format: text

text:
# Complex angular momentum in black hole physics and quasinormal modes

## I Introduction

Since the pioneering work of Watson Watson (1918) dealing with the propagation and diffraction of radio waves around the Earth, the complex angular momentum (CAM) method has been extensively used in several domains of scattering theory (see the monographs of Newton Newton (1982) and of Nussenzveig Nussenzveig (1992) and references therein for various applications in quantum mechanics, nuclear physics, electromagnetism, optics, acoustics and seismology). The success of the CAM method is due to its ability to provide a clear description of a given scattering problem by extracting the physical information (linked to the geometrical and diffractive aspects of the scattering process) which is hidden in partial-wave representations.

The CAM method was first used in gravitational physics by Chandrasekar and Ferrari Chandrasekhar and Ferrari (1992) in their study of nonradial oscillations of relativistic stars. They used the theory of Regge poles Newton (1982) to determine the flow of gravitational energy through the star. The general framework for the CAM description of Schwarzschild black hole scattering was developed by Andersson and Thylwe Andersson and Thylwe (1994), which Andersson Andersson (1994) then used to interpret the black hole glory. An important concept, which is naturally present in the CAM point of view, is that of a surface wave, which allows a description of the diffractive effects of scattering. Andersson established that the surface waves orbiting around the Schwarzschild black hole of mass $`M`$ propagate close to the unstable photon orbit at $`r=3M`$. Yet except for these articles, the CAM/surface-wave approach to resonant scattering in black hole physics has been neglected in favor of the quasi-normal modes (QNMs), in which the dynamical response to an external perturbation is explained in terms of resonant frequencies. For recent reviews of the QNM approach see Refs. Kokkotas and Schmidt, 1999 and Nollert, 1999 as well as chapter 4 of Ref. Frolov and Novikov, 1998. An introduction to black hole scattering can be found in Andersson and Jensen (gr-qc/0011025).

In this paper we will establish the connection between Andersson’s surface waves and the QNMs. More precisely, we shall prove here that the QNM complex frequencies of the Schwarzschild black hole are Breit-Wigner-type resonances generated by the surface waves. Moreover, because each surface wave is associated with a given Regge pole of the $`S`$-matrix, we can construct the spectrum of the QNM complex frequencies from the Regge trajectories, i.e., from the curves traced out in the CAM plane by the Regge poles as a function of the frequency.

As early as 1972, it was suggested by Goebel Goebel (1972) that the black hole normal modes could be interpreted in terms of gravitational waves in spiral orbits close to the unstable photon orbit at $`r=3M`$, which decay by radiating away energy. In the present paper, using the CAM approach, we establish this appealing and physically intuitive picture on a rigorous basis. To conclude, we also provide a framework for future developments.

## II From CAM to QNM

We first consider the scattering of a monochromatic scalar wave, with time dependence $`\mathrm{exp}(i\omega t)`$, by the Schwarzschild black hole of mass $`M`$. The corresponding scattering amplitude can be written (see, e.g. Frolov and Novikov (1998))

$$f(\omega ,\theta )=\frac{1}{2i\omega }\underset{\mathrm{}=0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}(2\mathrm{}+1)\left(S_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )1\right)P_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ is the ordinary angular momentum index, $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$ are the usual Legendre polynomials and $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ are the diagonal elements of the $`S`$-matrix. For a given angular momentum $`\mathrm{}`$, the coefficient $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ is obtained from the partial wave solution $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{}}`$ of the following problem:

(i) $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{}}`$ satisfies the Schrödinger-type equation

$$\frac{d^2\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{}}}{dr_{}^2}+\left[\omega ^2V(r)\right]\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{}}=0.$$
(2)
Eq. (2) is obtained from the scalar wave equation after separating variables and is called the Regge-Wheeler equation. Here $`r`$ is the standard radial Schwarzschild coordinate and $`r_{}=r+2M\mathrm{ln}\left(12M/r\right)+\mathrm{const}`$ is the Regge-Wheeler tortoise coordinate while the potential $`V(r)`$ is given by

$$V(r)=\left(\frac{r2M}{r}\right)\left[\frac{\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)}{r^2}+\frac{2M}{r^3}\right].$$
(3)
(ii) $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{}}`$, as any physical wave, must have a purely ingoing behavior at the event horizon at $`r=2M`$, i.e.

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{}}(r)\underset{r_{}\mathrm{}}{}e^{i\omega r_{}}.$$
(4)
(iii) At spatial infinity $`r+\mathrm{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{}}`$ has the asymptotic behavior

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{}}(r)\underset{r_{}+\mathrm{}}{}\frac{1}{T_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )}e^{i\omega r_{}+i\mathrm{}\pi /2}\frac{S_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )}{T_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )}e^{+i\omega r_{}i\mathrm{}\pi /2}.$$
(5)
For certain complex values of $`\omega `$, both $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`T_{\mathrm{}}`$ have a simple pole but $`S_{\mathrm{}}/T_{\mathrm{}}`$ is regular. These values are the frequencies of the QNMs, which we can define (see Eqs. (4) and (5)) as the solutions of the wave equation which represent a purely outgoing wave at infinity and a purely ingoing wave at the horizon. We now denote by $`\omega _\mathrm{}n=\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}i\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{}n/2`$ with $`\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}>0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{}n>0`$ the QNM frequencies, $`\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}`$ representing the frequency of the oscillation corresponding to the QNM and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{}n`$ representing its damping. In the immediate neighborhood of $`\omega _\mathrm{}n`$, $`S_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$ has the Breit-Wigner form, i.e.,

$$S_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{}p/2}{\omega \omega _\mathrm{}p^{(o)}+i\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{}p/2}.$$
(6)
Using the CAM method, we can provide a physical picture of the scattering process in term of diffraction by surface waves and a physical explanation of the mechanism of QNM excitation valid for high frequencies. By means of a Watson transformation Watson (1918) applied to the scattering amplitude (1), we can write Andersson and Thylwe (1994)

$$f(\omega ,\theta )=\frac{1}{2\omega }_𝒞\frac{\lambda \left(S_{\lambda 1/2}(\omega )1\right)}{\mathrm{cos}\pi \lambda }P_{\lambda 1/2}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )𝑑\lambda .$$
(7)
Here $`𝒞`$ is the integration contour in the complex $`\lambda `$-plane Watson (1918) illustrated in Fig. 1. The Watson transformation permits us to replace the ordinary angular momentum $`\mathrm{}`$ by the complex angular momentum (CAM) $`\lambda `$. Here $`S_{\lambda 1/2}(\omega )`$ is now an analytic extension of $`S_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$ into the complex $`\lambda `$-plane which is regular in the vicinity of the positive real $`\lambda `$ axis. Moreover, $`P_{\lambda 1/2}(z)`$ is the hypergeometric function $`F(\lambda +1/2,\lambda +1/2;1;(1z)/2)`$.

We can then deform the path of integration in Eq. (7), taking into account the possible singularities. The only singularities that are encountered are the poles of the S-matrix lying in the first quadrant of the CAM plane Andersson and Thylwe (1994). They are known as Regge poles Newton (1982); Nussenzveig (1992) and we shall denote them by $`\lambda _n(\omega )`$, the index $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ permitting us to distinguish between the different poles. By Cauchy’s Theorem we can then extract from Eq. (7) the contribution of a residue series over Regge poles given by

$$f_P(\omega ,\theta )=\frac{i\pi }{\omega }\underset{n=1}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\lambda _n(\omega )r_n(\omega )}{\mathrm{cos}\left(\pi \lambda _n(\omega )\right)}P_{\lambda _n(\omega )1/2}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )$$
(8)
where $`r_n(\omega )=\mathrm{residue}\left(S_{\lambda 1/2}(\omega )\right)_{\lambda =\lambda _n(\omega )}`$. It should be noted that $`f`$ differs from $`f_P`$ by a background integral Andersson and Thylwe (1994) which does not play any role in the resonance phenomenon. By using the asymptotic expansion

$$P_{\lambda 1/2}(\mathrm{cos}\theta )\frac{e^{i\lambda (\pi \theta )i\pi /4}+e^{i\lambda (\pi \theta )+i\pi /4}}{(2\pi \lambda \mathrm{sin}\theta )^{1/2}}$$

as $`|\lambda |\mathrm{}`$, valid for $`|\lambda |\mathrm{sin}\theta >1`$, as well as

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{cos}\pi \lambda }=2i\underset{m=0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}e^{i\pi (2m+1)(\lambda 1/2)}$$

which is true if $`\mathrm{Im}\lambda >0`$, we can write

$`f_P(\omega ,\theta )={\displaystyle \frac{2\pi }{i\omega }}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _n(\omega )r_n(\omega )}{\left[2\pi \lambda _n(\omega )\mathrm{sin}\theta \right]^{1/2}}}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}(e^{i\lambda _n(\omega )(\theta +2m\pi )im\pi +i\pi /4}`$
$`+e^{i\lambda _n(\omega )(2\pi \theta +2m\pi )im\pi i\pi /4}).`$ (9)
In Eq. (II), terms like $`\mathrm{exp}[i\lambda _n(\omega )(\theta )]`$ and $`\mathrm{exp}[i\lambda _n(\omega )(2\pi \theta )]`$ correspond to surface wave contributions. Because a given Regge pole $`\lambda _n(\omega )`$ lies in the first quadrant of the CAM plane, $`\mathrm{exp}[i\lambda _n(\omega )(\theta )]`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{exp}[i\lambda _n(\omega )(2\pi \theta )]`$) corresponds to a surface wave propagating counterclockwise (resp. clockwise) around the black hole and $`\mathrm{Re}\lambda _n(\omega )`$ represents its azimuthal propagation constant while $`\mathrm{Im}\lambda _n(\omega )`$ is its damping constant. The exponential decay $`\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{Im}\lambda _n(\omega )\theta ]`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{Im}\lambda _n(\omega )(2\pi \theta )]`$) is due to continual reradiation of energy. Moreover, in Eq. (II), the sum over $`m`$ takes into account the multiple circumnavigations of the surface waves around the black hole as well as the associated radiation damping. Finally, the presence of the factor $`\mathrm{exp}[im\pi ]`$ in Eq. (II) should be also noted: it accounts for the phase advance due to the two caustics on the scattering axis.

The resonant behavior of the black hole can now be understood in terms of surface waves. As $`\omega `$ varies, each Regge pole $`\lambda _n(\omega )`$ describes a Regge trajectory Newton (1982) in the CAM plane. When the quantity $`\mathrm{Re}\lambda _n(\omega )`$ coincides with a half-integer (a half-integer but not an integer because of the caustics), a resonance occurs. Indeed, it is produced by a constructive interference between the different components of the $`n`$-th surface wave, each component corresponding to a different number of circumnavigations. Resonance wave frequencies $`\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}`$ are therefore obtained from the Bohr-Sommerfeld type quantization condition

$$\mathrm{Re}\lambda _n\left(\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}\right)=\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.$$
(10)
By assuming that $`\omega `$ is in the neighborhood of $`\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}`$ and using $`\mathrm{Re}\lambda _n(\omega )\mathrm{Im}\lambda _n(\omega )`$ (which can be numerically verified, except for very low frequencies), we can expand $`\lambda _n(\omega )`$ in a Taylor series about $`\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}`$, and obtain

$`\lambda _n(\omega )\mathrm{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{Re}\lambda _n(\omega )}{d\omega }}|_{\omega =\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}}(\omega \omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)})`$
$`+i\mathrm{Im}\lambda _n(\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}).`$ (11)
Then, by replacing Eq. (II) in the term $`\mathrm{cos}\left(\pi \lambda _n(\omega )\right)`$ of Eq. (8), we show that $`f_P(\omega ,\theta )`$ presents a resonant behavior given by the Breit-Wigner formula (6) with

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{}n}{2}=\frac{\mathrm{Im}\lambda _n(\omega )}{d\mathrm{Re}\lambda _n(\omega )/d\omega }|_{\omega =\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}}.$$
(12)
Eqs. (10) and (12) are kind of semiclassical formulas which permit us to determine the location of the resonances from Regge trajectories.

We now discuss the numerical aspects of our work. In order to determine the location of the QNM frequencies from Eqs. (10) and (12), we need the Regge trajectories. For a given $`\omega `$ real and positive, we search for a complex value of $`\mathrm{}`$ such that the coefficient $`1/T_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$ is zero but $`S_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )/T_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$ is not. Such a value is then a pole of $`S_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$ and provides immediately the value of the associated pole for $`S_{\lambda 1/2}(\omega )`$. Leaver Leaver (1985) presents a method for finding the zeros of $`1/T_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$. Though he uses his method to find the QNM frequencies, his method is equally valid, mutatis mutandis, for finding the Regge poles $`\{\lambda _n=\mathrm{}_n+1/2\}`$ of $`S_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$. Leaver writes the solution to Eq. (2) as an infinite sum

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{}}(r)=(r2M)^\rho \left({\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r}}\right)^{2\rho }e^{\rho \left(\frac{r2M}{2M}\right)}`$
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}a_k\left({\displaystyle \frac{r2M}{r}}\right)^k`$ (13)
where $`\rho =i2M\omega `$. The recurrence relations between the $`a_k`$ are given by Leaver:

$$\alpha _ka_{k+1}+\beta _ka_k+\gamma _ka_{k1}=0,$$
(14)
where

$`\alpha _k`$ $`=`$ $`k^2+2k(\rho +1)+2\rho +1,`$ (15)
$`\beta _k`$ $`=`$ $`[2k^2+2k(4\rho +1)+8\rho ^2+4\rho +\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)+1],`$
$`\gamma _k`$ $`=`$ $`k^2+4k\rho +4\rho ^2.`$ (17)
Leaver noted that the coefficient $`1/T_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$ has a zero whenever the sum $`a_k`$ converges.

He translates this requirement into an infinite-fraction equation involving the coefficients $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$. Majumdar and Panchapakesan gave an alternative condition using the Hill determinant method Majumdar and Panchapakesan (1989): a set of parameters $`\{l,\omega \}`$ that give a convergent sum solve

$$D=\left|\begin{array}{ccccc}\beta _0& \alpha _0& & & \mathrm{}\\ \gamma _1& \beta _1& \alpha _1& & \mathrm{}\\ & \gamma _2& \beta _2& \alpha _2& \mathrm{}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\end{array}\right|=0.$$
(18)
This technique has the advantage of being more numerically tractable than Leaver’s, but it might be only valid for the Regge poles that lie close to the real axis of the CAM plane. Both Leaver’s original method and the Hill determinant method have been applied to the search for Regge poles in our study. We found excellent agreement between Leaver’s method and the Hill-determinant method for small values of Regge mode index $`n`$. We also agreed with Andersson’s values given in Ref. Andersson (1994). Fig. 2 exhibits the Regge trajectories numerically calculated while Table 1 presents a sample of QNM frequencies calculated from the semiclassical formulas (10) and (12). A comparison between the “exact” and the semiclassical spectra shows a good agreement, except for very low frequencies. Furthermore, the semiclassical theory permits us to classify the resonances in distinct families, each family being associated with one Regge pole and therefore to understand the meaning of the indices $`n`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ introduced to denote the QNM frequencies $`\omega _\mathrm{}n`$.

At large $`\omega `$, the position of the Regge poles very closely adheres to the asymptotic form:

$$\lambda _n(\omega )3\sqrt{3}M\omega +i\left(n1/2\right)n=1,2,3,\mathrm{}$$
(19)
Eq. (19) leads us to conclude that the $`n`$-th surface wave is localized near the unstable circular photon orbit at $`R=3M`$ by the following consistency argument: by reinstating dependence on Schwarzschild time $`t`$ into Eq. (II), we can see that the surface waves circle the black hole in time $`T=2\pi \mathrm{Re}\lambda _n(\omega )/\omega 2\pi 3\sqrt{3}M`$ for large $`\omega `$. Furthermore, a photon on the circular orbit with constant radius $`R`$ takes the time $`T^{}=2\pi R/(12M/R)^{1/2}`$ to circle the black hole (this result can be found by integrating the Schwarzschild metric $`ds^2=0`$). By equating $`T`$ and $`T^{}`$, we obtain $`R=3M`$. Moreover, by using Eqs. (10), (12) and (19), we recover the well-known high-frequency behaviors (see Refs. Kokkotas and Schmidt, 1999 and Frolov and Novikov, 1998 and references therein)

$$\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}\frac{\mathrm{}+1/2}{3\sqrt{3}M}\mathrm{and}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{}n}{2}\frac{n1/2}{3\sqrt{3}M}.$$
(20)
These asymptotic behaviors have been obtained under the hypothesis $`\mathrm{Re}\lambda _n(\omega )\mathrm{Im}\lambda _n(\omega )`$ and are therefore valid for $`\mathrm{}n`$.

Our approach also applies to electromagnetic and gravitational scattering. In Fig. 3 and Table 2 we present some results for the latter case. A comparison between the exact and the semiclassical spectra shows a rather good agreement.

Finally, it seems to us necessary to emphasize that the CAM method we have developed here is based on two assumptions about the Regge poles $`\lambda _n(\omega )`$: They must formally satisfy $`|\lambda _n(\omega )|+\mathrm{}`$ as well as $`\mathrm{Re}\lambda _n(\omega )\mathrm{Im}\lambda _n(\omega )`$ as $`\omega \mathrm{}`$. As a consequence, our method is a “high-frequency” approach which permits us to recover and to physically interpret the spectrum of the QNM frequencies lying in the region $`2M\mathrm{Re}\omega >0.2`$ of the complex $`\omega `$-plane. It should be noted that the highly damped QNM (for gravitational perturbations) as well as their associated frequencies which are connected with the area spectrum of the black hole (see Hod (1998) for the first paper on this subject and Baez (2003) and references therein for recent works in this domain) can neither be understood in the framework of our approach nor interpreted in terms of surface waves orbiting around the black hole near the unstable circular orbit at $`r=3M`$: Indeed, when the index $`n`$ is very large, the frequencies for these highly damped QNM are asymptotically given by Leaver (1985); Nollert (1993); Motl (gr-qc/0212096); Motl and Neitzke (hep-th/0301173)

$$\omega _\mathrm{}n^{(o)}\frac{\mathrm{ln}3}{8\pi M}\mathrm{and}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{}n}{2}\frac{n+1/2}{4M}$$
(21)
and they therefore lie in the region $`2M\mathrm{Re}\omega 0.2`$ and $`2M|\mathrm{Im}\omega |1`$ of the complex $`\omega `$-plane.

## III Conclusion

To conclude, we would like first to comment on some aspects of our work and then to consider some possible extensions of the CAM approach in gravitational physics:

\- We have established the connection between Andersson’s surface waves and the QNM complex frequencies of the Schwarzschild black hole in the particular context of wave scattering. This connection is more general and could be also obtained directly from the Regge-Wheeler equation, by extending the CAM method developed by Sommerfeld Sommerfeld (1949) as an alternative to the Watson approach Watson (1918).

\- Because the gravitational radiation created in many black hole processes is dominated at intermediate timescales by QNMs, it can be always interpreted in terms of surface waves. Whatever the perturbation which modifies the geometry of a Schwarzschild black hole, it leads to the excitation of surface waves localized close to the unstable photon orbit. During its repeated circumnavigations, a given surface wave decays by radiating away its energy, leading to the damped ringing of the geometry. This mechanism is analogous to the damped ringing of the Earth which occurs during several days after a large earthquake and which can be explained in term of the Rayleigh surface wave.

\- The CAM method could be naturally introduced in many other areas of the physics of relativistic stars and black holes. Such a program could include in particular the following topics:

(i) The interpretation of the QNM of neutron stars and of the Kerr black hole in terms of surface waves. For the Kerr black hole, such an approach could easily explain the splitting of the quasinormal frequencies due to rotation.

(ii) The analysis of Hawking radiation as well as of Kerr black hole superradiance.

(iii) The study of black holes immersed in asymptotically anti-de Sitter space-times. The CAM approach could provide new tests of the AdS/CFT correspondence recently proposed in the context of superstring theory Maldacena (1998). With this aim in view, the (2+1)-dimensional BTZ black hole Banados et al. (1992) seems to us very interesting because, in that particular space-time, the wave equation can be solved exactly (see, e.g., Cardoso and Lemos (2001)) and therefore Regge poles can be analytically obtained.

(iv) The study of artificial black holes Novello et al. (2002). Here, it would be possible to benefit from the formidable CAM machinery developed in electromagnetism, optics and acoustics.

###### Acknowledgements.

It is a pleasure to acknowledge helpful discussions with Nils Andersson.


text:
# Blanchfield and Seifert algebra in high-dimensional knot theory

## 1. Blanchfield and Seifert modules

Let $`A`$ be a ring, with Laurent polynomial extension $`A[z,z^1]`$.

###### Definition 1.1.

A f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-module is induced if it is of the form

$$P[z,z^1]=A[z,z^1]_AP$$

for a f.g. projective $`A`$-module $`P`$. ∎

We shall make frequent use of the identity

$$\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(P[z,z^1],Q[z,z^1])=\mathrm{Hom}_A(P,Q)[z,z^1]$$

with $`P,Q`$ f.g. projective $`A`$-modules.

###### Definition 1.2.

(i) A Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module $`B`$ is an $`A[z,z^1]`$-module such that

* $`1z:BB`$ is an automorphism,
* there exists an induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-module resolution

$$0P_1[z,z^1]\text{}P_0[z,z^1]B0.$$

(ii) The Blanchfield category $`𝔹(A[z,z^1])`$ has objects Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules and $`A[z,z^1]`$-module morphisms.

Write the augmentation as

$$ϵ:A[z,z^1]A;z1.$$

###### Proposition 1.3.

Let $`C`$ be a 1-dimensional induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain complex with

$$d=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}d_jz^j:C_1=P_1[z,z^1]C_0=P_0[z,z^1].$$

The homology $`A[z,z^1]`$-module

$$B=H_0(C)=\mathrm{coker}(d)$$

is a Blanchfield module if and only if the $`A`$-module morphism

$$ϵ(d)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}d_j:P_1P_0$$

is an isomorphism.

###### Proof.

If $`B`$ is a Blanchfield module the inverse isomorphism $`(1z)^1:BB`$ is resolved by an $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain map $`f:CC`$

so that $`f:CC`$ is chain homotopy inverse to $`1z:CC`$. A chain homotopy

$$g:f(1z)1:CC$$

is defined by an $`A[z,z^1]`$-module morphism

$$g=\underset{j=r}{\overset{s}{}}z^jg_j:C_0=P_0[z,z^1]C_1=P_1[z,z^1]$$

such that

$$\begin{array}{c}1f_0(1z)=dg:C_0=P_0[z,z^1]C_0=P_0[z,z^1],\hfill \\ 1f_1(1z)=gd:C_1=P_1[z,z^1]C_1=P_1[z,z^1],\hfill \end{array}$$

and

$$ϵ(g)=\underset{j=r}{\overset{s}{}}g_j:P_0P_1$$

is an $`A`$-module isomorphism inverse to $`ϵ(d)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}d_j:P_1P_0`$.

Conversely, suppose that $`ϵ(d):P_1P_0`$ is an isomorphism, with inverse

$$ϵ(d)^1=h:P_0P_1,$$

so that

$$\begin{array}{c}1dh=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}(1z^j)d_jh:C_0=P_0[z,z^1]C_0=P_0[z,z^1],\hfill \\ 1hd=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}(1z^j)hd_j:C_1=P_1[z,z^1]C_1=P_1[z,z^1].\hfill \end{array}$$

The $`A[z,z^1]`$-module morphisms

$$\begin{array}{c}f_0=(1dh)(1z)^1:C_0=P_0[z,z^1]C_0=P_0[z,z^1],\hfill \\ f_1=(1hd)(1z)^1:C_1=P_1[z,z^1]C_1=P_1[z,z^1].\hfill \end{array}$$

are the components of a chain equivalence $`f:CC`$ chain homotopy inverse to $`1z:CC`$, with a chain homotopy

$$h:f(1z)1:CC.$$

It remains to verify that $`d:C_1C_0`$ is injective. If $`x\mathrm{ker}(d:C_1C_0)`$ then

$$x=(1hd)(x)=(1z)f_1(x)C_1$$

with $`f_1(x)\mathrm{ker}(d:C_1C_0)`$ by the injectivity of $`1z:C_0C_0`$. It follows that for any integer $`j1`$

$$x=(1z)^j(f_1)^j(x)C_1,$$

and

$$x\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1z)^j(C_1)=\{0\}C_1.$$

Proposition 1.3 is the special case $`n=0`$ of :

###### Proposition 1.4.

The following conditions on an $`(n+1)`$-dimensional induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain complex $`C`$ are equivalent :

* there exists a homology equivalence $`CB`$ to an $`n`$-dimensional chain complex in the Blanchfield category $`𝔹(A[z,z^1])`$,
* $`H_{}(A_{A[z,z^1]}C)=0`$.

###### Proof.

As for Proposition 3.1.2 of Ranicki . ∎

###### Example 1.5.

Let $`M`$ be a finite $`CW`$ complex with a homology equivalence $`p:MS^1`$, such as a knot complement. Let $`\overline{M}=p^{}`$ be the pullback infinite cyclic cover of $`M`$, and let $`C=C(\overline{p}:\overline{M})_{+1}`$ be the relative cellular $`[z,z^1]`$-module chain complex of the induced $``$-equivariant cellular map $`\overline{p}:\overline{M}`$, with $`H_{}(C)=\stackrel{~}{H}_{}(\overline{M})`$ the reduced homology of $`\overline{M}`$. Then $`H_{}(_{[z,z^1]}C)=H_{+1}(\overline{p})=0`$, and $`C`$ is homology equivalent to a finite chain complex in the Blanchfield category $`𝔹([z,z^1])`$.

###### Definition 1.6.

(i) A Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ is a f.g. projective $`A`$-module $`P`$ together with an endomorphism $`e:PP`$.
(ii) A morphism of Seifert $`A`$-modules $`g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ is an $`A`$-module morphism such that

$$e^{}g=ge:PP^{}$$

(iii) The Seifert category $`𝕊(A)`$ has objects Seifert $`A`$-modules and morphisms as in (ii). ∎

Seifert modules determine Blanchfield modules by :

###### Definition 1.7.

(i) The covering of a Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ is the Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module

$$B(P,e)=\mathrm{coker}(1e+ze:P[z,z^1]P[z,z^1])$$

with the resolution

$$C(P,e):C_1=P[z,z^1]\text{}C_0=P[z,z^1].$$

(ii) The covering of a Seifert $`A`$-module morphism $`g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ is the Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module morphism

$$B(g):B(P,e)B(P^{},e^{});xg(x)$$

resolved by the chain map

###### Theorem 1.8.

The covering construction defines a functor of additive categories

$$B:𝕊(A)𝔹(A[z,z^1]);(P,e)B(P,e)$$

such that

* Every Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module $`B`$ is isomorphic to the covering $`B(P,e)`$ of a Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$.
* The coverings of $`e,1e:(P,e)(P,e)`$ are automorphisms

$$B(e)=(1z)^1,B(1e)=(1z^1)^1:B(P,e)B(P,e),$$

with inverses

$$B(e)^1=1z,B(1e)^1=1z^1:B(P,e)B(P,e).$$
* Every morphism of Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules $`f:B(P,e)B(P^{},e^{})`$ is of the type

$$f=B(g)t^k$$

for some morphism of Seifert $`A`$-modules $`g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ and $`k0`$, with $`t`$ the automorphism

$$t=B(e(1e))=((1z)(1z^1))^1:B(P,e)B(P,e).$$
* Two morphisms $`g_1,g_2:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ are such that

$$B(g_1)t^{k_1}=B(g_2)t^{k_2}:B(P,e)B(P^{},e^{})$$

for some $`k_1,k_20`$ if and only if

$$(g_1(e(1e))^{k_2}g_2(e(1e))^{k_1})(e(1e))^{\mathrm{}}=0:PP^{}$$

for some $`\mathrm{}0`$.

###### Proof.

(i) By Proposition 1.3 it may be assumed that $`B=H_0(C)`$ with

$$d=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}d_jz^j:C_1=P_1[z,z^1]C_0=P_0[z,z^1]$$

for f.g. projective $`A`$-modules $`P_0,P_1`$, such that the augmentation $`A`$-module morphism

$$ϵ(d)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}d_j:P_1P_0$$

is an $`A`$-module isomorphism.

Let $`s`$ be another indeterminate over $`A`$, and use the isomorphism of rings

$$A[s,s^1,(1s)^1]A[z,z^1,(1z)^1];s(1z)^1$$

to identify

$$A[s,s^1,(1s)^1]=A[z,z^1,(1z)^1],$$

with

$$s=(1z)^1,z=s^1(s1).$$

The $`A[z,z^1,(1z)^1]`$-module morphism induced by $`d:C_1C_0`$

$$d=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}d_jz^j:P_1[z,z^1,(1z)^1]P_0[z,z^1,(1z)^1]$$

is expressed in terms of $`s`$ as

$$d=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}(s^1(s1))^jd_j:P_1[s,s^1,(1s)^1]P_0[s,s^1,(1s)^1].$$

The $`A[s]`$-module morphism

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}d_jϵ(d)^1s^{kj}(s1)^j:P_0[s]P_0[s]$$

induces the $`A[s,s^1,(1s)^1]`$-module morphism

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=s^kdϵ(d)^1:P_0[s,s^1,(1s)^1]P_0[s,s^1,(1s)^1].$$

Now $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a degree $`k`$ polynomial with coefficients $`\mathrm{\Delta }_j\mathrm{Hom}_A(P_0,P_0)`$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_js^j:P_0[s]P_0[s]$$

such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_k=1`$. The Seifert $`A`$-module

$$(P,e)=(P_0P_0\mathrm{}P_0(k\mathrm{terms}),\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{\Delta }_0\\ 1& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{\Delta }_1\\ 0& 1& 0& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{\Delta }_2\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{\Delta }_{k1}\end{array}\right))$$

is such that there is defined an exact sequence of $`A[s]`$-modules

$$0P_0[s]\text{}P_0[s]P0$$

with $`s`$ acting on $`P`$ by $`e`$ and

$$P_0[s]P:\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}s^jx_j(x_0,x_1,\mathrm{},x_{k1}).$$

The covering of $`(P,e)`$ is the induced $`A[s,s^1,(1s)^1]`$-module

$$B(P,e)=A[s,s^1,(1s)^1]_{A[s]}P$$

and the isomorphism of exact sequences of $`A[s,s^1,(1s)^1]`$-modules

includes an isomorphism

$$BB(P,e).$$

(ii) The $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain maps

$$C(e),1z:C(P,e)C(P,e)$$

are inverse chain homotopy equivalences, with

$$(1z)C(e)=C(e)(1z):C(P,e)C(P,e)$$

and a chain homotopy

$$1:(1z)C(e)\mathrm{id}:C(P,e)C(P,e).$$

Likewise, the $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain maps

$$C(1e),z^1(1z)^1:C(P,e)C(P,e)$$

are inverse chain homotopy equivalences, with

$$z^1(1z)C(1e)=C(1e)(z^1(1z)):C(P,e)C(P,e)$$

and a chain homotopy

$$z^1:z^1(1z)C(1e)\mathrm{id}:C(P,e)C(P,e).$$

(iii) With $`s=(1z)^1`$ as in (i) define

$$t=s(1s)=z(1z)^2,$$

and identify

$$A[s,s^1,(1s)^1]=A[s,t^1]=A[z,z^1,(1z)^1],$$

Suppose given Seifert $`A`$-modules $`(P,e)`$, $`(P^{},e^{})`$ and a morphism of Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules $`f:B(P,e)B(P^{},e^{})`$. Resolve $`f`$ by an $`A[s,t^1]`$-module chain map

with

$$\begin{array}{c}f_0=t^k\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}s^jf_{0,j}:P[s,t^1]P^{}[s,t^1],\hfill \\ f_1=t^k\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}s^jf_{1,j}:P[s,t^1]P^{}[s,t^1]\hfill \end{array}$$

for some $`A`$-module morphisms $`f_{0,j},f_{1,j}:PP^{}`$. The morphism of Seifert $`A`$-modules

$$g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})$$

with

$$g=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}(e^{})^jf_{0,j}:PP^{}$$

is such that

$$f=B(g)t^k:B(P,e)B(P^{},e^{})$$

with

$$t=B(e(1e)):B(P,e)B(P,e).$$

(Example: $`z=(1e)^2t^1:B(P,e)B(P,e)`$.)
(iv) It suffices to show that a morphism of Seifert $`A`$-modules $`g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ is such that

$$B(g)=0:B(P,e)B(P^{},e^{})$$

if and only if for some $`k0`$

$$g(e(1e))^k=0:PP.$$

Now $`B(g)=0`$ if and only if there exists an $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain homotopy

$$h:g0:C(P,e)C(P^{},e^{})$$

with

Thus

$$h(1e+ze)=g:P[z,z^1]P^{}[z,z^1],$$

and writing

$$h=\underset{j=a}{\overset{b}{}}z^jh_j:P[z,z^1]P^{}[z,z^1]$$

we have

$$h_{j1}e+h_j(1e)=\{\begin{array}{cc}g\hfill & \text{if }j=0\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{if }j0\hfill \end{array}.$$

For any $`k1`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}g(e(1e))^k\hfill & =h_1e^{k+1}(1e)^k+h_0e^k(1e)^{k+1}\hfill \\ & =h_2e^{k+2}(1e)^{k1}h_1e^{k1}(1e)^{k+2}\hfill \\ & =h_3e^{k+3}(1e)^{k2}+h_2e^{k2}(1e)^{k+3}\hfill \\ & =\mathrm{}\hfill \\ & =(1)^k(h_{k1}e^{2k+1}+h_k(1e)^{2k+1}).\hfill \end{array}$$

Now $`h_{k1}=0`$ for $`ka`$, and $`h_k=0`$ for $`kb+1`$, so that for $`k=\mathrm{max}(a,b+1)`$ we have

$$g(e(1e))^k=0:PP^{}.$$

###### Example 1.9.

Let $`p:MS^1`$ be a map from a finite $`CW`$ complex which is transverse regular at a point $`1S^1`$ in the sense that $`N=p^1(1)M`$ is a subcomplex, and cutting $`M`$ along $`N`$ gives a fundamental domain $`(M_N;N,zN)`$ for the pullback infinite cyclic cover of $`M`$

$$\overline{M}=p^{}=\underset{j=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}z^jM_N$$

with $`z:\overline{M}\overline{M}`$ a generating covering translation. The map $`p`$ can be cut also, to obtain a map

$$p_N:(M_N;N,zN)([0,1];\{0\},\{1\})$$

such that

$$p=[p_N]:M=M_N/(N=zN)S^1=[0,1]/(0=1).$$

$`\overline{M}`$     $`z^2M_N`$     $`z^1M_N`$     $`M_N`$     $`zM_N`$     $`z^2M_N`$     $`z^1N`$     $`N`$     $`zN`$     $`z^2N`$
The two inclusions

$$f:NM_N,g:N=zNM_N$$

induce chain maps of finite f.g. free $``$-module chain complexes

$$f,g:C=C(M\{0\})_{+1}D=C(p_N:M_N[0,1])_{+1}$$

such that

$$C(fzg:C[z,z^1]D[z,z^1])=C(\overline{p}:\overline{M})_{+1}.$$

In particular, if $`M`$ is a knot complement then $`p:MS^1`$ can be chosen to be a homology equivalence, and $`NM`$ is a Seifert surface for the knot, as in the Introduction and Example 1.5. In this case

$$H_{}(fg)=H_{+1}(\overline{p}:\overline{M})=0$$

and $`fg:CD`$ is a chain equivalence. The $``$-module chain map

$$e=(fg)^1f:CC$$

defines a finite chain complex $`(C,e)`$ in the Seifert module category $`𝕊()`$ with covering $`B(C,e)`$ a finite chain complex in the Blanchfield module category $`𝔹([z,z^1])`$ such that

$$B(C,e)C(\overline{p}:\overline{M})_{+1}.$$

## 2. Seifert modules with zero Blanchfield module

This Chapter is devoted to the kernel of the covering functor from Seifert modules to Blanchfield modules

$$B:𝕊(A)𝔹(A[z,z^1]);(P,e)B(P,e).$$

We study the Seifert modules $`(P,e)`$ with $`B(P,e)=0`$, and more generally the morphisms of Seifert modules $`g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ with $`B(g):B(P,e)B(P^{},e^{})`$ an isomorphism.

###### Definition 2.1.

(i) A Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ is nilpotent if

$$e^k=0:PP$$

for some $`k0`$.
(ii) A Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ is unipotent if $`(P,1e)`$ is nilpotent, that is

$$(1e)^k=0:PP$$

for some $`k0`$.
(iii) A Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ is a projection if

$$e(1e)=0:PP.$$

(iv) A Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ is a near-projection if $`e(1e):PP`$ is nilpotent, that is if for some $`k0`$

$$(e(1e))^k=0:PP.$$

The near-projection terminology was introduced in Lück and Ranicki .

###### Proposition 2.2.

(Bass, Heller and Swan )
(i) A linear morphism of induced f.g. projective $`A[z]`$-modules

$$f_0+zf_1:P[z]Q[z]$$

is an isomorphism if and only if $`f_0+f_1:PQ`$ is an isomorphism and

$$e=(f_0+f_1)^1f_1:PP$$

is nilpotent.
(ii) A linear morphism of induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules

$$f_0+zf_1:P[z,z^1]Q[z,z^1]$$

is an isomorphism if and only if $`f_0+f_1:PQ`$ is an isomorphism and

$$e=(f_0+f_1)^1f_1:PP$$

is a near-projection. ∎

###### Proposition 2.3.

The following conditions on a Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ are equivalent :

* $`B(P,e)=0`$.
* $`(P,e)`$ is a near-projection.
* There is a direct sum decomposition

$$(P,e)=(P^+,e^+)(P^{},e^{})$$

with $`(P^+,e^+)`$ unipotent and $`(P^{},e^{})`$ nilpotent.

###### Proof.

(i) $``$ (ii) This is a special case of Proposition 2.2, with

$$f=1e+ze:P[z,z^1]P[z,z^1].$$

(iii) $``$ (ii) Immediate from

$$e(1e)=e^+(1e^+)e^{}(1e^{}):P=P^+P^{}P=P^+P^{}.$$

(ii) $``$ (iii) By the binomial theorem, for any $`k1`$ and an indeterminate $`x`$ over $``$

$$x^k+(1x)^k=1+x(1x)\pi _k(x)[x]$$

with

$$\pi _k(x)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k1}{}}(()^j\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k1}{j}\right)1)x^{j1}[x].$$

Thus for any $`A`$-module endomorphism $`e:PP`$

$$e^k+(1e)^k=1+e(1e)\pi _k(e):PP.$$

If $`(P,e)`$ is a near-projection with $`(e(1e))^k=0`$ then $`e(1e)\pi _k(e):PP`$ is nilpotent, and $`e^k+(1e)^k:PP`$ is an automorphism. The endomorphism

$$p=(e^k+(1e)^k)^1e^k:PP$$

is a projection, $`p^2=p`$, and the images

$$P^+=\mathrm{im}(p:PP),P^{}=\mathrm{im}(1p:PP)$$

are such that

$$(P,e)=(P^+,e^+)(P^{},e^{})$$

with

$$(1e^+)^k=0:P^+P^+,(e^{})^k=0:P^{}P^{}.$$

###### Proposition 2.4.

Given a morphism $`g:(P_1,e_1)(P_0,e_0)`$ of Seifert $`A`$-modules let $`C`$ be the 1-dimensional f.g. projective $`A`$-module chain complex

$$d_C=g:C_1=P_1C_0=P_0$$

and let $`e:CC`$ be the $`A`$-module chain map defined by

$$\begin{array}{c}e_0:C_0=P_0C_0=P_0,\hfill \\ e_1:C_1=P_1C_1=P_1.\hfill \end{array}$$

The following conditions on $`g`$ are equivalent :

* $`B(g):B(P_1,e_1)B(P_0,e_0)`$ is an isomorphism of Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules.
* There exists a morphism $`h:(P_0,e_0)(P_1,e_1)`$ of Seifert $`A`$-modules such that

$$\begin{array}{c}gh=(e_0(1e_0))^k:P_0P_0,\hfill \\ hg=(e_1(1e_1))^k:P_1P_1\hfill \end{array}$$

for some $`k0`$, defining a chain homotopy

$$h:(e(1e))^k0:CC.$$
* There exist 1-dimensional f.g. projective $`A`$-module chain complexes $`C^+,C^{}`$ with chain maps

$$e^+:C^+C^+,e^{}:C^{}C^{}$$

such that $`1e^+:C^+C^+`$, $`e^{}:C^{}C^{}`$ are chain homotopy nilpotent, and with a chain equivalence

$$i=\left(\begin{array}{c}i^+\\ i^{}\end{array}\right):CC^+C^{}$$

such that

$$e^+i^+=i^+e:CC^+,e^{}i^{}=i^{}e:CC^{}.$$

###### Proof.

(i) $``$ (ii) By Theorem 1.8 (iii) there exist a morphism $`i:(P_0,e_0)(P_1,e_1)`$ and $`j0`$ such that

$$B(g)^1=B(i)t^j:B(P_0,e_0)B(P_1,e_1).$$

It follows that

$$\begin{array}{c}B(gi)=B(g)B(i)=t^j=B((e_0(1e_0))^j):B(P_0,e_0)B(P_0,e_0),\hfill \\ B(ig)=B(i)B(g)=t^j=B((e_1(1e_1))^j):B(P_1,e_1)B(P_1,e_1)\hfill \end{array}$$

and by Theorem 1.8 (iv) there exist $`\mathrm{}_0,\mathrm{}_10`$ such that

$$\begin{array}{c}(gi(e_0(1e_0))^j)(e_0(1e_0))^\mathrm{}_0=0:(P,e_0)(P,e_0),\hfill \\ (ig(e_1(1e_1))^j)(e_1(1e_1))^\mathrm{}_1=0:(P_1,e_1)(P_1,e_1).\hfill \end{array}$$

Defining

$$\begin{array}{c}h=i(e_0(1e_0))^{\mathrm{}_0+\mathrm{}_1}:(P_0,e_0)(P_1,e_1),\hfill \\ k=j+\mathrm{}_0+\mathrm{}_1\hfill \end{array}$$

we have

$$\begin{array}{c}gh=gi(e_0(1e_0))^{\mathrm{}_0+\mathrm{}_1}=(e_0(1e_0))^k:(P_0,e_0)(P_0,e_0),\hfill \\ hg=ig(e_1(1e_1))^{\mathrm{}_0+\mathrm{}_1}=(e_1(1e_1))^k:(P_1,e_1)(P_1,e_1).\hfill \end{array}$$

(ii) $``$ (i) The inverse of $`B(g)`$ is given by

$$B(g)^1=B(h)t^k:B(P_0,e_0)B(P_1,e_1).$$

(iii) $``$ (i) It follows from the chain homotopy nilpotence of $`1e^+`$ and $`e^{}`$ that the $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain maps

$$\begin{array}{c}1e^++ze^+:C^+[z,z^1]C^+[z,z^1],\hfill \\ 1e^{}+ze^{}:C^{}[z,z^1]C^{}[z,z^1]\hfill \end{array}$$

are chain equivalences. It now follows from the commutative diagram

that the $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain map

$$1e+ze:C[z,z^1]C[z,z^1]$$

is also a chain equivalence. Thus

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{coker}(B(g):B(P_1,e_1)B(P_0,e_0))=H_0(1e+ze)=0,\hfill \\ \mathrm{ker}(B(g):B(P_1,e_1)B(P_0,e_0))=H_1(1e+ze)=0\hfill \end{array}$$

and $`B(g):B(P_1,e_1)B(P_0,e_0)`$ is an isomorphism.
(ii) $``$ (iii) As in the proof of Proposition 2.3 write

$$x^k+(1x)^k=1+x(1x)\pi _k(x)[x].$$

The $`A`$-module chain map

$$e^k+(1e)^k:CC$$

is a chain equivalence, with the $`A`$-module morphisms

$$\begin{array}{c}u_0=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}(e_0(1e_0)\pi _k(e_0))^j:P_0P_0,\hfill \\ u_1=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}(e_1(1e_1)\pi _k(e_1))^j:P_1P_1\hfill \end{array}$$

defining a chain homotopy inverse $`u:CC`$, and the $`A`$-module morphism

$$v=(\pi _k(e_1))^kh:P_0P_1$$

defining a chain homotopy

$$v:u(e^k+(1e)^k)1:CC.$$

The $`A`$-module chain map

$$p=ue^k:CC$$

is a chain homotopy projection, with a chain homotopy

$$v:u(1e)^k1p:CC,$$

and the $`A`$-module morphism

$$q=(u_1)^2h+pv=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}(e_1(1e_1)\pi _k(e_1))^ju_1h:P_0P_1$$

defining a chain homotopy

$$q:p(1p)0:CC.$$

The $`A`$-module morphisms

$$\begin{array}{c}p^+=\left(\begin{array}{cc}p_0& g\\ q& 1p_1\end{array}\right):P_0P_1P_0P_1,\hfill \\ p^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1p_0& g\\ q& p_1\end{array}\right):P_0P_1P_0P_1\hfill \end{array}$$

are projections such that

$$p^++p^{}=1:P_0P_1P_0P_1.$$

(This is a special case of the instant finiteness obstruction of Ranicki  and Lück and Ranicki ). Define 1-dimensional f.g. projective $`A`$-module chain complexes $`C^+,C^{}`$ by

$$\begin{array}{c}d_{C^+}=p^+|:C_1^+=P_1C_0^+=\mathrm{im}(p^+),\hfill \\ d_C^{}=p^{}|:C_1^{}=P_1C_0^{}=\mathrm{im}(p^{}).\hfill \end{array}$$

The $`A`$-module chain maps

$$e^+:C^+C^+,e^{}:C^{}C^{},i^+:CC^+,i^{}:CC^{}$$

defined by

$$\begin{array}{c}e_0^+=(e_0e_1)|:C_0^+=\mathrm{im}(p^+)C_0^+=\mathrm{im}(p^+),\hfill \\ e_1^+=e_1:C_1^+=P_1C_1^+=P_1,\hfill \\ e_0^{}=(e_0e_1)|:C_0^{}=\mathrm{im}(p^{})C_0^{}=\mathrm{im}(p^{}),\hfill \\ e_1^{}=e_1:C_1^{}=P_1C_1^{}=P_1,\hfill \\ i_0^+=p^+|:C_0=P_0C_0^+=\mathrm{im}(p^+),\hfill \\ i_1^+=p_1:C_1=P_1C_1^+=P_1,\hfill \\ i_0^{}=p^{}|:C_0=P_0C_0^{}=\mathrm{im}(p^{}),\hfill \\ i_1^{}=1p_1:C_1=P_1C_1^{}=P_1\hfill \end{array}$$

are such that $`1e^+:C^+C^+`$, $`e^{}:C^{}C^{}`$ are chain homotopy nilpotent, with

$$i=\left(\begin{array}{c}i^+\\ i^{}\end{array}\right):CC^+C^{}$$

a chain equivalence such that

$$e^+i^+=i^+e:CC^+,e^{}i^{}=i^{}e:CC^{}.$$

###### Remark 2.5.

(a) Propositions 2.3 and 2.4 are the 0- and 1-dimensional cases of a general result, namely that the following conditions on a self chain map $`e:CC`$ of an $`n`$-dimensional f.g. projective $`A`$-module chain complex are equivalent:

* The $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain map

$$1e+ze:C[z,z^1]C[z,z^1]$$

is a chain equivalence.
* For some $`k0`$ there exists a chain homotopy

$$h:(e(1e))^k0:CC$$

such that $`eh=he`$, i.e. $`e:CC`$ is a chain homotopy near-projection.
* There exist $`n`$-dimensional f.g. projective $`A`$-module chain complexes $`C^+,C^{}`$ with chain maps

$$e^+:C^+C^+,e^{}:C^{}C^{}$$

such that $`1e^+:C^+C^+`$, $`e^{}:C^{}C^{}`$ are chain homotopy nilpotent, and with a chain equivalence

$$i=\left(\begin{array}{c}i^+\\ i^{}\end{array}\right):CC^+C^{}$$

such that

$$e^+i^+=i^+e:CC^+,e^{}i^{}=i^{}e:CC^{}.$$

(b) If $`(C,e)`$ satisfies the equivalent conditions in (a) then there there are defined $`A`$-module chain equivalences

$$\begin{array}{c}C(1e+ze:C[z]C[z])C(1e^++ze^+:C^+[z]C^+[z])C^+,\hfill \\ C(z^1(1e)+e:C[z^1]C[z^1])\hfill \\ C(z^1(1e^{})+e^{}:C^{}[z^1]C^{}[z^1])C^{},\hfill \end{array}$$

so that the chain homotopy types of $`C^+,C^{}`$ are entirely determined by $`C`$ and $`e`$. ∎

## 3. Blanchfield and Seifert forms

Let now $`A`$ be a ring with involution $`AA;a\overline{a}`$.

###### Definition 3.1.

(i) The dual of a f.g. projective (left) $`A`$-module $`P`$ is the f.g. projective $`A`$-module

$$P^{}=\mathrm{Hom}_A(P,A)$$

with

$$A\times P^{}P^{};(a,f)(xf(x)\overline{a}).$$

(ii) The dual of a morphism $`f:PQ`$ of f.g. projective $`A`$-modules is the morphism

$$f^{}:Q^{}P^{};g(xg(f(x))).$$

The natural $`A`$-module morphism

$$PP^{};x(f\overline{f(x)})$$

is an isomorphism, which will be used to identify

$$P^{}=P.$$

Thus for any f.g. projective $`A`$-modules duality defines an isomorphism

$$T:\mathrm{Hom}_A(P,Q)\mathrm{Hom}_A(Q^{},P^{});ff^{}$$

with inverse $`gg^{}`$. In particular, for $`Q=P^{}`$ this is an involution

$$T:\mathrm{Hom}_A(P,P^{})\mathrm{Hom}_A(P,P^{});ff^{}$$

with $`T^2=1`$.

Fix a central unit $`\eta A`$ such that

$$\overline{\eta }=\eta ^1A.$$

In practice, $`\eta =+1`$ or $`1`$.

###### Definition 3.2.

An $`\eta `$-symmetric form over $`A`$ $`(P,\lambda )`$ is a f.g. projective $`A`$-module $`P`$ together with a morphism $`\lambda :PP^{}`$ such that

$$\eta \lambda ^{}=\lambda :PP^{}.$$

The form is nonsingular if $`\lambda :PP^{}`$ is an isomorphism. ∎

Extend the involution on $`A`$ to an involution on $`A[z,z^1]`$ by

$$\overline{z}=z^1.$$

###### Definition 3.3.

(i) The dual of a Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module $`B`$ is the Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module

$$B\widehat{}=\mathrm{Ext}_{A[z,z^1]}^1(B,A[z,z^1]).$$

(ii) The dual of a Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ is the Seifert $`A`$-module

$$(P,e)^{}=(P^{},1e^{}).$$

###### Proposition 3.4.

(i) The dual of an induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-module presentation of a Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module $`B`$

$$C:0P_1[z,z^1]\text{}P_0[z,z^1]B0$$

is an induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-module presentation of the dual Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module $`B\widehat{}`$

$$C^1:0P^0[z,z^1]\text{}P^1[z,z^1]B\widehat{}0$$

with $`P^i=(P_i)^{}`$ the dual f.g. projective $`A`$-modules.
(ii) The dual $`B(P,e)\widehat{}`$ of the covering $`B(P,e)`$ of a Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ is related to the covering $`B((P,e)^{})=B(P^{},1e^{})`$ of the dual Seifert $`A`$-module by a natural isomorphism

$$\zeta _{(P,e)}:B(P^{},1e^{})B(P,e)\widehat{}.$$

(iii) For any Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module $`B`$ there is a natural isomorphism

$$BB\widehat{}\widehat{}.$$

###### Proof.

(i) Any exact sequence of projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules

$$0Q_1Q_0B0$$

induces an exact sequence

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B,A[z,z^1])=0\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(Q_0,A[z,z^1])\hfill \\ \mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(Q_1,A[z,z^1])\hfill \\ \mathrm{Ext}_{A[z,z^1]}^1(B,A[z,z^1])\mathrm{Ext}_{A[z,z^1]}^1(Q_0,A[z,z^1])=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

(ii) Define $`\zeta _{(P,e)}`$ to fit into the natural isomorphism of exact sequences of induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules

(iii) The double dual $`C^{}`$ of any induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-module resolution

$$C:0C_1C_0B0$$

is naturally isomorphic to $`C`$. ∎

###### Definition 3.5.

(i) The dual of a morphism $`g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ of Seifert $`A`$-modules is the morphism

$$g^{}:(P_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{},1e_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{})(P^{},1e^{}).$$

(ii) The dual of a morphism $`f:BB^{}`$ of Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules is the morphism

$$f\widehat{}=(f_1^{},f_0^{}):B^{}\widehat{}B\widehat{}$$

with $`f_0,f_1`$ the components of any chain map $`CC^{}`$ of induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain complexes resolving $`f`$

so that $`(f_1^{},f_0^{})`$ resolves $`f\widehat{}`$

###### Proposition 3.6.

(i) For any Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules $`B,B^{}`$ duality defines an isomorphism

$$T:\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B,B^{})\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B^{}\widehat{},B\widehat{});ff\widehat{}$$

with inverse $`gg\widehat{}`$. For $`B^{}=B\widehat{}`$ this is an involution

$$T:\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B,B\widehat{})\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B,B\widehat{});ff\widehat{}$$

with $`T^2=1`$.
(ii) The dual of a morphism of Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules

$$f=B(g)t^k:B(P,e)B(P^{},e^{})$$

is the morphism

$$f\widehat{}:B(P^{},e^{})\widehat{}B(P,e)\widehat{}$$

such that

$$(\zeta _{(P,e)})^1f\widehat{}\zeta _{(P^{},e^{})}=B(g^{})t^k:B(P_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{},1e_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{})B(P^{},1e^{}).$$

(iii) For any Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ the dual of the isomorphism of Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules $`\zeta _{(P,e)}:B(P^{},1e^{})B(P,e)\widehat{}`$ is the isomorphism

$$(\zeta _{(P,e)})\widehat{}=z^1\zeta _{(P^{},1e^{})}:B(P,e)B(P^{},1e^{})\widehat{}.$$

(iv) For any Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$ the duality involution

$$T:\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B(P,e),B(P,e)\widehat{})\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B(P,e),B(P,e)\widehat{});ff\widehat{}$$

corresponds under the isomorphism induced by $`\zeta _{(P,e)}:B(P^{},1e^{})B(P,e)\widehat{}`$

$$\begin{array}{c}\zeta _{(P,e)}:\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B(P,e),B(P^{},1e^{}))\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B(P,e),B(P,e)\widehat{});\hfill \\ B(\theta )t^k\zeta _{(P,e)}B(\theta )t^k\hfill \end{array}$$

to the $`z^1`$-duality involution

$$\begin{array}{c}T_{z^1}:\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B(P,e),B(P^{},1e^{}))\hfill \\ \mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B(P,e),B(P^{},1e^{}));\hfill \\ B(\theta )t^kz^1B(\theta ^{})t^k.\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Proof.

(i) By construction.
(ii) Applying Definition 3.5 to the resolution of $`f`$

the identity $`(\zeta _{(P,e)})^1f\widehat{}\zeta _{(P^{},e^{})}=B(g^{})t^k`$ is given by the composition of resolutions

(iii) Consider the composition of resolutions

(iv) By (ii) and (iii), for any morphism $`\theta :(P,e)(P^{},1e^{})`$

$$(\zeta _{(P,e)}B(\theta ))\widehat{}=z^1(\zeta _{(P,e)}B(\theta ^{})):\theta ,e)B(P,e)\widehat{}.$$

###### Definition 3.7.

(i) An $`\eta `$-symmetric Blanchfield form over $`A[z,z^1]`$ $`(B,\varphi )`$ is a Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module $`B`$ together with a morphism $`\varphi :BB\widehat{}`$ such that

$$\eta \varphi \widehat{}=\varphi :BB\widehat{}.$$

The form is nonsingular if $`\varphi :BB\widehat{}`$ is an isomorphism.
A morphism of Blanchfield forms $`f:(B,\varphi )(B^{},\varphi ^{})`$ is a morphism of Blanchfield modules $`f:BB^{}`$ such that

$$f\widehat{}\varphi ^{}f=\varphi :BB\widehat{}.$$

(ii) A $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert form over $`A`$ $`(P,e,\theta )`$ is a morphism of Seifert $`A`$-modules

$$\theta :(P,e)(P^{},1e^{})$$

such that

$$\theta =(\theta \eta \theta ^{})e:PP^{}.$$

(This is equivalent to a morphism of Seifert $`A`$-modules $`\lambda :(P,e)(P^{},1e^{})`$ such that $`\eta \lambda ^{}=\lambda `$, with $`\theta =\lambda e`$, $`\theta \eta \theta ^{}=\lambda `$.) The form $`(P,e,\theta )`$ is nonsingular if $`\theta \eta \theta ^{}:PP^{}`$ is an isomorphism.
A morphism of Seifert forms $`g:(P,e,\theta )(P^{},e^{},\theta ^{})`$ is a morphism of Seifert modules $`g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ such that

$$g^{}\theta ^{}g=\theta :PP^{}.$$

(iii) The covering of a $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert form over $`A`$ $`(P,e,\theta )`$ is the $`\eta `$-symmetric Blanchfield form over $`A[z,z^1]`$

$$B(P,e,\theta )=(B(P,e),\varphi )$$

with

$$\varphi =(1z^1)\zeta _{(P,e)}B(\theta \eta \theta ^{}):B(P,e)B(P,e)\widehat{}.$$

If $`(P,e,\theta )`$ is a nonsingular Seifert form then $`B(P,e,\theta )`$ is a nonsingular Blanchfield form. ∎

###### Example 3.8.

An $`n`$-knot $`k:S^nS^{n+2}`$ with exterior $`M`$ determines a $``$-acyclic $`(n+2)`$-dimensional symmetric Poincaré complex $`(C,\varphi )`$ over $`[z,z^1]`$ with $`C=C(\overline{p}:\overline{M})_{+1}`$. Furthermore, a Seifert surface $`N^{n+1}S^{n+2}`$ for $`k`$ determines an $`(n+1)`$-dimensional Seifert $``$-module chain complex $`(D,e,\theta )`$ for $`(C,\varphi )`$ with $`D=\stackrel{~}{C}(M)`$ and $`(C,\varphi )=B(D,\theta )`$. If $`n=2i1`$ and $`\overline{M}`$ is $`(i1)`$-connected then $`N`$ can be chosen to be $`(i1)`$-connected; in this simple case $`(H_i(C),\varphi _0)`$ is a nonsingular $`(1)^{i+1}`$-symmetric Blanchfield form over $`[z,z^1]`$, and $`(H_i(D),e,\theta )`$ is a nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-symmetric Seifert form over $``$ such that $`(H_i(C),\varphi _0)=B(H_i(D),e,\theta )`$, with $`e=(\theta +(1)^i\theta ^{})^1\theta `$. See Ranicki \[14, Chapter 7.9\], \[16, Chapter 32\] for further details.

###### Proposition 3.9.

(i) For any morphism from a Seifert $`A`$-module to its dual

$$\theta :(P,e)(P^{},1e^{})$$

the morphism

$$\theta ^{}=(\theta \eta \theta ^{})e:(P,e)(P^{},1e^{})$$

defines a $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert form $`(P,e,\theta ^{})`$ such that

$$\theta ^{}\eta \theta _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}=\theta \eta \theta ^{}:PP^{}.$$

(ii) For a nonsingular $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert form $`(P,e,\theta )`$ the endomorphism $`e:PP`$ is determined by $`\theta :PP^{}`$, with

$$e=(\theta \eta \theta ^{})^1\theta :PP.$$

A morphism of nonsingular $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert forms $`g:(P,e,\theta )(P,e^{},\theta ^{})`$ is the same as a morphism of the underlying Seifert modules $`g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ such that

$$g^{}(\theta ^{}\eta \theta ^{})g=\theta \eta \theta ^{}:PP^{}.$$

(iii) Every morphism $`f:B(P,e,\theta )B(P^{},e^{},\theta ^{})`$ of the covering $`\eta `$-symmetric Blanchfield forms of $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert forms $`(P,e,\theta )`$, $`(P^{},e^{},\theta ^{})`$ is of the type

$$f=B(g)t^k$$

with $`k0`$, $`t=B(e(1e)):B(P,e)B(P,e)`$, and $`g:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$ a morphism of Seifert $`A`$-modules such that for some $`\mathrm{}0`$

$$g^{}(\theta ^{}\eta \theta ^{})g=(\theta \eta \theta ^{})(e(1e))^2\mathrm{}:PP^{}.$$

###### Proof.

(i) From the definitions

$$\begin{array}{cc}\theta ^{}\eta \theta _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\hfill & =(\theta \eta \theta ^{})e\eta e^{}(\theta ^{}\overline{\eta }\theta )\hfill \\ & =(\theta \eta \theta ^{})e+(\theta \eta \theta ^{})(1e)\hfill \\ & =\theta \eta \theta ^{}:PP^{}\hfill \end{array}$$

and also

$$(\theta ^{}\eta \theta _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{})e=(\theta \eta \theta ^{})e=\theta ^{}:PP^{}.$$

(ii) Immediate from the definitions.
(iii) By Theorem 1.8 (iii) $`f=B(h)t^j`$ for some $`h:(P,e)(P^{},e^{})`$, $`j0`$. Let $`B(P,e,\theta )=(B(P,e),\varphi )`$, $`B(P^{},e^{},\theta ^{})=(B(P^{},e^{}),\varphi ^{})`$, so that $`f\widehat{}\varphi ^{}f=\varphi `$ and by Proposition 3.6 (ii) there is defined a commutative diagram

Now apply 1.8 (iv) to the identity

$$B(h^{}(\theta ^{}\eta \theta ^{})h)t^{2j}=B(\theta \eta \theta ^{}):B(P,e)B(P^{},1e^{}),$$

to obtain

$$(h^{}(\theta ^{}\eta \theta ^{})h(\theta \eta \theta ^{})(e(1e))^{2j})(e(1e))^{\mathrm{}}=0:B(P,e)B(P^{},1e^{})$$

for some $`\mathrm{}0`$. Setting

$$g=h(e(1e))^{\mathrm{}},k=j+\mathrm{}$$

gives the required expression $`f=B(g)t^k`$. ∎

In Theorem 3.10 below, it will be proved that every nonsingular Blanchfield form over $`A[z,z^1]`$ is isomorphic to the covering of a nonsingular Seifert form over $`A`$. The proof will use the quadratic Poincaré complexes of Ranicki , . By definition, a 1-dimensional $`\eta `$-quadratic Poincaré complex $`(C,\psi )`$ over $`A`$ is a 1-dimensional f.g. projective $`A`$-module chain complex

together with $`A`$-module morphisms

$$\psi _0:C^0=C_0^{}C_1,\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0:C^1C_0,\psi _1:C^0C_0$$

such that

$$d\psi _0+\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0d^{}+\psi _1\eta \psi _1^{}=0:C^0C_0$$

and the chain map $`(\psi _0+\eta \stackrel{~}{\psi }_0^{},\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0+\eta \psi _0^{}):C^1C`$ is a chain equivalence. Replacing $`\psi _0,\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0,\psi _1`$ by $`\psi _0+\eta \stackrel{~}{\psi }_0^{},0,\psi _1+\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0d^{}`$ respectively, it may always be assumed that $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0=0`$.

###### Theorem 3.10.

Every nonsingular $`\eta `$-symmetric Blanchfield form $`(B,\varphi )`$ over $`A[z,z^1]`$ is isomorphic to the covering $`B(P,e,\theta )`$ of a nonsingular $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert form $`(P,e,\theta )`$ over $`A`$. If $`B`$ admits an induced f.g. projective $`A[z,z^1]`$-module resolution

$$0P_1[z,z^1]\text{}P_0[z,z^1]B0$$

with

$$d=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}d_jz^j:P_1[z,z^1]P_0[z,z^1]$$

then $`P`$ can be chosen to be a direct summand of $`\underset{k}{}(P_0P_0^{})`$ such that

$$PP^{}\underset{k}{}(P_0P_0^{}).$$

###### Proof.

By Proposition 1.3 the given resolution of $`B`$ determines a resolution of the form

$$0P[z,z^1]\text{}P[z,z^1]B0$$

with $`e:PP`$ an endomorphism of

$$P=\underset{k}{}P_0.$$

(This is not yet the $`(P,e)`$ we are seeking). By Theorem 1.8 (i), (iv) it may be assumed that

$$(\zeta _{(P,e)})^1\varphi t=B(\theta )t^{\mathrm{}}:B=B(P,e)B(P^{},1e^{})$$

for some Seifert $`A`$-module $`(P,e)`$, morphism $`\theta :(P,e)(P^{},1e^{})`$ and $`\mathrm{}0`$. The $`\eta `$-symmetric Blanchfield form $`(B(P,e),\varphi ^{})`$ defined by

$$\varphi ^{}=\zeta _{(P,e)}B(\theta )t^1:B(P,e)B(P,e)\widehat{}$$

is nonsingular, and such that there is defined an isomorphism

$$s^{\mathrm{}}:(B(P,e),\varphi ^{})(B(P,e),\varphi ).$$

Replacing $`(B(P,e),\varphi )`$ by $`(B(P,e),\varphi ^{})`$ it may thus be assumed that $`\mathrm{}=0`$, with

$$(\zeta _{(P,e)})^1\varphi t=B(\theta ):B(P,e)B(P^{},1e^{}).$$

The covering of $`\theta \eta \theta ^{}:(P,e)(P^{},1e^{})`$ is the isomorphism of Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-modules

$$\begin{array}{cc}B(\theta \eta \theta ^{})\hfill & =(\zeta _{(P,e)})^1\varphi t\eta z(\zeta _{(P,e)})^1\varphi \widehat{}t\hfill \\ & =(\zeta _{(P,e)})^1(1z)\varphi t\hfill \\ & =(1z^1)^1(\zeta _{(P,e)})^1\varphi :B(P,e)B(P,e)\widehat{}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Replacing $`\theta `$ by $`\theta ^{}=(\theta \eta \theta ^{})e`$ (as in Proposition 3.9 (i)) we have a $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert form $`(P,e,\theta )`$ such that

$$B(P,e,\theta )(B,\varphi ).$$

However, in general $`(P,e,\theta )`$ may be singular, i.e. $`\theta \eta \theta ^{}:PP^{}`$ need not be an isomorphism. We shall obtain a nonsingular $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert form $`(P^{},e^{},\theta ^{})`$ such that $`B(P^{},e^{},\theta ^{})(B,\varphi )`$ by gluing together two null-cobordism of the 1-dimensional $`(\eta )`$-quadratic Poincaré complex $`(C,\psi )`$ defined by

$$\begin{array}{c}d_C=\theta \eta \theta ^{}:C_1=PC_0=P^{},\hfill \\ \psi _0=1:C^0=PC_1=P,\hfill \\ \psi _1=\theta :C^0=PC_0=P^{}.\hfill \end{array}$$

One null-cobordism is easy: it is $`(f:CD,(0,\psi ))`$ with

$$f=1:C_1=PD_1=P,D_i=0\mathrm{for}i1.$$

The other null-cobordism is of the form $`(i^{}:CC^{},(\delta \psi ,\psi ))`$, with $`i^{}:CC^{}`$ constructed by the method of Remark 2.5, as follows. By Proposition 2.4 (ii) (with $`g=\theta \eta \theta ^{}`$) there exists a morphism

$$h:(P^{},1e^{})(P,e)$$

such that

$$\begin{array}{c}h(\theta \eta \theta ^{})=(e(1e))^k:PP,\hfill \\ (\theta \eta \theta ^{})h=(e^{}(1e^{}))^k:P^{}P^{}\hfill \end{array}$$

for some $`k0`$. Let $`E:CC`$ be the chain map defined by

$$\begin{array}{c}E_0=1e^{}:C_0=P^{}C_0=P^{},\hfill \\ E_1=e:C_1=PC_1=P.\hfill \end{array}$$

As in the proof of 2.4 (ii) $``$ (iii) $`h`$ determines a chain homotopy projection

$$\begin{array}{cc}p\hfill & =(E^k+(1E)^k)^1E^k\hfill \\ & =\left(\underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}(E(1E)\pi _k(E))^j\right)E^k:CC\hfill \end{array}$$

with a chain homotopy

$$q:p(1p)0:CC$$

such that $`pE=Ep`$, $`Eq=qE`$, and such that

$$\begin{array}{c}p^+=\left(\begin{array}{cc}p_0& \theta \eta \theta ^{}\\ q& 1p_1\end{array}\right):P^{}PP^{}P,\hfill \\ p^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1p_0& (\theta \eta \theta ^{})\\ q& p_1\end{array}\right):P^{}PP^{}P\hfill \end{array}$$

are projections with

$$p^++p^{}=1:P^{}PP^{}P.$$

We now have a decomposition of Seifert $`A`$-modules

$$(P^{}P,(1e^{})e)=(P^+,e^+)(P^{},e^{})$$

with

$$P^+=\mathrm{im}(p^+),P^{}=\mathrm{im}(p^{}).$$

The 1-dimensional f.g. projective $`A`$-module chain complexes $`C^+,C^{}`$ defined by

$$\begin{array}{c}d_{C^+}=p^+|:C_1^+=PC_0^+=P^+,\hfill \\ d_C^{}=p^{}|:C_1^{}=PC_0^{}=P^{}\hfill \end{array}$$

and the $`A`$-module chain maps

$$E^+:C^+C^+,E^{}:C^{}C^{},i^+:CC^+,i^{}:CC^{}$$

defined by

$$\begin{array}{c}E_0^+=e^+:C_0^+=P^+C_0^+=P^+,\hfill \\ E_1^+=e:C_1^+=PC_1^+=P,\hfill \\ E_0^{}=e^{}:C_0^{}=P^{}C_0^{}=P^{},\hfill \\ E_1^{}=1e:C_1^{}=PC_1^{}=P,\hfill \\ i_0^+=p^+|:C_0=P^{}C_0^+=P^+,\hfill \\ i_1^+=p_1:C_1=PC_1^+=P,\hfill \\ i_0^{}=p^{}|:C_0=PC_0^{}=P^{},\hfill \\ i_1^{}=1p_1:C_1=PC_1^{}=P\hfill \end{array}$$

are such that $`1E^+:C^+C^+`$, $`E^{}:C^{}C^{}`$ are chain homotopy nilpotent, with

$$i=\left(\begin{array}{c}i^+\\ i^{}\end{array}\right):CC^+C^{}$$

a chain equivalence such that

$$E^+i^+=i^+E:CC^+,E^{}i^{}=i^{}E:CC^{}.$$

Moreover, it follows from

$$E^{}=E:C^1=CC^1=C$$

that

$$\begin{array}{c}p^{}=p:C^1=CC^1=C,\hfill \\ p_1=1p_0^{}:PP.\hfill \end{array}$$

The morphism

$$h^{}=eh\eta h^{}e^{}:(P^{},1e^{})(P,e)$$

is such that

$$\begin{array}{c}h^{}(\theta \eta \theta ^{})=(e(1e))^k:PP,\hfill \\ (\theta \eta \theta ^{})h^{}=(e^{}(1e^{}))^k:P^{}P^{}\hfill \end{array}$$

and replacing $`h`$ by $`h^{}`$ in the construction of $`q`$ gives a chain homotopy

$$q^{}:p(1p)0:CC$$

such that

$$q^{}=\theta \eta \theta ^{}:P^{}P$$

with $`\theta `$ (resp. $`\eta \theta ^{}`$) the contribution of $`eh`$ (resp. $`\eta h^{}e^{}`$), and $`e\theta =\theta (1e^{})`$. The morphism of Seifert $`A`$-modules defined by

$$\lambda =\left(\begin{array}{cc}\theta \eta \theta ^{}& \eta p_0^{}\\ p_0& \theta \eta \theta ^{}\end{array}\right):(P^{}P,\left(\begin{array}{cc}1e^{}& 0\\ 0& e\end{array}\right))(PP^{},\left(\begin{array}{cc}e& 0\\ 0& 1e^{}\end{array}\right))$$

is such that $`(\eta )\lambda ^{}=\lambda `$, and restricts to an isomorphism

$$\lambda ^+:(P^+,e^+)((P^+)^{},1(e^+)^{}),$$

identifying $`(P^+)^{}=\mathrm{im}((p^+)^{})`$. The $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert form over $`A`$ defined by

$$(P^{},e^{},\theta ^{})=(P^+,e^+,\lambda ^+e^+)$$

is nonsingular and such that

$$B(P^{},e^{},\theta ^{})(B,\varphi ).$$

###### Remark 3.11.

(i) The proof of Theorem 3.10 minimizes the use of the theory of algebraic Poincaré complexes. However, it is based on an idea of infinite gluing which really is best expressed in this language, specifically the quadratic $`Q`$-groups of an $`A`$-module chain complex $`C`$

$$Q_n(C)=H_n(_2;C_AC)$$

which are the central objects of the theory, with the generator $`T_2`$ acting by

$$T:C_p_AC_qC_q_AC_p;xy(1)^{pq}yx.$$

(There is a brief review in Chapter 20 of ). A chain map $`f:CD`$ induces morphisms in the $`Q`$-groups

$$f_\%:Q_n(C)Q_n(D)$$

which depend only on the chain homotopy class of $`f`$. As in Definition 24.1 of , given chain maps $`f,g:CD`$ let $`Q_{}(f,g)`$ be the relative $`Q`$-groups which fit into the exact sequence

$$\mathrm{}Q_{n+1}(f,g)Q_n(C)\text{}Q_n(D)Q_n(f,g)\mathrm{}$$

and define a union operation

$$U:Q_n(f,g)Q_n(U(f,g))$$

with

$$U(f,g)=C(fzg:C[z,z^1]D[z,z^1])$$

an $`A[z,z^1]`$-module chain complex. An element $`(\delta \theta ,\theta )Q_{n+1}(f,g)`$ is an $`(n+1)`$-dimensional quadratic pair over $`A`$

$$x=((fg):CCD,(\delta \theta ,\theta \theta ))$$

and the union is an $`(n+1)`$-dimensional quadratic complex over $`A[z,z^1]`$

$$U(x)=(U(f,g),U(\delta \theta ,\theta )).$$

The construction mimics the construction of an infinite cyclic cover by gluing together $``$ copies of a fundamental domain. If $`x`$ is a Poincaré pair then $`U(x)`$ is a Poincaré complex. The chain complex ingredient in the proof of Theorem 3.10 is the following characterization of the pairs $`x`$ such that the union $`U(x)`$ is contractible, i.e. such that

$$fzg:C[z,z^1]D[z,z^1]$$

is a chain equivalence. This is the case if and only if $`fg:CD`$ is a chain equivalence and $`(fg)^1f:CC`$ is a chain homotopy near-projection. Thus there is no loss of generality in taking

$$C=D,f=1e,g=e$$

for a chain homotopy near-projection $`e:CC`$, and as in Remark 2.5 there is defined a chain equivalence

$$i:(C,e)(C^+,e^+)(C^{},e^{})$$

with $`1e^+:C^+C^+`$, $`e^{}:C^{}C^{}`$ chain homotopy nilpotent. The background to the proof of Theorem 3.10 is the computation

$$Q_{}(f,g)=H_{}((1e^+)e^{}:C^+_AC^{}C^+_AC^{})$$

so that an element $`(\delta \theta ,\theta )Q_{n+1}(f,g)`$ is determined by a chain map

$$\theta :(C^+)^nC^{}$$

together with a chain homotopy

$$\delta \theta :e^{}\theta \theta (1e^+)^{}:(C^+)^nC^{}.$$

The quadratic pair $`((fg):CCD,(\delta \theta ,\theta \theta ))`$ is Poincaré if and only if $`\theta `$ is a chain equivalence.
(ii) Here is a geometric interpretation of (i). Let $`X`$ be a finite $`n`$-dimensional Poincaré complex, and let $`F:MX\times S^1`$ be a homotopy equivalence from a closed $`(n+1)`$-dimensional manifold $`M`$. The restriction of $`F`$ to a transverse inverse image is an $`n`$-dimensional normal map

$$G=F|:N=F^1(X\times \{\})X$$

and cutting $`M`$ along $`N`$ gives a fundamental domain for $`F^{}(X\times )=\overline{M}`$ with a normal map

$$G_N=\overline{F}|:(M_N;N,zN)X\times ([0,1];\{0\},\{1\})$$

such that

$$\overline{F}=\underset{j=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}z^jG_N:\overline{M}=\underset{j=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}z^jM_NX\times $$

is a $``$-equivariant lift of $`F`$.
Define the kernel $`[\pi _1(X)]`$-module chain complexes

$$\begin{array}{c}C=C(G:C(N)C(X))_{+1},\hfill \\ D=C(G_N:C(M_N)C(X\times [0,1]))_{+1}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The chain maps $`i_0,i_1:CD`$ induced by the inclusions $`NM_N`$, $`zNM_N`$ are such that $`fzg:C[z,z^1]D[z,z^1]`$ is a chain equivalence, since $`F:MX\times S^1`$ is a homotopy equivalence. The infinitely generated free $`[\pi _1(X)]`$-module chain complexes

$$\begin{array}{c}C^+=C(\overline{G}^+:\overline{M}^+X\times ^+)_{+1},\hfill \\ C^{}=C(\overline{G}^{}:\overline{M}^{}X\times ^{})_{+1}\hfill \end{array}$$

with

$$\overline{M}^+=\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}z^jM_N,\overline{M}^{}=\underset{j=\mathrm{}}{\overset{1}{}}z^jM_N$$

are such that there is defined an exact sequence

$$0CC^+C^{}C(\overline{F})_{+1}0$$

with $`C(\overline{F})`$ the algebraic mapping cone of the $`[\pi _1(X)][z,z^1]`$-module chain equivalence $`\overline{F}:C(\overline{M})C(X\times )`$. Thus there is defined a $`[\pi _1(X)]`$-module chain equivalence

$$CC^+C^{},$$

and $`C^+,C^{}`$ are chain equivalent to finite f.g. projective $`[\pi _1(X)]`$-module chain complexes. The quadratic Poincaré kernel of $`G_N`$ is determined as in (i) by a chain equivalence $`\theta :(C^+)^nC^{}`$.
In particular, if $`n=2i`$ and $`G,G_N`$ are $`i`$-connected then

$$K_i(N)=H_i(C)=H_i(C^+)H_i(C^{})=H_{i+1}(\overline{M}^+,N)H_{i+1}(\overline{M}^{},N)$$

with an isomorphism $`\theta :H_i(C^+)^{}H_i(C^{})`$. Every homology class in $`K_i(N)`$ is a sum of a class which dies on the right and one which dies on the left; the reduced projective class

$$[H_i(C^+)]=[H_i(C^{})]\stackrel{~}{K}_0([\pi _1(X)])=K_0([\pi _1(X)])/K_0()$$

is the obstruction to finding a basis of classes which all die on the left (or all die on the right). The reduced nilpotent projective class

$$[H_i(C^+),1e^+]=[H_i(C^{}),e^{}]\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{Nil}}_0([\pi _1(X)])=\mathrm{Nil}_0([\pi _1(X)])/K_0()$$

is the Farrell-Hsiang  splitting obstruction of $`F`$, which is 0 if (and for $`i3`$ only if) $`G:NX`$ can be chosen to be a homotopy equivalence, or equivalently $`(M_N;N,zN)`$ can be chosen to be an $`h`$-cobordism. The surgery obstruction

$$\begin{array}{cc}\sigma (G)=(K_i(N),\lambda ,\mu )\hfill & \mathrm{ker}(L_{2i}^h([\pi _1(X)])L_{2i}^p([\pi _1(X)]))\hfill \\ & =\mathrm{im}(\widehat{H}^{2i+1}(_2;\stackrel{~}{K}_0([\pi _1(X)]))L_{2i}^h([\pi _1(X)]))\hfill \end{array}$$

is represented by the hyperbolic $`(1)^i`$-quadratic form on the f.g. projective $`[\pi _1(X)]`$-module $`H_i(C^+)`$, with

$$\begin{array}{c}\lambda =\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \theta ^1\\ (1)^i(\theta ^{})^1& 0\end{array}\right):\hfill \\ K_i(N)=H_i(C^+)H_i(C^{})K_i(N)^{}=H_i(C^+)^{}H_i(C^{})^{},\hfill \\ \mu :K_i(N)[\pi _1(X)]/\{x(1)^i\overline{x}\};(a^+,a^{})\theta ^1(a^{})(a^+).\hfill \end{array}$$

However, in Theorem 3.10 it is the other case $`n=2i+1`$ which occurs. ∎

## 4. Witt groups

This Chapter extends the results of Chapter 3 to the algebraic $`L`$-groups of Blanchfield and Seifert forms, using the algebraic theory of surgery (Ranicki , ).

Cohn  constructed the universal localization $`\sigma ^1R`$ of a ring $`R`$ inverting a set $`\sigma `$ of square matrices over $`R`$. The canonical ring morphism $`R\sigma ^1R`$ is universally $`\sigma `$-inverting : for any ring morphism $`f:RS`$ such that $`f(s)`$ is invertible for every $`s\sigma `$ there is a unique ring morphism $`\sigma ^1RS`$ such that

$$f:R\sigma ^1RS.$$

See  or  for the expression of the free Wall quadratic $`L`$-groups $`L_n^h(R)=L_n(R)`$ of a ring with involution $`R`$ as the cobordism groups of $`n`$-dimensional quadratic Poincaré complexes $`(C,\psi )`$ over $`R`$ with $`C`$ f.g. free. In particular, $`L_{2i}(R)`$ is the Witt group of nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-quadratic forms over $`R`$.

For an injective universal localization $`R\sigma ^1R`$ of rings with involution the quadratic $`L`$-groups of $`R`$ and $`\sigma ^1R`$ are related by the exact sequence of of Vogel  and Neeman and Ranicki

with $`L_n(R,\sigma )`$ the cobordism group of $`(n1)`$-dimensional quadratic Poincaré complexes $`(C,\psi )`$ over $`R`$ such that $`C`$ is f.g. free and $`H_{}(\sigma ^1C)=0`$. In particular, $`L_{2i}(R,\sigma )`$ is the Witt group of nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-quadratic $`\sigma ^1R/R`$-valued linking forms on f.g. $`\sigma `$-torsion $`R`$-modules of type $`\mathrm{coker}(s:R^kR^k)`$ ($`s\sigma `$), and $`:L_{2i}(\sigma ^1R)L_{2i}(R,\sigma )`$ is given by the boundary construction for $`\sigma ^1R`$-nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-quadratic forms over $`R`$.

Given a ring $`A`$ let $`\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1]`$ be the universal localization of $`A[z,z^1]`$ inverting the set $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ of all $`A`$-invertible square matrices over $`A[z,z^1]`$. The canonical ring morphism $`A[z,z^1]\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1]`$ is an injection with the universal property that every morphism of rings $`A[z,z^1]R`$ sending matrices in $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ to invertible matrices over $`R`$ has a unique factorization $`A[z,z^1]\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1]R`$.

###### Example 4.1.

For commutative $`A`$ $`\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1]=P^1A[z,z^1]`$ is the commutative localization of $`A[z,z^1]`$ inverting the set $`P`$ of all polynomials $`p(z)A[z,z^1]`$ with $`p(1)A`$ a unit.

An involution on the ring $`A`$ is extended to the rings $`A[z,z^1]`$, $`\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1]`$ by $`\overline{z}=z^1`$, as before. As in Proposition 32.6 of Ranicki , the dual of a Blanchfield $`A[z,z^1]`$-module $`B`$ is given up to natural isomorphism by

$$B\widehat{}=\mathrm{Hom}_{A[z,z^1]}(B,\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1]/A[z,z^1]).$$

An $`A[z,z^1]`$-module morphism $`\varphi :BB\widehat{}`$ is the same as a pairing

$$\varphi :B\times B\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1]/A[z,z^1]$$

such that for all $`x,x^{},y,y^{}B`$, $`a,bA[z,z^1]`$

$$\begin{array}{c}\varphi (x+x^{},y)=\varphi (x,y)+\varphi (x^{},y),\hfill \\ \varphi (x,y+y^{})=\varphi (x,y)+\varphi (x,y^{}),\hfill \\ \varphi (ax,by)=b\varphi (x,y)\overline{a}\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1]/A[z,z^1].\hfill \end{array}$$

The quadratic $`L`$-groups $`L_{}`$ of the Laurent polynomial extension $`A[z,z^1]`$ of a ring with involution $`A`$ split as

$$L_{n+1}(A[z,z^1])=L_{n+1}(A)L_n^p(A)$$

with $`L_{}^p`$ the projective quadratic $`L`$-groups (Novikov , Ranicki ). The relative $`L`$-group $`L_{2i+2}(A[z,z^1],\mathrm{\Pi })`$ in the localization exact sequence

$$\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{}L_{2i+2}(A[z,z^1])\hfill & L_{2i+2}(\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1])\hfill \\ & L_{2i+2}(A[z,z^1],\mathrm{\Pi })L_{2i+1}(A[z,z^1])\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$

is the Witt group of nonsingular $`(1)^{i+1}`$-symmetric Blanchfield forms $`(B,\varphi )`$ over $`A[z,z^1]`$ such that $`B`$ admits a 1-dimensional f.g. free $`A[z,z^1]`$-module resolution

$$0C_1C_0B0.$$

As in Chapter 31 of  let $`\mathrm{LIso}_p^{2i}(A)`$ be the Witt group of nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-symmetric Seifert forms over $`A`$.

###### Theorem 4.2.

(\[16, Prop 32.11\]) The covering construction (3.7) defines an isomorphism

$$B:\mathrm{LIso}_p^{2i}(A)L_{2i+2}(A[z,z^1],\mathrm{\Pi });(P,e,\theta )B(P,e,\theta ),$$

with Theorem 3.10 giving an explicit inverse $`B^1`$.

The isomorphism $`B^1`$ of 4.2 is a generalization of the projection

$$B:K_1(A[z,z^1])K_0(A)$$

of Bass, Heller and Swan  and the projection

$$B:L_{2i+1}(A[z,z^1])L_{2i}^p(A)$$

of  and  (where $`B`$ denotes Bass rather than Blanchfield).

###### Example 4.3.

The high-dimensional knot cobordism groups $`k:S^{2i1}S^{2i+1}`$ ($`i2`$) are

$$C_{2i1}=\mathrm{LIso}^{2i}()=L_{2i+2}([z,z^1],P).$$

See Chapters 33, 40 and 41 of  for a more detailed discussion.

###### Remark 4.4.

Theorems 3.10, 4.2 give a new proof of the result that every nonsingular $`\eta `$-symmetric Blanchfield form $`(B,\varphi )`$ over $`A[z,z^1]`$ is isomorphic to the covering $`B(P,e,\theta )`$ of a nonsingular $`(\eta )`$-symmetric Seifert form $`(P,e,\theta )`$ over $`A`$, with a corresponding isomorphism in the Witt groups. For $`A=`$, $`\eta =\pm 1`$ this was proved by a variety of geometric and algebraic methods by Kearton , Levine , Trotter  and Farber . For arbitrary $`A`$ this was proved in Proposition 32.10 of Ranicki  using algebraic transversality for quadratic Poincaré complexes over $`A[z,z^1]`$. The novelty is the explicit algorithm for constructing $`(P,e,\theta )`$ from $`(B,\varphi )`$.

The expression of the Witt groups of $`(1)^{i+1}`$-symmetric Blanchfield forms over $`A[z,z^1]`$ as the relative $`L`$-group $`L_{2i+2}(A[z,z^1],\mathrm{\Pi })`$ in the exact sequence of $`L`$-groups

$$\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{}L_{2i+2}(A[z,z^1])\hfill & L_{2i+2}(\mathrm{\Pi }^1A[z,z^1])\hfill \\ & L_{2i+2}(A[z,z^1],\mathrm{\Pi })L_{2i+1}(A[z,z^1])\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$

can be refined to an even more useful expression by inverting $`1zA[z,z^1]`$. Write

$$A_z=A[z,z^1],A_{z,1z}=A[z,z^1,(1z)^1].$$

For an $`A`$-module $`P`$ and an $`A_z`$-module $`Q`$ write

$$P_z=A_z_AP,P_{z,1z}=A_{z,1z}_AP,Q_{1z}=A_{z,1z}_{A_z}Q.$$

The element

$$s=(1z)^1A_{z,1z}$$

is such that $`s+\overline{s}=1A_{z,1z}`$, so there is no difference between $`\pm `$-quadratic and $`\pm `$-symmetric structures (= forms, algebraic Poincaré complexes, $`L`$-groups) over $`A_{z,1z}`$. The cartesian square of rings with involution

induces excision isomorphisms of relative $`L`$-groups

$$L_{}(A_z,\mathrm{\Pi })L_{}(A_{z,1z},\mathrm{\Pi })$$

and there is a commutative braid of exact sequences

See Chapter 36 of  for the identification of $`L_{2i+2}(A_{z,1z})`$ with the Witt group of almost $`(1)^{i+1}`$-symmetric forms $`(P,\varphi )`$ over $`A`$, with $`P`$ a f.g. free $`A`$-module and $`\varphi :PP^{}`$ an isomorphism such that $`1+(1)^i(\varphi ^{})^1\varphi :PP`$ is nilpotent (cf. Clauwens ).

###### Theorem 4.5.

The map $`L_{2i+2}(A_z,\mathrm{\Pi })L_{2i+1}(A_{z,1z})`$ is 0, so that

$$L_{2i+2}(A_z,\mathrm{\Pi })=\mathrm{coker}(L_{2i+2}(A_{z,1z})L_{2i+2}(\mathrm{\Pi }^1A_{z,1z}))$$

The Witt class of the covering $`B(P,e,\theta )`$ of a nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-symmetric Seifert form $`(P,e,\theta )`$ over $`A`$ is the Witt class of the nonsingular $`(1)^{i+1}`$-quadratic form $`(P_{z,1z},(1z)\theta )`$ over $`A_{z,1z}`$, modulo the indeterminacy coming from the $`(1)^{i+1}`$-quadratic Witt group of $`A_{z,1z}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`R`$ be a ring with involution. A 1-dimensional $`(1)^i`$-quadratic Poincaré complex $`(C,\psi )`$ over $`R`$ with $`\psi _0:C^0C_1`$ an isomorphism (and $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_0=0:C^1C_0`$) is null-cobordant

$$(C,\psi )=0L_1(R,(1)^i)=L_{2i+1}(R),$$

with a null-cobordism $`(f:CD,(\delta \psi ,\psi ))`$ defined by

$$f=1:C_1D_1=C_1,D_i=0(i1),\delta \psi =0.$$

The nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-quadratic formation corresponding to $`(C,\psi )`$ is the boundary $`(C^0,\psi _1)`$ of the $`(1)^{i+1}`$-quadratic form $`(C^0,\psi _1)`$ over $`R`$.
Now suppose that $`R\sigma ^1R=S`$ is an injective noncommutative localization of rings with involution, so that there is defined a localization exact sequence

$$\mathrm{}L_{2i+2}(R)L_{2i+2}(S)\text{}L_{2i+2}(R,\sigma )L_{2i+1}(R)\mathrm{}$$

with $`L_{2i+2}(R,\sigma )`$ the cobordism group of f.g. free 1-dimensional $`(1)^i`$-quadratic Poincaré complexes $`(C,\psi )`$ over $`R`$ such that $`1d:S_RC_1S_RC_0`$ is an $`S`$-module isomorphism. If $`(C,\psi )`$ is such that $`\psi _0:C^0C_1`$ is an $`R`$-module isomorphism then (as above) $`(C,\psi )=0L_{2i+1}(R)`$, and

$$1(\psi _1+(1)^{i+1}\psi _1^{})=1d\psi _0:S_RC^0S_RC_0$$

is an $`S`$-module isomorphism, so that $`S_R(C^0,\psi _1)`$ is a nonsingular $`(1)^{i+1}`$-quadratic form over $`S`$ such that

$$\begin{array}{c}(C,\psi )=S_R(C^0,\psi _1)\hfill \\ \mathrm{ker}(L_{2i+2}(R,\sigma )L_{2i+1}(R))=\mathrm{coker}(L_{2i+2}(R)L_{2i+2}(S)).\hfill \end{array}$$

In particular, if $`(B,\varphi )`$ is a nonsingular $`(1)^{i+1}`$-symmetric Blanchfield form over $`A_z`$ then by Theorem 3.10 $`(B,\varphi )=B(P,e,\theta )`$ is the covering of a nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-symmetric Seifert form $`(P,e,\theta )`$ over $`A`$. The 1-dimensional $`(1)^i`$-quadratic Poincaré complex $`(C,\psi )`$ over $`A_z`$ defined by

$$\begin{array}{c}d=\theta +(1)^iz^1\theta ^{}:C_1=P_zC_0=P_z^{},\hfill \\ \psi _0=1z:C^0=P_zC_1=P_z,\hfill \\ \psi _1=(1z)\theta :C^0=P_zC_0=P_z^{}\hfill \end{array}$$

has $`1\psi _0:(C^0)_{1z}(C_1)_{1z}`$ an $`A_{z,1z}`$-module isomorphism, so that

$$(B,\varphi )_{1z}=(C,\psi )_{1z}=0L_1(A_{z,1z},(1)^i)=L_{2i+1}(A_{z,1z}).$$

The nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-quadratic formation over $`A_{z,1z}`$ corresponding to $`(C,\psi )_{1z}`$ is the boundary of the $`\mathrm{\Pi }^1A_{z,1z}`$-nonsingular $`(1)^{i+1}`$-quadratic form

$$(C^0,\psi _1)_{1z}=(P_{z,1z},(1z)\theta )$$

and

$$\begin{array}{cc}(B,\varphi )=(C,\psi )\hfill & =(C,\psi )_{1z}=(P_{z,1z},(1z)\theta )\hfill \\ & \mathrm{ker}(L_{2i+2}(A_z,\mathrm{\Pi })L_{2i+1}(A_{z,1z}))\hfill \\ & =\mathrm{ker}(L_{2i+2}(A_{z,1z},\mathrm{\Pi })L_{2i+1}(A_{z,1z}))\hfill \\ & =\mathrm{coker}(L_{2i+2}(A_{z,1z})L_{2i+2}(\mathrm{\Pi }^1A_{z,1z})).\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Example 4.6.

The expression for the Witt group of Blanchfield forms given by Theorem 4.5 in the case $`A=`$ gives the following expression for the cobordism class of a high-dimensional knot. Let $`k:S^{2i1}S^{2i+1}`$ be a knot with exterior

$$(M^{2i+1},M)=(\mathrm{cl}.(S^{2i+1}\backslash k(S^{2i1})\times D^2),S^{2i1}\times S^1)$$

and Seifert surface $`N^{2i}S^{2i+1}`$. Keeping $`N=k(S^{2i1})`$ fixed push $`N`$ into the interior of $`D^{2i+2}`$ to obtain a codimension 2 embedding $`ND^{2i+2}`$ with trivial normal 2-plane bundle. The exterior is a $`(2i+2)`$-dimensional manifold with boundary

$$(L^{2i+2},L)=(\mathrm{cl}.(D^{2i+2}\backslash N\times D^2),M_MN\times S^1).$$

Assume that $`\pi _j(M)\pi _j(S^1)`$ for $`1ji1`$ (as may be arranged by surgery below the middle dimension), so that $`N`$ can be chosen to be $`(i1)`$-connected, and $`\pi _j(L)\pi _j(S^1)`$ for $`1ji`$. As in Proposition 27.8 of  there is defined an $`(i+1)`$-connected $`(2i+2)`$-dimensional normal map of triads

$$\begin{array}{c}(f,b):(L;M,N\times S^1;S^{2i1}\times S^1)\hfill \\ (D^{2i+2}\times [0,1];D^{2i+2}\times \{0\},D^{2i+2}\times \{1\};k(S^{2i1})\times [0,1])\times S^1\hfill \end{array}$$

with target a $`(2i+2)`$-dimensional geometric Poincaré triad. The nonsingular $`(1)^i`$-symmetric Seifert form $`(H_i(N),e,\theta )`$ over $``$ determines the kernel $`(1)^{i+1}`$-quadratic form over $`_z=[z,z^1]`$

$$(K_{i+1}(\overline{L}),\psi )=(H_i(N)_z,(1z)\theta )$$

(cf. Ko , Cochran, Orr and Teichner ). For $`i2`$ the knot cobordism class of $`k`$ is the Witt class of $`(H_i(N),e,\theta )`$, or equivalently the Witt class of the nonsingular $`(1)^{i+1}`$-symmetric Blanchfield form $`(H_i(\overline{M}),\varphi )=B(H_i(N),e,\theta )`$ over $`_z`$. Theorem 4.5 identifies the knot cobordism class with the Witt class (modulo the indeterminacy) of the induced nonsingular $`(1)^{i+1}`$-quadratic form over $`_{z,1z}=[z,z^1,(1z)^1]`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}[k]=(H_i(N),e,\theta )=(H_i(\overline{M}),\varphi )=(K_{i+1}(\overline{L}),\psi )_{1z}=(H_i(N)_{z,1z},(1z)\theta )\hfill & \\ C_{2i1}=\mathrm{LIso}^{2i}()=L_{2i+2}(_z,P)=\mathrm{coker}(L_{2i+2}(_{z,1z})L_{2i+2}(P^1_{z,1z}))\hfill & \end{array}$$

with $`P=\{p(z)|p(1)=1\}_z`$ the multiplicative subset of Alexander polynomials. See Proposition 36.3 of  for the computation of the indeterminacy

$$L_{2i+2}(_{z,1z})=L^{2i+2}()=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & \text{if }i0(mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2})\hfill \\ (\mathrm{signature})\hfill & \text{if }i1(mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}).\hfill \end{array}$$

$`\mathrm{}`$