups. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2012.
  • [9] Stefan Friedl, Montek Gill, and Stephan Tillmann. Linear representations of 3–manifold groups over rings. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 146(11):4951–4966, 2018.
  • [10] Stefan Friedl, Takahiro Kitayama, and Matthias Nagel. Representation varieties detect essential surfaces. Math. Res. Lett., 25(3):803–817, 2018.
  • [11] Grace S. Garden and Stephan Tillmann. An invitation to Culler-Shalen theory in arbitrary characteristic. preprint, 2024.
  • [12] Takashi Hara and Takahiro Kitayama. Character varieties of higher dimensional representations and splittings of 3–manifolds. Geometriae Dedicata, 213:433–466, 2021.
  • [13] Allen Hatcher. Notes on basic 33–manifold topology. http://www.math.cornell.edu/h̃atcher, 2007.
  • [14] John Hempel. 33-Manifolds. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N. J.; University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, 1976. Ann. of Math. Studies, No. 86.
  • [15] William Jaco. Lectures on three–manifold topology, volume 43 of CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1980.
  • [16] Benjamin Martin. Reductive subgroups of reductive groups in nonzero characteristic. J. Algebra, 262(2):265–286, 2003.
  • [17] Benjamin Martin. GG–equivariant inclusions and character varieties. in preparation, 2024.
  • [18] John W. Morgan. The Smith conjecture. In The Smith conjecture (New York, 1979), volume 112 of Pure Appl. Math., pages 3–6. Academic Press, Orlando, FL, 1984.
  • [19] Stephen Schanuel and Xingru Zhang. Detection of essential surfaces in 3–manifolds with SL2{\rm SL}_{2}–trees. Math. Ann., 320(1):149–165, 2001.
  • [20] Jennifer Schultens. Kakimizu complexes of Seifert fibered spaces. Algebr. Geom. Topol., 18(5):2897–2918, 2018.
  • [21] Henry Segerman. Detection of incompressible surfaces in hyperbolic punctured torus bundles. Geom. Dedicata, 150:181–232, 2011.
  • [22] Peter B. Shalen. Representations of 3–manifold groups. In Handbook of geometric topology, pages 955–1044. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2002.
  • [23] John R. Stallings. A topological proof of Grushko’s theorem on free products. Math. Z., 90:1–8, 1965.
  • [24] Stephan Tillmann. Character varieties of mutative 3–manifolds. Algebr. Geom. Topol., 4:133–149, 2004.
  • [25] Stephan Tillmann. Degenerations of ideal hyperbolic triangulations. Math. Z., 272(3-4):793–823, 2012.
  • [26] Tomoyoshi Yoshida. On ideal points of deformation curves of hyperbolic 33–manifolds with one cusp. Topology, 30(2):155–170, 1991.
\Addresses