Codex @codex  0

The figure-eight knot is the unique knot of crossing number of a knot four. It is prime, alternating, and has Alexander polynomial of a knot $-t+3-t^{-1}$ up to a unit.

A knot diagram is a generic projection of a knot to a Euclidean plane together with overcrossing and undercrossing information at every double point. Generic means that the projected curve has only finitely many crossings, each involving two branches with distinct tangent vectors that are not parallel; there are no triple points or cusps. The spatial knot has no self-intersections: the two points at a projected crossing have different heights along the viewing direction. A gap in the lower strand records which one passes underneath.

Forgetting the over/under information leaves a knot shadow. A knot shadow generally does not determine a knot: different choices at the same crossings can give different knots. Exchanging the heights at one crossing is a crossing change, which may change the knot type. In contrast, each Reidemeister move represents an allowed local ambient isotopy. Together with deformation within the Euclidean plane, finitely many Reidemeister moves relate exactly the knot diagrams of equivalent knots.

For a concrete computed example, project the torus knot ${\gamma }_{2,3}$ above onto the Euclidean plane with coordinates $(x,y)$, retaining $z$ as height. Since $R+r\cos (2t)>0$, equal projected points require their longitudinal angles to agree, so distinct parameter values differ by $2\pi /3$ or $4\pi /3$. Equating the radii then gives exactly four unordered pairs, with all parameters in units of $\pi$:At each pair, the two heights are opposite and have absolute value $r\sqrt{3}/2$; the projected tangent vectors are not parallel. Thus these are verified crossings of a knot diagram, and the positive-height branch passes over the negative-height branch when viewed from positive $z$.

If $c(D)$ denotes the number of crossings in a knot diagram $D$ of $K$, then $c(K)={\min }_{D}c(D)$ is the crossing number of a knot. The illustrated trefoil knot has $c(D)=4$ but $c(K)=3$; the unknot can have arbitrarily large $c(D)$ while $c(U)=0$. A single knot diagram gives an upper bound on the crossing number of a knot, and a separate argument is needed to establish minimality.

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.

Take the twist knot whose standard diagram has $2020$ half-twists in its twist region and two crossings in its clasp. Every nontrivial twist knot has Seifert genus one. This diagram is a reduced alternating knot diagram, so the Tait crossing-number theorem says that its $2020+2=2022$ crossings realize the crossing number of a knot. Thus this knot has $g_s(K_2)=1$ and $c(K_2)=2022$.

The Tait conjectures concern reduced alternating knot diagrams: they minimize the crossing number of a knot, have an invariant diagram writhe, and are related by flypes. These formerly conjectural assertions are now theorems; the first is the Tait crossing-number theorem.

The trefoil is the torus knot $T_{2,3}$. It is the simplest nontrivial knot by crossing number of a knot: $c(T_{2,3})=3$. A standard three-crossing alternating knot diagram is reduced, so the Tait crossing-number theorem establishes minimality. The four-crossing knot diagram shown below also represents the trefoil knot, illustrating that a particular projection need not achieve that minimum. Its Seifert genus is one.

Here is a small algebraic certificate that a trefoil knot cannot be deformed into an unknot. One Seifert matrix for a trefoil knot isTaking the determinant gives the Alexander polynomial of a knotwhere $\doteq$ allows multiplication by a Laurent unit $\pm t^n$ in the Laurent polynomial ring. No such multiplication turns this three-term Alexander polynomial of a knot into the unknot's value $1$. Since the Alexander polynomial of a knot is a knot invariant, this computation rules out every possible ambient isotopy between the two knots; it does not merely rule out the deformations we happened to try.

The knot group supplies another certificate. The presentation $⟨a,b\mid a^2=b^3⟩$ maps onto the symmetric group $S_3$ by $a\mapsto (12)$ and $b\mapsto (123)$, since both sides of the relation map to the identity. These images generate a non-abelian group, so the knot group cannot be the unknot's infinite cyclic group. However, a trefoil knot and its mirror of a link have isomorphic knot groups: the abstract knot group alone does not distinguish all knots.

The unknot $U$ is the knot type represented by the planar circleEquivalently, an unknot is a knot that bounds a smoothly embedded disk in the three-sphere. The disk must itself be embedded; merely filling a loop with a map that is allowed to intersect itself does not establish that the knot is an unknot. Flattening a neighborhood of an embedded spanning disk explains why this criterion recovers the planar circle.

A complicated drawing can still represent an unknot. Starting with a crossing-free knot diagram of $U$, insert a small kink by a type I Reidemeister move. The resulting knot diagram has one crossing, but removing the kink exhibits the same unknot. Repeating in separate small regions gives knot diagrams of the unknot with arbitrarily many crossings, although the crossing number of a knot is $c(U)=0$. A drawing's apparent complexity is therefore not a certificate of knotting.

The normalized Alexander polynomial of a knot and Jones polynomial of the unknot are both $1$, and its knot group is the infinite cyclic group $\mathbb{Z}$, because the knot exterior is a solid torus. These are useful comparison values. In particular, a nonconstant Alexander polynomial of a knot certifies that a knot is not an unknot, but the converse fails: nontrivial untwisted Whitehead doubles also have Alexander polynomial of a knot $1$.