We’re building crystals, like diamonds, purely from topology. Last time I said how: you take a graph and embed its maximal abelian cover into the vector space
Now let me say a bit more about the maximal abelian cover. It’s not nearly as famous as the universal cover, but it’s very nice.
First I’ll whiz though the basic idea, and then I’ll give the details.
The basic idea
By ‘space’ let me mean a connected topological space that’s locally nice. The basic idea is that if is some space, its universal cover
is a covering space of
that covers all other covering spaces of
The maximal abelian cover
has a similar universal property—but it’s abelian, and it covers all abelian connected covers. A cover is abelian if its group of deck transformations is abelian.
The cool part is that universal covers are to homotopy theory as maximal abelian covers are to homology theory.
What do I mean by that? For starters, points in are just homotopy classes of paths in
starting at some chosen basepoint. And the points in
are just ‘homology classes’ of paths starting at the basepoint.
But people don’t talk so much about ‘homology classes’ of paths. So what do I mean by that? Here a bit of category theory comes in handy. Homotopy classes of paths in are morphisms in the fundamental groupoid of
Homology classes of paths are morphisms in the abelianized version of the fundamental groupoid!
But wait a minute — what does that mean? Well, we can abelianize any groupoid by imposing the relations
whenever it makes sense to do so. It makes sense to do so when you can compose the morphisms and
in either order, and the resulting morphisms
and
have the same source and the same target. And if you work out what that means, you’ll see it means
But now let me say it all much more slowly, for people who want a more relaxed treatment.
The details
There are lots of slightly different things called ‘graphs’ in mathematics, but in topological crystallography it’s convenient to work with one that you’ve probably never seen before. This kind of graph has two copies of each edge, one pointing in each direction.
So, we’ll say a graph has a set
of vertices, a set
of edges, maps
assigning to each edge its source and target, and a map
sending each edge to its inverse, obeying
and
for all
That inequality at the end will make category theorists gag: definitions should say what’s true, not what’s not true. But category theorists should be able to see what’s really going on here, so I leave that as a puzzle.
For ordinary folks, let me repeat the definition using more words. If and
we write
and draw
as an interval with an arrow on it pointing from
to
We write
as
and draw
as the same interval as
but with its arrow reversed. The equations obeyed by
say that taking the inverse of
gives an edge
and that
No edge can be its own inverse.
A map of graphs, say is a pair of functions, one sending vertices to vertices and one sending edges to edges, that preserve the source, target and inverse maps. By abuse of notation we call both of these functions
I started out talking about topology; now I’m treating graphs very combinatorially, but we can bring the topology back in. From a graph we can build a topological space
called its geometric realization. We do this by taking one point for each vertex and gluing on one copy of
for each edge
gluing the point
to
and the point
to
and then identifying the interval for each edge
with the interval for its inverse by means of the map
Any map of graphs gives rise to a continuous map between their geometric realizations, and we say a map of graphs is a cover if this continuous map is a covering map. For simplicity we denote the fundamental group of by
and similarly for other topological invariants of
However, sometimes I’ll need to distinguish between a graph
and its geometric realization
Any connected graph has a universal cover, meaning a connected cover
that covers every other connected cover. The geometric realization of is connected and simply connected. The fundamental group
acts as deck transformations of
meaning invertible maps
such that
We can take the quotient of
by the action of any subgroup
and get a cover
In particular, if we take to be the commutator subgroup of
we call the graph
the maximal abelian cover of the graph
and denote it by
We obtain a cover
whose group of deck transformations is the abelianization of This is just the first homology group
In particular, if the space corresponding to
has
holes, this is the free abelian group on
generators.
I want a concrete description of the maximal abelian cover! I’ll build it starting with the universal cover, but first we need some preliminaries on paths in graphs.
Given vertices in
define a path from
to
to be a word of edges
with
for some vertices
with
and
We allow the word to be empty if and only if
; this gives the trivial path from
to itself.
Given a path from
to
we write
and we write the trivial path from
to itself as
We define the composite of paths
and
via concatenation of words, obtaining a path we call
We call a path from a vertex
to itself a loop based at
We say two paths from to
are homotopic if one can be obtained from the other by repeatedly introducing or deleting subwords of the form
where
If
is a homotopy class of paths from
to
we write
We can compose homotopy classes
and
by setting
If is a connected graph, we can describe the universal cover
as follows. Fix a vertex
of
which we call the basepoint. The vertices of
are defined to be the homotopy classes of paths
where
is arbitrary. The edges in
from the vertex
to the vertex
are defined to be the edges
with
In fact, there is always at most one such edge. There is an obvious map of graphs
sending each vertex of
to the vertex
of
This map is a cover.
Now we are ready to construct the maximal abelian cover For this, we impose a further equivalence relation on paths, which is designed to make composition commutative whenever possible. However, we need to be careful. If
and
the composites
and
are both well-defined if and only if
and
In this case,
and
share the same starting point and share the same ending point if and only if
and
If all four of these equations hold, both
and
are loops based at
So, we shall impose the relation
only in this case.
We say two paths are homologous if one can be obtained from another by:
• repeatedly introducing or deleting subwords where
and/or
• repeatedly replacing subwords of the form
by those of the form
where and
are loops based at the same vertex.
My use of the term ‘homologous’ is a bit nonstandard here!
We denote the homology class of a path by
Note that if two paths
are homologous then
and
Thus, the starting and ending points of a homology class of paths are well-defined, and given any path
we write
The composite of homology classes is also well-defined if we set
We construct the maximal abelian cover of a connected graph just as we constructed its universal cover, but using homology classes rather than homotopy classes of paths. And now I’ll introduce some jargon that should make you start thinking about crystals!
Fix a basepoint for
The vertices of
or atoms, are defined to be the homology classes of paths
where
is arbitrary. Any edge of
or bond, goes from some atom
to the some atom
The bonds from
to
are defined to be the edges
with
There is at most one bond between any two atoms. Again we have a covering map
The homotopy classes of loops based at form a group, with composition as the group operation. This is the fundamental group
of the graph
This is isomorphic as the fundamental group of the space associated to
By our construction of the universal cover,
is also the set of vertices of
that are mapped to
by
Furthermore, any element
defines a deck transformation of
that sends each vertex
to the vertex
Similarly, the homology classes of loops based at form a group with composition as the group operation. Since the additional relation used to define homology classes is precisely that needed to make composition of homology classes of loops commutative, this group is the abelianization of
It is therefore isomorphic to the first homology group
of the geometric realization of
By our construction of the maximal abelian cover, is also the set of vertices of
that are mapped to
by
Furthermore, any element
defines a deck transformation of
that sends each vertex
to the vertex
So, it all works out! The fundamental group acts as deck transformations of the universal cover, while the first homology group
acts as deck transformations of the maximal abelian cover.
Puzzle for experts: what does this remind you of in Galois theory?
We’ll get back to crystals next time.
Read the whole series
• Part 1 – the basic idea.
• Part 2 – the maximal abelian cover of a graph.
• Part 3 – constructing topological crystals.
• Part 4 – examples of topological crystals.
Last time I explained how to create the ‘maximal abelian cover’ of a connected graph. Now I’ll say more about a systematic procedure for embedding this into a vector space. That will give us a topological crystal […]