Durhuus and Jonsson (1995) introduced the class of “locally constructible” (LC) 3-spheres and showed that there are only exponentially many combinatorial types of simplicial LC 3-spheres. Such upper bounds are crucial for the convergence of models for 3D quantum gravity.
We characterize the LC property for d-spheres (“the sphere minus a facet collapses to a (d−2)-complex”) and for d-balls. In particular, we link it to the classical notions of collapsibility, shellability and constructibility, and obtain hierarchies of such properties for simplicial balls and spheres. The main corollaries from this study are:
– Not all simplicial 3-spheres are locally constructible. (This solves a problem by Durhuus and Jonsson.)
There are only exponentially many shellable simplicial 3-spheres with given number of facets. (This answers a question by Kalai.)
– All simplicial constructible 3-balls are collapsible. (This answers a question by Hachimori.)
– Not every collapsible 3-ball collapses onto its boundary minus a facet. (This property appears in papers by Chillingworth and Lickorish.)
Span Tree Simplicial Complex Dual Graph Interior Vertex Free Face
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Bing, R. H., Some aspects of the topology of 3-manifolds related to the Poincaré conjecture, in Lectures on Modern Mathematics, Vol. II, pp. 93–128. Wiley, New York, 1964.Google Scholar
Björner, A., Topological methods, in Handbook of Combinatorics, Vol. 2, pp. 1819–1872. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1995.Google Scholar
Catterall, S., Kogut, J. & Renken, R., Is there an exponential bound in fourdimensional simplicial gravity? Phys. Rev. Lett., 72 (1994), 4062–4065.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Cheeger, J., Critical points of distance functions and applications to geometry, in Geometric Topology: Recent Developments (Montecatini Terme, 1990), Lecture Notes in Math., 1504, pp. 1–38. Springer, Berlin–Heidelberg, 1991.Google Scholar
Chillingworth, D. R. J., Collapsing three-dimensional convex polyhedra. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 63 (1967), 353–357. Correction in Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 88 (1980), 307–310.Google Scholar
Gromov, M., Spaces and questions. Geom. Funct. Anal., 2000, Special Volume, Part I (2000), 118–161.Google Scholar
Grove, K., Petersen, P. V & Wu, J.Y., Geometric finiteness theorems via controlled topology. Invent. Math., 99 (1990), 205–213. Correction in Invent. Math., 104 (1991), 221–222.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Hachimori, M. & Ziegler, G. M., Decompositons of simplicial balls and spheres with knots consisting of few edges. Math. Z., 235 (2000), 159–171.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Hamstrom, M.-E. & Jerrard, R.P., Collapsing a triangulation of a “knotted” cell. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 21 (1969), 327–331.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Hog-Angeloni, C. & Metzler, W., Geometric aspects of two-dimensional complexes, in Two-Dimensional Homotopy and Combinatorial Group Theory, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 197, pp. 1–50. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, J. F. P., Piecewise Linear Topology. University of Chicago Lecture Notes. Benjamin, New York–Amsterdam, 1969.Google Scholar
Lickorish, W. B. R. & Martin, J. M., Triangulations of the 3-ball with knotted spanning 1-simplexes and collapsible rth derived subdivisions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 137 (1969), 451–458.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar