%!TEX root = ../blob1.tex

\section{Introduction}

We construct the ``blob complex'' $\bc_*(M; \cC)$ associated to an $n$-manifold $M$ and a ``linear $n$-category with strong duality'' $\cC$. This blob complex provides a simultaneous generalisation of several well-understood constructions:

\begin{itemize}

\item The vector space $H_0(\bc_*(M; \cC))$ is isomorphic to the usual topological quantum field theory invariant of $M$ associated to $\cC$. (See \S \ref{sec:fields} \nn{more specific}.)

\item When $n=1$, $\cC$ is just an associative algebroid, and $\bc_*(S^1; \cC)$ is quasi-isomorphic to the Hochschild complex $\HC_*(\cC)$. (See \S \ref{sec:hochschild}.)

\item When $\cC$ is the polynomial algebra $k[t]$, thought of as an n-category (see \S \ref{sec:comm_alg}), we have 

that $\bc_*(M; k[t])$ is homotopy equivalent to $C_*(\Sigma^\infty(M), k)$, the singular chains

on the configurations space of unlabeled points in $M$.

%$$H_*(\bc_*(M; k[t])) = H^{\text{sing}}_*(\Delta^\infty(M), k).$$ 

\end{itemize}

The blob complex definition is motivated by the desire for a derived analogue of the usual TQFT Hilbert space (replacing quotient of fields by local relations with some sort of resolution), 

and for a generalization of Hochschild homology to higher $n$-categories. We would also like to be able to talk about $\CM{M}{T}$ when $T$ is an $n$-category rather than a manifold. The blob complex allows us to do all of these! More detailed motivations are described in \S \ref{sec:motivations}.

The blob complex has good formal properties, summarized in \S \ref{sec:properties}. These include an action of $\CH{M}$, 

extending the usual $\Homeo(M)$ action on the TQFT space $H_0$ (see Property \ref{property:evaluation}) and a gluing formula allowing calculations by cutting manifolds into smaller parts (see Property \ref{property:gluing}).

We expect applications of the blob complex to contact topology and Khovanov homology but do not address these in this paper. See \S \ref{sec:future} for slightly more detail.

\subsubsection{Structure of the paper}

The three subsections of the introduction explain our motivations in defining the blob complex (see \S \ref{sec:motivations}), summarise the formal properties of the blob complex (see \S \ref{sec:properties}) and outline anticipated future directions and applications (see \S \ref{sec:future}).

The first part of the paper (sections \S \ref{sec:fields}---\S \ref{sec:evaluation}) gives the definition of the blob complex, and establishes some of its properties. There are many alternative definitions of $n$-categories, and part of our difficulty defining the blob complex is simply explaining what we mean by an ``$n$-category with strong duality'' as one of the inputs. At first we entirely avoid this problem by introducing the notion of a `system of fields', and define the blob complex associated to an $n$-manifold and an $n$-dimensional system of fields. We sketch the construction of a system of fields from a $1$-category or from a pivotal $2$-category.

\nn{KW: the previous two paragraphs seem a little awkward to me, but I don't presently have a good idea for fixing them.}

\nn{some more things to cover in the intro}

\begin{itemize}

\item related: we are being unsophisticated from a homotopy theory point of

view and using chain complexes in many places where we could get by with spaces

\item ? one of the points we make (far) below is that there is not really much

difference between (a) systems of fields and local relations and (b) $n$-cats;

thus we tend to switch between talking in terms of one or the other

\end{itemize}

\medskip\hrule\medskip

\subsection{Motivations}

\label{sec:motivations}

We will briefly sketch our original motivation for defining the blob complex.

\nn{this is adapted from an old draft of the intro; it needs further modification

in order to better integrate it into the current intro.}

As a starting point, consider TQFTs constructed via fields and local relations.

(See Section \ref{sec:tqftsviafields} or \cite{kw:tqft}.)

This gives a satisfactory treatment for semisimple TQFTs

(i.e.\ TQFTs for which the cylinder 1-category associated to an

$n{-}1$-manifold $Y$ is semisimple for all $Y$).

For non-semi-simple TQFTs, this approach is less satisfactory.

Our main motivating example (though we will not develop it in this paper)

is the (decapitated) $4{+}1$-dimensional TQFT associated to Khovanov homology.

It associates a bigraded vector space $A_{Kh}(W^4, L)$ to a 4-manifold $W$ together

with a link $L \subset \bd W$.

The original Khovanov homology of a link in $S^3$ is recovered as $A_{Kh}(B^4, L)$.

How would we go about computing $A_{Kh}(W^4, L)$?

For $A_{Kh}(B^4, L)$, the main tool is the exact triangle (long exact sequence)

relating resolutions of a crossing.

Unfortunately, the exactness breaks if we glue $B^4$ to itself and attempt

to compute $A_{Kh}(S^1\times B^3, L)$.

According to the gluing theorem for TQFTs-via-fields, gluing along $B^3 \subset \bd B^4$

corresponds to taking a coend (self tensor product) over the cylinder category

associated to $B^3$ (with appropriate boundary conditions).

The coend is not an exact functor, so the exactness of the triangle breaks.

The obvious solution to this problem is to replace the coend with its derived counterpart.

This presumably works fine for $S^1\times B^3$ (the answer being the Hochschild homology

of an appropriate bimodule), but for more complicated 4-manifolds this leaves much to be desired.

If we build our manifold up via a handle decomposition, the computation

would be a sequence of derived coends.

A different handle decomposition of the same manifold would yield a different

sequence of derived coends.

To show that our definition in terms of derived coends is well-defined, we

would need to show that the above two sequences of derived coends yield the same answer.

This is probably not easy to do.

Instead, we would prefer a definition for a derived version of $A_{Kh}(W^4, L)$

which is manifestly invariant.

(That is, a definition that does not

involve choosing a decomposition of $W$.

After all, one of the virtues of our starting point --- TQFTs via field and local relations ---

is that it has just this sort of manifest invariance.)

The solution is to replace $A_{Kh}(W^4, L)$, which is a quotient

\[

 \text{linear combinations of fields} \;\big/\; \text{local relations} ,

\]

with an appropriately free resolution (the ``blob complex")

\[

	\cdots\to \bc_2(W, L) \to \bc_1(W, L) \to \bc_0(W, L) .

\]

Here $\bc_0$ is linear combinations of fields on $W$,

$\bc_1$ is linear combinations of local relations on $W$,

$\bc_2$ is linear combinations of relations amongst relations on $W$,

and so on.

None of the above ideas depend on the details of the Khovanov homology example,

so we develop the general theory in this paper and postpone specific applications

to later papers.

\subsection{Formal properties}

\label{sec:properties}

We now summarize the results of the paper in the following list of formal properties.

\begin{property}[Functoriality]

\label{property:functoriality}%

The blob complex is functorial with respect to homeomorphisms. That is, 

\begin{equation*}

X \mapsto \bc_*^{\cC}(X)

\end{equation*}

is a functor from $n$-manifolds and homeomorphisms between them to chain complexes and isomorphisms between them.

\end{property}

The blob complex is also functorial with respect to $\cC$, although we will not address this in detail here.

\begin{property}[Disjoint union]

\label{property:disjoint-union}

The blob complex of a disjoint union is naturally the tensor product of the blob complexes.

\begin{equation*}

\bc_*(X_1 \du X_2) \iso \bc_*(X_1) \tensor \bc_*(X_2)

\end{equation*}

\end{property}

If an $n$-manifold $X_\text{cut}$ contains $Y \sqcup Y^\text{op}$ as a codimension $0$-submanifold of its boundary, write $X_\text{glued} = X_\text{cut} \bigcup_{Y}\selfarrow$ for the manifold obtained by gluing together $Y$ and $Y^\text{op}$. Note that this includes the case of gluing two disjoint manifolds together.

\begin{property}[Gluing map]

\label{property:gluing-map}%

%If $X_1$ and $X_2$ are $n$-manifolds, with $Y$ a codimension $0$-submanifold of $\bdy X_1$, and $Y^{\text{op}}$ a codimension $0$-submanifold of $\bdy X_2$, there is a chain map

%\begin{equation*}

%\gl_Y: \bc_*(X_1) \tensor \bc_*(X_2) \to \bc_*(X_1 \cup_Y X_2).

%\end{equation*}

Given a gluing $X_\mathrm{cut} \to X_\mathrm{glued}$, there is

a natural map

\[

\]

\end{property}

\begin{property}[Contractibility]

\label{property:contractibility}%

\nn{this holds with field coefficients, or more generally when

the map to 0-th homology has a splitting; need to fix statement}

The blob complex on an $n$-ball is contractible in the sense that it is quasi-isomorphic to its $0$-th homology. Moreover, the $0$-th homology of balls can be canonically identified with the original $n$-category $\cC$.

\begin{equation}

\end{equation}

\end{property}

\begin{property}[Skein modules]

\label{property:skein-modules}%

The $0$-th blob homology of $X$ is the usual 

(dual) TQFT Hilbert space (a.k.a.\ skein module) associated to $X$

by $\cC$. (See \S \ref{sec:local-relations}.)

\begin{equation*}

H_0(\bc_*^{\cC}(X)) \iso A^{\cC}(X)

\end{equation*}

\end{property}

\begin{property}[Hochschild homology when $X=S^1$]

\label{property:hochschild}%

The blob complex for a $1$-category $\cC$ on the circle is

quasi-isomorphic to the Hochschild complex.

\begin{equation*}

\end{equation*}

\end{property}

Here $\CH{X}$ is the singular chain complex of the space of homeomorphisms of $X$, fixed on $\bdy X$.

\begin{property}[$C_*(\Homeo(-))$ action]

\label{property:evaluation}%

There is a chain map

\begin{equation*}

\ev_X: \CH{X} \tensor \bc_*(X) \to \bc_*(X).

\end{equation*}

Restricted to $C_0(\Homeo(X))$ this is just the action of homeomorphisms described in Property \ref{property:functoriality}. Further, for

any codimension $1$-submanifold $Y \subset X$ dividing $X$ into $X_1 \cup_Y X_2$, the following diagram

(using the gluing maps described in Property \ref{property:gluing-map}) commutes.

\begin{equation*}

\xymatrix{

     \CH{X} \otimes \bc_*(X) \ar[r]^{\ev_X}    & \bc_*(X) \\

     \CH{X_1} \otimes \CH{X_2} \otimes \bc_*(X_1) \otimes \bc_*(X_2)

        \ar@/_4ex/[r]_{\ev_{X_1} \otimes \ev_{X_2}}  \ar[u]^{\gl^{\Homeo}_Y \otimes \gl_Y}  &

            \bc_*(X_1) \otimes \bc_*(X_2) \ar[u]_{\gl_Y}

}

\end{equation*}

\nn{should probably say something about associativity here (or not?)}

Further, for

any codimension $0$-submanifold $Y \sqcup Y^\text{op} \subset \bdy X$ the following diagram

(using the gluing maps described in Property \ref{property:gluing-map}) commutes.

\begin{equation*}

\xymatrix@C+2cm{

     \CH{X \bigcup_Y \selfarrow} \otimes \bc_*(X \bigcup_Y \selfarrow) \ar[r]^<<<<<<<<<<<<{\ev_{(X \bigcup_Y \scalebox{0.5}{\selfarrow})}}    & \bc_*(X \bigcup_Y \selfarrow) \\

     \CH{X} \otimes \bc_*(X)

        \ar[r]_{\ev_{X}}  \ar[u]^{\gl^{\Homeo}_Y \otimes \gl_Y}  &

            \bc_*(X) \ar[u]_{\gl_Y}

}

\end{equation*}

\end{property}

In \S \ref{sec:ncats} we introduce the notion of topological $n$-categories, from which we can construct systems of fields, as well as the notion of an $A_\infty$ $n$-category.

\label{property:blobs-ainfty}

Let $\cC$ be  a topological $n$-category.  Let $Y$ be an $n{-}k$-manifold. 

\end{property}

\begin{rem}

Perhaps the most interesting case is when $Y$ is just a point; then we have a way of building an $A_\infty$ $n$-category from a topological $n$-category.

\end{rem}

There is a version of the blob complex for $\cC$ an $A_\infty$ $n$-category

instead of a garden variety $n$-category; this is described in \S \ref{sec:ainfblob}.

\begin{property}[Product formula]

Let $W$ be a $k$-manifold and $Y$ be an $n-k$ manifold. Let $\cC$ be an $n$-category.

Then

\[

\]

Note on the right hand side we have the version of the blob complex for $A_\infty$ $n$-categories.

\end{property}

\begin{property}[Gluing formula]

\label{property:gluing}%

\mbox{}% <-- gets the indenting right

\begin{itemize}

\item For any $(n-1)$-manifold $Y$, the blob homology of $Y \times I$ is

naturally an $A_\infty$ category. % We'll write $\bc_*(Y)$ for $\bc_*(Y \times I)$ below.

\item For any $n$-manifold $X$, with $Y$ a codimension $0$-submanifold of its boundary, the blob homology of $X$ is naturally an

$A_\infty$ module for $\bc_*(Y \times I)$.

\item For any $n$-manifold $X_\text{glued} = X_\text{cut} \bigcup_Y \selfarrow$, the blob complex $\bc_*(X_\text{glued})$ is the $A_\infty$ self-tensor product of

$\bc_*(X_\text{cut})$ as an $\bc_*(Y \times I)$-bimodule.

\begin{equation*}

\bc_*(X_\text{glued}) \simeq \bc_*(X_\text{cut}) \Tensor^{A_\infty}_{\mathclap{\bc_*(Y \times I)}} \selfarrow

\end{equation*}

\end{itemize}

\end{property}

\begin{property}[Mapping spaces]

Then 

\end{property}

\begin{property}[Higher dimensional Deligne conjecture]

\label{property:deligne}

The singular chains of the $n$-dimensional fat graph operad act on blob cochains.

\end{property}

Properties \ref{property:functoriality}, \ref{property:gluing-map} and \ref{property:skein-modules} will be immediate from the definition given in

\S \ref{sec:blob-definition}, and we'll recall them at the appropriate points there. \todo{Make sure this gets done.}

Properties \ref{property:disjoint-union} and \ref{property:contractibility} are established in \S \ref{sec:basic-properties}.

Property \ref{property:hochschild} is established in \S \ref{sec:hochschild}, Property \ref{property:evaluation} in \S \ref{sec:evaluation},

and Property \ref{property:gluing} in \S \ref{sec:gluing}.

\nn{need to say where the remaining properties are proved.}

\subsection{Future directions}

\label{sec:future}

Throughout, we have resisted the temptation to work in the greatest generality possible (don't worry, it wasn't that hard). 

In most of the places where we say ``set" or ``vector space", any symmetric monoidal category would do.

\nn{maybe make similar remark about chain complexes and $(\infty, 0)$-categories}

More could be said about finite characteristic (there appears in be $2$-torsion in $\bc_1(S^2, \cC)$ for any spherical $2$-category $\cC$, for example). Much more could be said about other types of manifolds, in particular oriented, $\operatorname{Spin}$ and $\operatorname{Pin}^{\pm}$ manifolds, where boundary issues become more complicated. (We'd recommend thinking about boundaries as germs, rather than just codimension $1$ manifolds.) We've also take the path of least resistance by considering $\operatorname{PL}$ manifolds; there may be some differences for topological manifolds and smooth manifolds.

Many results in Hochschild homology can be understood `topologically' via the blob complex. For example, we expect that the shuffle product on the Hochschild homology of a commutative algebra $A$ simply corresponds to the gluing operation on $\bc_*(S^1 \times [0,1], A)$, but haven't investigated the details.

Most importantly, however, \nn{applications!} \nn{$n=2$ cases, contact, Kh}

\subsection{Thanks and acknowledgements}

We'd like to thank David Ben-Zvi, Michael Freedman, Vaughan Jones, Justin Roberts, Chris Schommer-Pries, Peter Teichner \nn{probably lots more} for many interesting and useful conversations. During this work, Kevin Walker has been at Microsoft Station Q, and Scott Morrison has been at Microsoft Station Q and the Miller Institute for Basic Research at UC Berkeley.

\medskip\hrule\medskip

Still to do:

\begin{itemize}

\item say something about starting with semisimple n-cat (trivial?? not trivial?)

\item Mention somewhere \cite{MR1624157} ``Skein homology''; it's not directly related, but has similar motivations.

\end{itemize}