text/tqftreview.tex
changeset 215 adc03f9d8422
child 222 217b6a870532
equal deleted inserted replaced
214:408abd5ef0c7 215:adc03f9d8422
       
     1 %!TEX root = ../blob1.tex
       
     2 
       
     3 \section{TQFTs via fields}
       
     4 \label{sec:fields}
       
     5 \label{sec:tqftsviafields}
       
     6 
       
     7 In this section we review the construction of TQFTs from ``topological fields".
       
     8 For more details see \cite{kw:tqft}.
       
     9 
       
    10 We only consider compact manifolds, so if $Y \sub X$ is a closed codimension 0
       
    11 submanifold of $X$, then $X \setmin Y$ implicitly means the closure
       
    12 $\overline{X \setmin Y}$.
       
    13 
       
    14 
       
    15 \subsection{Systems of fields}
       
    16 
       
    17 Let $\cM_k$ denote the category with objects 
       
    18 unoriented PL manifolds of dimension
       
    19 $k$ and morphisms homeomorphisms.
       
    20 (We could equally well work with a different category of manifolds ---
       
    21 oriented, topological, smooth, spin, etc. --- but for definiteness we
       
    22 will stick with unoriented PL.)
       
    23 
       
    24 %Fix a top dimension $n$, and a symmetric monoidal category $\cS$ whose objects are sets. While reading the definition, you should just think about the case $\cS = \Set$ with cartesian product, until you reach the discussion of a \emph{linear system of fields} later in this section, where $\cS = \Vect$, and \S \ref{sec:homological-fields}, where $\cS = \Kom$.
       
    25 
       
    26 A $n$-dimensional {\it system of fields} in $\cS$
       
    27 is a collection of functors $\cC_k : \cM_k \to \Set$ for $0 \leq k \leq n$
       
    28 together with some additional data and satisfying some additional conditions, all specified below.
       
    29 
       
    30 Before finishing the definition of fields, we give two motivating examples
       
    31 (actually, families of examples) of systems of fields.
       
    32 
       
    33 The first examples: Fix a target space $B$, and let $\cC(X)$ be the set of continuous maps
       
    34 from X to $B$.
       
    35 
       
    36 The second examples: Fix an $n$-category $C$, and let $\cC(X)$ be 
       
    37 the set of sub-cell-complexes of $X$ with codimension-$j$ cells labeled by
       
    38 $j$-morphisms of $C$.
       
    39 One can think of such sub-cell-complexes as dual to pasting diagrams for $C$.
       
    40 This is described in more detail below.
       
    41 
       
    42 Now for the rest of the definition of system of fields.
       
    43 \begin{enumerate}
       
    44 \item There are boundary restriction maps $\cC_k(X) \to \cC_{k-1}(\bd X)$, 
       
    45 and these maps are a natural
       
    46 transformation between the functors $\cC_k$ and $\cC_{k-1}\circ\bd$.
       
    47 For $c \in \cC_{k-1}(\bd X)$, we will denote by $\cC_k(X; c)$ the subset of 
       
    48 $\cC(X)$ which restricts to $c$.
       
    49 In this context, we will call $c$ a boundary condition.
       
    50 \item The subset $\cC_n(X;c)$ of top fields with a given boundary condition is an object in our symmetric monoidal category $\cS$. (This condition is of course trivial when $\cS = \Set$.) If the objects are sets with extra structure (e.g. $\cS = \Vect$ or $\Kom$), then this extra structure is considered part of the definition of $\cC_n$. Any maps mentioned below between top level fields must be morphisms in $\cS$.
       
    51 \item $\cC_k$ is compatible with the symmetric monoidal
       
    52 structures on $\cM_k$, $\Set$ and $\cS$: $\cC_k(X \du W) \cong \cC_k(X)\times \cC_k(W)$,
       
    53 compatibly with homeomorphisms, restriction to boundary, and orientation reversal.
       
    54 We will call the projections $\cC(X_1 \du X_2) \to \cC(X_i)$
       
    55 restriction maps.
       
    56 \item Gluing without corners.
       
    57 Let $\bd X = Y \du -Y \du W$, where $Y$ and $W$ are closed $k{-}1$-manifolds.
       
    58 Let $X\sgl$ denote $X$ glued to itself along $\pm Y$.
       
    59 Using the boundary restriction, disjoint union, and (in one case) orientation reversal
       
    60 maps, we get two maps $\cC_k(X) \to \cC(Y)$, corresponding to the two
       
    61 copies of $Y$ in $\bd X$.
       
    62 Let $\Eq_Y(\cC_k(X))$ denote the equalizer of these two maps.
       
    63 Then (here's the axiom/definition part) there is an injective ``gluing" map
       
    64 \[
       
    65 	\Eq_Y(\cC_k(X)) \hookrightarrow \cC_k(X\sgl) ,
       
    66 \]
       
    67 and this gluing map is compatible with all of the above structure (actions
       
    68 of homeomorphisms, boundary restrictions, orientation reversal, disjoint union).
       
    69 Furthermore, up to homeomorphisms of $X\sgl$ isotopic to the identity,
       
    70 the gluing map is surjective.
       
    71 From the point of view of $X\sgl$ and the image $Y \subset X\sgl$ of the 
       
    72 gluing surface, we say that fields in the image of the gluing map
       
    73 are transverse to $Y$ or splittable along $Y$.
       
    74 \item Gluing with corners.
       
    75 Let $\bd X = Y \cup -Y \cup W$, where $\pm Y$ and $W$ might intersect along their boundaries.
       
    76 Let $X\sgl$ denote $X$ glued to itself along $\pm Y$.
       
    77 Note that $\bd X\sgl = W\sgl$, where $W\sgl$ denotes $W$ glued to itself
       
    78 (without corners) along two copies of $\bd Y$.
       
    79 Let $c\sgl \in \cC_{k-1}(W\sgl)$ be a be a splittable field on $W\sgl$ and let
       
    80 $c \in \cC_{k-1}(W)$ be the cut open version of $c\sgl$.
       
    81 Let $\cC^c_k(X)$ denote the subset of $\cC(X)$ which restricts to $c$ on $W$.
       
    82 (This restriction map uses the gluing without corners map above.)
       
    83 Using the boundary restriction, gluing without corners, and (in one case) orientation reversal
       
    84 maps, we get two maps $\cC^c_k(X) \to \cC(Y)$, corresponding to the two
       
    85 copies of $Y$ in $\bd X$.
       
    86 Let $\Eq^c_Y(\cC_k(X))$ denote the equalizer of these two maps.
       
    87 Then (here's the axiom/definition part) there is an injective ``gluing" map
       
    88 \[
       
    89 	\Eq^c_Y(\cC_k(X)) \hookrightarrow \cC_k(X\sgl, c\sgl) ,
       
    90 \]
       
    91 and this gluing map is compatible with all of the above structure (actions
       
    92 of homeomorphisms, boundary restrictions, orientation reversal, disjoint union).
       
    93 Furthermore, up to homeomorphisms of $X\sgl$ isotopic to the identity,
       
    94 the gluing map is surjective.
       
    95 From the point of view of $X\sgl$ and the image $Y \subset X\sgl$ of the 
       
    96 gluing surface, we say that fields in the image of the gluing map
       
    97 are transverse to $Y$ or splittable along $Y$.
       
    98 \item There are maps $\cC_{k-1}(Y) \to \cC_k(Y \times I)$, denoted
       
    99 $c \mapsto c\times I$.
       
   100 These maps comprise a natural transformation of functors, and commute appropriately
       
   101 with all the structure maps above (disjoint union, boundary restriction, etc.).
       
   102 Furthermore, if $f: Y\times I \to Y\times I$ is a fiber-preserving homeomorphism
       
   103 covering $\bar{f}:Y\to Y$, then $f(c\times I) = \bar{f}(c)\times I$.
       
   104 \end{enumerate}
       
   105 
       
   106 There are two notations we commonly use for gluing.
       
   107 One is 
       
   108 \[
       
   109 	x\sgl \deq \gl(x) \in \cC(X\sgl) , 
       
   110 \]
       
   111 for $x\in\cC(X)$.
       
   112 The other is
       
   113 \[
       
   114 	x_1\bullet x_2 \deq \gl(x_1\otimes x_2) \in \cC(X\sgl) , 
       
   115 \]
       
   116 in the case that $X = X_1 \du X_2$, with $x_i \in \cC(X_i)$.
       
   117 
       
   118 \medskip
       
   119 
       
   120 Using the functoriality and $\cdot\times I$ properties above, together
       
   121 with boundary collar homeomorphisms of manifolds, we can define the notion of 
       
   122 {\it extended isotopy}.
       
   123 Let $M$ be an $n$-manifold and $Y \subset \bd M$ be a codimension zero submanifold
       
   124 of $\bd M$.
       
   125 Let $x \in \cC(M)$ be a field on $M$ and such that $\bd x$ is splittable along $\bd Y$.
       
   126 Let $c$ be $x$ restricted to $Y$.
       
   127 Let $M \cup (Y\times I)$ denote $M$ glued to $Y\times I$ along $Y$.
       
   128 Then we have the glued field $x \bullet (c\times I)$ on $M \cup (Y\times I)$.
       
   129 Let $f: M \cup (Y\times I) \to M$ be a collaring homeomorphism.
       
   130 Then we say that $x$ is {\it extended isotopic} to $f(x \bullet (c\times I))$.
       
   131 More generally, we define extended isotopy to be the equivalence relation on fields
       
   132 on $M$ generated by isotopy plus all instance of the above construction
       
   133 (for all appropriate $Y$ and $x$).
       
   134 
       
   135 \nn{should also say something about pseudo-isotopy}
       
   136 
       
   137 
       
   138 \nn{remark that if top dimensional fields are not already linear
       
   139 then we will soon linearize them(?)}
       
   140 
       
   141 We now describe in more detail systems of fields coming from sub-cell-complexes labeled
       
   142 by $n$-category morphisms.
       
   143 
       
   144 Given an $n$-category $C$ with the right sort of duality
       
   145 (e.g. pivotal 2-category, 1-category with duals, star 1-category, disklike $n$-category),
       
   146 we can construct a system of fields as follows.
       
   147 Roughly speaking, $\cC(X)$ will the set of all embedded cell complexes in $X$
       
   148 with codimension $i$ cells labeled by $i$-morphisms of $C$.
       
   149 We'll spell this out for $n=1,2$ and then describe the general case.
       
   150 
       
   151 If $X$ has boundary, we require that the cell decompositions are in general
       
   152 position with respect to the boundary --- the boundary intersects each cell
       
   153 transversely, so cells meeting the boundary are mere half-cells.
       
   154 
       
   155 Put another way, the cell decompositions we consider are dual to standard cell
       
   156 decompositions of $X$.
       
   157 
       
   158 We will always assume that our $n$-categories have linear $n$-morphisms.
       
   159 
       
   160 For $n=1$, a field on a 0-manifold $P$ is a labeling of each point of $P$ with
       
   161 an object (0-morphism) of the 1-category $C$.
       
   162 A field on a 1-manifold $S$ consists of
       
   163 \begin{itemize}
       
   164     \item A cell decomposition of $S$ (equivalently, a finite collection
       
   165 of points in the interior of $S$);
       
   166     \item a labeling of each 1-cell (and each half 1-cell adjacent to $\bd S$)
       
   167 by an object (0-morphism) of $C$;
       
   168     \item a transverse orientation of each 0-cell, thought of as a choice of
       
   169 ``domain" and ``range" for the two adjacent 1-cells; and
       
   170     \item a labeling of each 0-cell by a morphism (1-morphism) of $C$, with
       
   171 domain and range determined by the transverse orientation and the labelings of the 1-cells.
       
   172 \end{itemize}
       
   173 
       
   174 If $C$ is an algebra (i.e. if $C$ has only one 0-morphism) we can ignore the labels
       
   175 of 1-cells, so a field on a 1-manifold $S$ is a finite collection of points in the
       
   176 interior of $S$, each transversely oriented and each labeled by an element (1-morphism)
       
   177 of the algebra.
       
   178 
       
   179 \medskip
       
   180 
       
   181 For $n=2$, fields are just the sort of pictures based on 2-categories (e.g.\ tensor categories)
       
   182 that are common in the literature.
       
   183 We describe these carefully here.
       
   184 
       
   185 A field on a 0-manifold $P$ is a labeling of each point of $P$ with
       
   186 an object of the 2-category $C$.
       
   187 A field of a 1-manifold is defined as in the $n=1$ case, using the 0- and 1-morphisms of $C$.
       
   188 A field on a 2-manifold $Y$ consists of
       
   189 \begin{itemize}
       
   190     \item A cell decomposition of $Y$ (equivalently, a graph embedded in $Y$ such
       
   191 that each component of the complement is homeomorphic to a disk);
       
   192     \item a labeling of each 2-cell (and each partial 2-cell adjacent to $\bd Y$)
       
   193 by a 0-morphism of $C$;
       
   194     \item a transverse orientation of each 1-cell, thought of as a choice of
       
   195 ``domain" and ``range" for the two adjacent 2-cells;
       
   196     \item a labeling of each 1-cell by a 1-morphism of $C$, with
       
   197 domain and range determined by the transverse orientation of the 1-cell
       
   198 and the labelings of the 2-cells;
       
   199     \item for each 0-cell, a homeomorphism of the boundary $R$ of a small neighborhood
       
   200 of the 0-cell to $S^1$ such that the intersections of the 1-cells with $R$ are not mapped
       
   201 to $\pm 1 \in S^1$; and
       
   202     \item a labeling of each 0-cell by a 2-morphism of $C$, with domain and range
       
   203 determined by the labelings of the 1-cells and the parameterizations of the previous
       
   204 bullet.
       
   205 \end{itemize}
       
   206 \nn{need to say this better; don't try to fit everything into the bulleted list}
       
   207 
       
   208 For general $n$, a field on a $k$-manifold $X^k$ consists of
       
   209 \begin{itemize}
       
   210     \item A cell decomposition of $X$;
       
   211     \item an explicit general position homeomorphism from the link of each $j$-cell
       
   212 to the boundary of the standard $(k-j)$-dimensional bihedron; and
       
   213     \item a labeling of each $j$-cell by a $(k-j)$-dimensional morphism of $C$, with
       
   214 domain and range determined by the labelings of the link of $j$-cell.
       
   215 \end{itemize}
       
   216 
       
   217 %\nn{next definition might need some work; I think linearity relations should
       
   218 %be treated differently (segregated) from other local relations, but I'm not sure
       
   219 %the next definition is the best way to do it}
       
   220 
       
   221 \medskip
       
   222 
       
   223 For top dimensional ($n$-dimensional) manifolds, we're actually interested
       
   224 in the linearized space of fields.
       
   225 By default, define $\lf(X) = \c[\cC(X)]$; that is, $\lf(X)$ is
       
   226 the vector space of finite
       
   227 linear combinations of fields on $X$.
       
   228 If $X$ has boundary, we of course fix a boundary condition: $\lf(X; a) = \c[\cC(X; a)]$.
       
   229 Thus the restriction (to boundary) maps are well defined because we never
       
   230 take linear combinations of fields with differing boundary conditions.
       
   231 
       
   232 In some cases we don't linearize the default way; instead we take the
       
   233 spaces $\lf(X; a)$ to be part of the data for the system of fields.
       
   234 In particular, for fields based on linear $n$-category pictures we linearize as follows.
       
   235 Define $\lf(X; a) = \c[\cC(X; a)]/K$, where $K$ is the space generated by
       
   236 obvious relations on 0-cell labels.
       
   237 More specifically, let $L$ be a cell decomposition of $X$
       
   238 and let $p$ be a 0-cell of $L$.
       
   239 Let $\alpha_c$ and $\alpha_d$ be two labelings of $L$ which are identical except that
       
   240 $\alpha_c$ labels $p$ by $c$ and $\alpha_d$ labels $p$ by $d$.
       
   241 Then the subspace $K$ is generated by things of the form
       
   242 $\lambda \alpha_c + \alpha_d - \alpha_{\lambda c + d}$, where we leave it to the reader
       
   243 to infer the meaning of $\alpha_{\lambda c + d}$.
       
   244 Note that we are still assuming that $n$-categories have linear spaces of $n$-morphisms.
       
   245 
       
   246 \nn{Maybe comment further: if there's a natural basis of morphisms, then no need;
       
   247 will do something similar below; in general, whenever a label lives in a linear
       
   248 space we do something like this; ? say something about tensor
       
   249 product of all the linear label spaces?  Yes:}
       
   250 
       
   251 For top dimensional ($n$-dimensional) manifolds, we linearize as follows.
       
   252 Define an ``almost-field" to be a field without labels on the 0-cells.
       
   253 (Recall that 0-cells are labeled by $n$-morphisms.)
       
   254 To each unlabeled 0-cell in an almost field there corresponds a (linear) $n$-morphism
       
   255 space determined by the labeling of the link of the 0-cell.
       
   256 (If the 0-cell were labeled, the label would live in this space.)
       
   257 We associate to each almost-labeling the tensor product of these spaces (one for each 0-cell).
       
   258 We now define $\lf(X; a)$ to be the direct sum over all almost labelings of the
       
   259 above tensor products.
       
   260 
       
   261 
       
   262 
       
   263 \subsection{Local relations}
       
   264 \label{sec:local-relations}
       
   265 
       
   266 
       
   267 A {\it local relation} is a collection subspaces $U(B; c) \sub \lf(B; c)$,
       
   268 for all $n$-manifolds $B$ which are
       
   269 homeomorphic to the standard $n$-ball and all $c \in \cC(\bd B)$, 
       
   270 satisfying the following properties.
       
   271 \begin{enumerate}
       
   272 \item functoriality: 
       
   273 $f(U(B; c)) = U(B', f(c))$ for all homeomorphisms $f: B \to B'$
       
   274 \item local relations imply extended isotopy: 
       
   275 if $x, y \in \cC(B; c)$ and $x$ is extended isotopic 
       
   276 to $y$, then $x-y \in U(B; c)$.
       
   277 \item ideal with respect to gluing:
       
   278 if $B = B' \cup B''$, $x\in U(B')$, and $c\in \cC(B'')$, then $x\bullet r \in U(B)$
       
   279 \end{enumerate}
       
   280 See \cite{kw:tqft} for details.
       
   281 
       
   282 
       
   283 For maps into spaces, $U(B; c)$ is generated by things of the form $a-b \in \lf(B; c)$,
       
   284 where $a$ and $b$ are maps (fields) which are homotopic rel boundary.
       
   285 
       
   286 For $n$-category pictures, $U(B; c)$ is equal to the kernel of the evaluation map
       
   287 $\lf(B; c) \to \mor(c', c'')$, where $(c', c'')$ is some (any) division of $c$ into
       
   288 domain and range.
       
   289 
       
   290 \nn{maybe examples of local relations before general def?}
       
   291 
       
   292 \subsection{Constructing a TQFT}
       
   293 
       
   294 In this subsection we briefly review the construction of a TQFT from a system of fields and local relations.
       
   295 (For more details, see \cite{kw:tqft}.)
       
   296 
       
   297 Let $W$ be an $n{+}1$-manifold.
       
   298 We can think of the path integral $Z(W)$ as assigning to each
       
   299 boundary condition $x\in \cC(\bd W)$ a complex number $Z(W)(x)$.
       
   300 In other words, $Z(W)$ lies in $\c^{\lf(\bd W)}$, the vector space of linear
       
   301 maps $\lf(\bd W)\to \c$.
       
   302 
       
   303 The locality of the TQFT implies that $Z(W)$ in fact lies in a subspace
       
   304 $Z(\bd W) \sub \c^{\lf(\bd W)}$ defined by local projections.
       
   305 The linear dual to this subspace, $A(\bd W) = Z(\bd W)^*$,
       
   306 can be thought of as finite linear combinations of fields modulo local relations.
       
   307 (In other words, $A(\bd W)$ is a sort of generalized skein module.)
       
   308 This is the motivation behind the definition of fields and local relations above.
       
   309 
       
   310 In more detail, let $X$ be an $n$-manifold.
       
   311 %To harmonize notation with the next section, 
       
   312 %let $\bc_0(X)$ be the vector space of finite linear combinations of fields on $X$, so
       
   313 %$\bc_0(X) = \lf(X)$.
       
   314 Define $U(X) \sub \lf(X)$ to be the space of local relations in $\lf(X)$;
       
   315 $U(X)$ is generated by things of the form $u\bullet r$, where
       
   316 $u\in U(B)$ for some embedded $n$-ball $B\sub X$ and $r\in \cC(X\setmin B)$.
       
   317 Define
       
   318 \[
       
   319 	A(X) \deq \lf(X) / U(X) .
       
   320 \]
       
   321 (The blob complex, defined in the next section, 
       
   322 is in some sense the derived version of $A(X)$.)
       
   323 If $X$ has boundary we can similarly define $A(X; c)$ for each 
       
   324 boundary condition $c\in\cC(\bd X)$.
       
   325 
       
   326 The above construction can be extended to higher codimensions, assigning
       
   327 a $k$-category $A(Y)$ to an $n{-}k$-manifold $Y$, for $0 \le k \le n$.
       
   328 These invariants fit together via actions and gluing formulas.
       
   329 We describe only the case $k=1$ below.
       
   330 (The construction of the $n{+}1$-dimensional part of the theory (the path integral) 
       
   331 requires that the starting data (fields and local relations) satisfy additional
       
   332 conditions.
       
   333 We do not assume these conditions here, so when we say ``TQFT" we mean a decapitated TQFT
       
   334 that lacks its $n{+}1$-dimensional part.)
       
   335 
       
   336 Let $Y$ be an $n{-}1$-manifold.
       
   337 Define a (linear) 1-category $A(Y)$ as follows.
       
   338 The objects of $A(Y)$ are $\cC(Y)$.
       
   339 The morphisms from $a$ to $b$ are $A(Y\times I; a, b)$, where $a$ and $b$ label the two boundary components of the cylinder $Y\times I$.
       
   340 Composition is given by gluing of cylinders.
       
   341 
       
   342 Let $X$ be an $n$-manifold with boundary and consider the collection of vector spaces
       
   343 $A(X; \cdot) \deq \{A(X; c)\}$ where $c$ ranges through $\cC(\bd X)$.
       
   344 This collection of vector spaces affords a representation of the category $A(\bd X)$, where
       
   345 the action is given by gluing a collar $\bd X\times I$ to $X$.
       
   346 
       
   347 Given a splitting $X = X_1 \cup_Y X_2$ of a closed $n$-manifold $X$ along an $n{-}1$-manifold $Y$,
       
   348 we have left and right actions of $A(Y)$ on $A(X_1; \cdot)$ and $A(X_2; \cdot)$.
       
   349 The gluing theorem for $n$-manifolds states that there is a natural isomorphism
       
   350 \[
       
   351 	A(X) \cong A(X_1; \cdot) \otimes_{A(Y)} A(X_2; \cdot) .
       
   352 \]
       
   353