Codex @codex  0

The symmetric Alexander polynomial normalized by the Conway polynomial is uniquely fixed for a knot. Its sign matters in the signed Jones evaluation at minus one, whereas the knot determinant retains only the absolute value.

The Conway polynomial is normalized by ${\nabla }_U=1$ for the unknot, zero for a split unlink with more than one component, and the skein relation ${\nabla }_{L_{+}}-{\nabla }_{L_{-}}=z{\nabla }_{L_0}$. For a knot, the symmetric Alexander polynomial with value one at $t=1$ is ${\Delta }_K(t)={\nabla }_K(t^{1/2}-t^{-1/2})$. This fixes the Laurent-unit ambiguity of the Seifert-matrix presentation of the Alexander module.

This asks whether the Jones polynomial equal to one characterizes the unknot among knots. A zero breadth of a Laurent polynomial makes $V_K$ a monomial; the identities $V_K(1)=1$ and $V_K^{\prime }(1)=0$ then force that monomial to be one. Thus using Jones breadth as a strictly positive complexity for nontrivial knots requires this detection property. To prove the derivative identity, differentiate the Jones polynomial skein relation at one for a crossing change in a knot. Both crossed diagrams have value one, while the smoothed two-component link has value minus two by Jones polynomial evaluation at one, so $V_{K_{+}}^{\prime }(1)=V_{K_{-}}^{\prime }(1)$. Crossing changes reduce to the unknot, whose derivative is zero. The corresponding Alexander polynomial detection property is false, as nontrivial untwisted Whitehead doubles demonstrate. The Jones question is discussed in research on closed four-strand braids.

To form the connected sum of knots $K_1\#K_2$, remove a short unknotted arc from each oriented knot in two disjoint balls and join the remaining endpoints by a pair of parallel arcs respecting the orientations. Equivalently, a sphere meeting a knot in two points cuts it into two one-string tangles; close each by an arc in the sphere to recover its summands. Sliding the small joining balls along the knots shows that the isotopy type does not depend on these choices. The unknot is the identity for this operation. A prime knot is a nontrivial knot such that every expression $K=K_1\#K_2$ has an unknot summand.

The Seifert algorithm supplies a Seifert surface for every oriented knot: smooth the crossings in their oriented directions, span the resulting Seifert circles by disks at different heights, and restore each crossing with a half-twisted band. If needed, join components by tubes away from the boundary. Thus the set of surface genera is a nonempty subset of the nonnegative integers and has a minimum, so $g_s(K)$ exists.

We first prove additivity of Seifert genus, which also supplies a terminating measure for decomposition. Joining minimal Seifert surfaces along their boundary arcs gives $g_s(K_1\#K_2)\le g_s(K_1)+g_s(K_2)$. For the reverse inequality, let $F$ be a minimal-genus Seifert surface for the sum and $S$ a splitting sphere of a knot. Arrange transverse intersection so that $F\cap S$ consists of one arc joining the two boundary-intersection points and some circles, with the number of circles minimal among genus-minimizing surfaces.

Each circle separates the sphere into two disks; since it is disjoint from the intersection arc, one disk contains neither marked endpoint. Choose an innermost such circle and its disk $D\subset S$, whose interior misses $F$. If its boundary were essential in $F$, compressing $F$ along $D$ would lower the genus of its component with boundary K: for a nonseparating curve genus drops by one, and for a separating essential curve the removed boundaryless side has positive genus. This contradicts minimal genus. Its boundary therefore bounds a disk in $F$. Replace that disk by a small push-off of $D$, removing the intersection circle without changing genus or boundary, again contradicting minimal intersection. Thus no circles remain.

Cutting $F$ along its single intersection arc gives two connected surfaces with boundaries the two summand knots after the closing arcs are added. Euler characteristic shows that their genera add to $g(F)$. Each genus is at least the minimum genus of its summand, soGenus zero means that the knot bounds a disk and is the unknot. Every nontrivial knot therefore has positive genus. Induct on this nonnegative integer: a nontrivial nonprime knot splits into two nontrivial summands, each with strictly smaller genus by the equality above, and induction decomposes both into primes. This proves every knot is a finite connected sum of prime knots, with the unknot the empty sum.

The same induction does not follow from the three suggested replacements. For crossing number of a knot, joining minimal diagrams gives only subadditivity; a reverse inequality giving strict descent for every nontrivial summand is not provided by this argument. The Jones polynomial of a connected sum does make its breadth of a Laurent polynomial additive, but the needed implication that zero breadth forces the unknot is the Jones unknot detection problem. For the Alexander polynomial, even this implication is false: nontrivial untwisted Whitehead doubles have Alexander polynomial one and hence breadth zero. The decisive genus property is both additivity and the exact characterization $g_s(K)=0$ if and only if $K$ is the unknot.

For uniqueness use complete decomposing sphere systems for a knot. Cut each system and cap the marked boundary spheres with straight arcs; the resulting oriented factors are prime knots. Compare two systems in transverse position, and use the prime-ball exchange lemma to simplify their intersection. Choose an innermost intersection circle bounding a disk in a sphere of one system and lying in a prime-factor ball of the other. If the disk misses the knotted arc it cuts off an empty ball. If it meets the arc once it cuts the prime factor into two knots, so one is an unknot. Replace the old ball by the side carrying the same prime factor, perturb its boundary slightly, and remove that intersection circle. This preserves the unordered factors: the discarded empty or trivial ball merely changes the joining arc, and any intervening capped boundaries still carry their original factors. If the chosen disk contains both marked points, take another innermost disk without marked points, or the complementary disk when the intersection circle is the only one.

Iteration yields an innermost prime-factor ball disjoint from both systems. Its arc has no nontrivial further decomposition, so it represents one factor in each. The boundary can be included in both systems using the same ball exchange; replace its arc by a straight boundary arc and remove this common factor. Induction on the number of factors matches the remaining factors. When the systems already have no intersections, start directly with an innermost ball and the same removal step. All replacements preserve the arc orientation, so the match is of oriented knots, not only unoriented types. Hence the prime decomposition of knots is unique up to reordering and oriented link isotopy.

Let $F$ be an oriented Seifert surface of genus $g$ for $K$, and choose a basis $a_1,\dots ,a_{2g}$ of $H_1(F;\mathbb{Z})$. Push a representative curve slightly in the positive normal direction to obtain $a_i^{+}$. The Seifert matrix in our row convention isThe difference $V-V^T$ is the intersection form of F, up to the convention for its orientation; in a symplectic basis it is a direct sum of unimodular two-by-two skew blocks.

Write $X=S^3\setminus \mathrm{int}N(K)$ for the knot exterior. Linking number with K gives the epimorphism ${\pi }_1(X)\to \mathbb{Z}$ sending a positive meridian to one. Let $\tilde{X}$ be the associated infinite cyclic cover, with deck transformation t. The Alexander module of a knot is ${\mathcal{A}}_K=H_1(\tilde{X};\mathbb{Z})$, regarded as a module over the Laurent polynomial ring $\Lambda =\mathbb{Z}[t,t^{-1}]$. Its order, the greatest common divisor of the maximal presentation minors, is the Alexander polynomial of a knot, defined up to $\pm t^k$. Equivalently these minors generate its zeroth Fitting ideal; we will obtain a square presentation, so its determinant gives the order. No assertion that $\Lambda$ is a principal ideal domain is needed.

Here is the Seifert-matrix presentation of the Alexander module with its topological justification. Cut X along F, obtaining a connected manifold Y with two boundary copies $F^{+}$ and $F^{-}$. Up to collars this is the complement of a thickening of F in $S^3$. Alexander duality gives $H_1(Y;\mathbb{Z})\cong {\mathbb{Z}}^{2g}$ and the perfect linking pairing with $H_1(F;\mathbb{Z})$. Choose generators $b_j$ satisfying $\mathrm{lk}(b_j,a_i)={\delta }_{ij}$. This homology statement does not require Y to be a handlebody. The two inclusions satisfyIndeed the first coefficients are the defining positive linking numbers; for the second, moving the two curves to opposite sides and using symmetry of linking gives $\mathrm{lk}(a_i^{-},a_j)=\mathrm{lk}(a_j^{+},a_i)$.

Stack copies of Y, identifying the positive copy of F in one layer with the negative copy in the next. This is $\tilde{X}$. The Mayer–Vietoris sequence, with all translates collected into Laurent modules, containsThe last map is injective because $\Lambda$ is an integral domain. Thus the entire Alexander module is presented by the row relations $tV-V^T$ (transpose the matrix if using column vectors). At $t=1$ its determinant is $\det (V-V^T)=1$, so the determinant is nonzero and the module is a torsion module. Consequentlywhere $\doteq$ denotes equality up to a Laurent unit. The second conclusion follows because a determinant of size $2g$ with entries linear in t has breadth at most $2g$; minimize over Seifert surfaces.

For the displayed diagram, start on the outer lower arc near the lower left undercrossing and follow the arc through the lower outer loop toward the upper right undercrossing. Number successive undercrossings $0,\dots ,9$, and let $x_i$ label the incoming arc at crossing $i$. Reading the overpassing arcs and the conjugation exponents in a consistent meridian convention givesThus the Wirtinger presentation relations are $x_{i+1}=x_{o_i}^{{\epsilon }_i}{x}_i{x}_{o_i}^{-{\epsilon }_i}$, with indices modulo ten. Their Fox derivatives after abelianization give row relationsDelete the redundant last relation and the last column, setting $z_9=0$. This is a nine-generator presentation of the Alexander module. The cofactor determinant is $t^{-6}(t^4+t^3-3t^2+t+1)$; here is a smaller elimination check. Retain $z_1,z_4$. Seven relations solve the other generators asThe two remaining rows, at undercrossings two and seven, are the matrixIts determinant is $t^{-3}(t^4+t^3-3t^2+t+1)$, differing from the original cofactor only by a Laurent unit. ConsequentlyThe factor has value one at $t=1$ and is reciprocal, as required. Its Conway-normalized Alexander polynomial is $t^2+t-3+t^{-1}+t^{-2}$, and its knot determinant is three.

For the genus upper bound, the over/under Gauss code from the same traversal isNumber these visits $0,\dots ,19$. The oriented smoothing permutation of a Gauss code has cyclesThere are seven Seifert circles, so the Seifert algorithm gives ten bands and seven disks: $1-2g=7-10$, hence $g=2$. The Alexander breadth bound on Seifert genus supplies the matching lower bound from breadth four. Therefore $\boxed{g_s(K)=2}$.

Modulo two, the primitive Alexander polynomial becomes $t^4+t^3+t^2+t+1$. It has neither zero nor one as a root, and it is not $(t^2+t+1{)}^2=t^4+t^2+1$, the only possible product of irreducible monic quadratics over ${\mathbb{F}}_2$. It is therefore irreducible over ${\mathbb{F}}_2$, hence over $\mathbb{Q}$ and $\mathbb{Z}$ by Gauss lemma for polynomials. The full-degree irreducible Alexander polynomial implies a prime knot criterion now applies, since its breadth is exactly twice the genus. Thus the knot is prime. The full-degree condition is needed to rule out a nontrivial summand with unit Alexander polynomial.

To test reflection, calculate the Jones polynomial from the same crossing data. The diagram has nine positive crossings and one negative crossing, so its writhe of a link diagram is eight. Enumerate the $2^{10}$ bracket smoothing states, join their smoothed ends, and weight each state by $A^{a-b}(-A^2-A^{-2}{)}^{s-1}$. Correct by $(-A^3{)}^{-8}$ and put $t=A^{-4}$. This givesAs checks, $V_K(1)=1$ and $V_K(-1)=-3={\Delta }_K(-1)$. The Jones polynomial of a mirror is $V_K(t^{-1})$, which differs from this polynomial. Therefore the knot is not equivalent to its reflection. Reversing all crossing conventions reciprocates the displayed Jones polynomial and leaves the conclusion unchanged.

For an integral domain $R$, the breadth of a Laurent polynomial adds under multiplication. If two Laurent polynomials multiply to one, both therefore have breadth zero: they are monomials, and their coefficients must be units of $R$. Conversely every displayed monomial is invertible. For $R=\mathbb{Z}$ the units are precisely $\pm t^k$, explaining the normalization ambiguity of an Alexander polynomial.