Computing degree of maps between manifolds (Q2505343): Difference between revisions

The authors study the set of degrees of maps between two closed \((n-1)\)-connected \(2n\)-manifolds when \(n \equiv 1\pmod 8\). Let \(V(n), n>3\), be the set of homeomorphism types of closed \((n-1)\)-connected \(2n\)-manifolds, and let \(D(M,N)\) be the set of the degrees of maps \(f: M \to N\). The following theorem on page 1281 is the main result. Theorem. Assume that \(n=1(8)\), \(n \neq 1\), and \(M, N \in V(n)\). (1) If \(r_M < r_N\), then \(D(M,N)=0\); (2) If \(r_M = r_N\) and \(M \neq N\), then \(D(M,N)\) is \(2\mathbb Z\) if \(\phi(\chi_M)=\text{Arf}(M)=0\); and is \(4\mathbb Z\) otherwise; moreover, if \(M=N\), add \(\{2l+1| l \in \mathbb Z\}\) to \(D(M,N)\), respectively; (3) If \(r_M=r_N+2\), then \(D(M,N)\) is \(2\mathbb Z\) if either \(\chi_M=0\) and \(\chi_N \neq 0\), or \(\chi_M \neq 0\), \(\chi_N = 0\), \(\phi(\chi_M)=0\) and \(\text{Arf}(M) \neq \text{Arf}(N)\); and \(\mathbb Z\) otherwise; (4) If \(r_M \geq r_M + 4\), then \(D(M,N)\) is \(2\mathbb Z\) if \(\chi_M=0\) and \(\chi_N \neq 0\); and \(\mathbb Z\) otherwise. I have quoted the statement of this theorem verbatim, but I do not understand it. For instance: 1. Earlier in the paper, the authors write sometimes ``\(n \equiv 1\pmod 8\)'' and I am not certain whether that is the same as ``\(n=1(8)\)''. 2. Perhaps one could write \(D(M,N)=0\) to mean that \(D(M,N)=\{0\}\) and \(2\mathbb Z\) for the set of even integers, but some explanation would be helpful. 3. \(\phi\) is never defined in the paper. What is defined is \(\varphi\) (page 1278, line 10 below), but that definition is not correct. 4. In the last line of part (2) of the theorem (the last line on page 1281), ``add'' means (maybe?) ``and'', but I still cannot understand the phrase ``add \(\{2l+1 \mid l \in \mathbb Z\}\) to \(D(M,N)\), respectively''. 5. In parts (2), (3) and (4) of the theorem the meaning of the word ``otherwise'' is not clear to me. The authors' style has various peculiarities which do not make the paper easy to read. For instance, on page 1277, in the second line following the definition, that authors say: ``a necessary and sufficient condition for an integer \(k \in D(M,N)\)''. Perhaps this is to mean ``a necessary and sufficient condition for an integer \(k\) to belong to \(D(M,N)\)''~? I think that the paper was not refereed adequately and was not subjected to a good proofreading before publishing.