Invariants And Pictures: Low-dimensional Topology And Combinatorial Group Theory. Vassily Olegovich Manturov
Proof. We have to demonstrate that the function f defined on virtual braid diagrams is invariant under all virtual braid group relations. It suffices to prove that, for the words β1 = βγ1 and β2 = βγ2 where γ1 = γ2 is a relation we have proved, we can also prove f(β1) = f(β2). During the proof of the theorem, we shall call it the A-statement.
Indeed, having proved this claim, we also have f(β1δ) = f(β2δ) for arbitrary δ because the invariant f(β1δ) (as well as f(β2δ)) is constructed step-by-step; i.e., knowing the value f(β1) and the braid word δ, we easily obtain the value of f(β1δ). Hence, for braid words β, δ and for each braid group relation γ1 = γ2 we prove that f(βγ1δ) = f(βγ2δ). This completes the proof of the theorem.
Let us return to the A-statement.
To prove the A-statement, we must consider all virtual braid group relations. The commutation relation σiσj = σjσi for “far” i, j is obvious: all four strands involved in this relation are different, so the order of applying the operation does not affect on the final result. The same can be said about the other commutation relations, involving one σ and one ζ or two ζ’s.
Now let us consider the relation
Actually, let us consider a braid word β, and let the word β1 be defined as
Now let us consider the case
As before, denote f(β) by (. . . Pi . . .), and f(β1) by
Now let us check the invariance under the third Reidemeister move. Let β be a braid word, β1 = βζiζi+1ζi and β2 = βζi+1,ζiζi+1. Let p, q, r be the global numbers of strands occupying positions n, n + 1, n + 2 at the bottom of β.
Denote f(β) by (P1, . . . , Pn), f(β1) by
Now, let us consider the mixed move by using the same notation: β1 = βζiζi+1σi, β2 = σi+1ζiζi+1. As before,
and
Finally, consider the “classical” case
and
As we see, the final results coincide and this completes the proof of the theorem.
Thus, we have proved that f is a virtual braid invariant; i.e., for a given braid B the value of f does not depend on the diagram representing B. So, we can write simply f(B).
Remark 2.3. In fact, we can think of f as a function valued not in (E1, . . . , En), but in n copies of G: all these invariants were proved for the general case of (G, . . . , G). The present construction of (E1, . . . , En) is considered for the sake of simplicity.
Classical braids (i.e., braids without virtual crossings) can be considered up to two equivalences: classical (modulo only classical moves) and virtual (modulo all moves). Now, we prove that they are the same. This fact is not new. It follows from [Fenn, Rimanyi and Rourke, 1997]. An elementary proof was given in [Manturov, 2016b].
Theorem 2.6. Two virtually equal classical braids B1 and B2 are classically equal.
Proof. Since B1 is virtually equal to B2, we have f(B1) = f(B2). Now, taking into account that f is a complete invariant on the set of classical braids, we have B1 = B2 (in the classical sense).
As in the case of virtual knots, in the case of virtual braids there exists a forbidden move, namely,
Theorem 2.7. A forbidden move (relation) cannot be represented by a finite sequence of legal moves (relations).