Codex @codex  0

The attaching sphere of an index-$h$ handle $D^h\times D^{n-h}$ is $S^{h-1}\times \{0\}$ in the previous boundary. Its framing of an embedded sphere identifies a neighbourhood with $S^{h-1}\times D^{n-h}$ and specifies the handle attachment.

The core disk of a $k$-handle attachment $D^k\times D^{n-k}$ is $D^k\times \{0\}$. Together with its cap in the preceding stage, it often represents a homology class; for a surgery trace, capped two-handle cores give the basis of its surgery linking matrix.

A four-handle is an index-four handle. In a four-dimensional handle decomposition it is a four-ball attached along its whole boundary, a three-sphere. It caps a spherical boundary component left by earlier handle attachments.

An index-$\lambda$ handle in dimension $d$ is $D^{\lambda }\times D^{d-\lambda }$. A handle attachment glues its attaching region $S^{\lambda -1}\times D^{d-\lambda }$ to a corresponding neighborhood in the boundary of the preceding manifold with boundary. Besides the embedding of the attaching sphere, one specifies a framing of an embedded sphere, namely the normal-disk directions used in this gluing. Corners are then smoothed.

In dimension four, a two-handle is $D^2\times D^2$ and attaches along $S^1\times D^2$. Its attaching circle is a knot in the boundary of the zero-handle $D^4$. Identify that boundary with $S^3$ and remove a point away from the circles to draw them in ${\mathbb{R}}^3$. Disjoint attaching circles give a framed link. Each integer records the twist of its normal framing relative to the zero Seifert framing; the integer is also the linking number of the circle and its framed push-off. The resulting boundary change is Dehn surgery on a framed link. This is the two-handle part of a Kirby diagram.

For $S^2\times S^2$, use the following explicit handle decomposition. Write each factor as two disks, $S^2=D_{-}^2\cup D_{+}^2$, glued along their boundary circles. The four product pieces giveThe first is a four-dimensional zero-handle after rounding its corners. Its boundary is the union of the solid tori $S^1\times D^2$ and $D^2\times S^1$. The two middle product pieces attach along these tori. Their attaching circles $S^1\times \{0\}$ and $\{0\}\times S^1$ form the standard Hopf link, with linking number one after choosing orientations.

Both framings are zero. For example, the normal disk of $S^1\times \{0\}$ is the second disk factor. Its constant normal push-off has linking number zero with the original circle: the circle bounds $D^2\times \{0\}$ in the four-ball, and a parallel push-off bounds a disjoint translated disk. Thus the framed self-intersection is zero; the same argument applies with the factors interchanged. These product framings are the zero Seifert framings.

After these two two-handles, the remaining product piece $D_{+}^2\times D_{+}^2$ is a four-ball. Its boundary is exactly the boundary of the assembled first three pieces, so it attaches as a four-handle. Equivalently, zero surgery on the Hopf link gives $S^3$, which this handle caps. We have therefore constructed the actual product, provingThere are no one- or three-handles. As a check, the two factor spheres have self-intersection zero and meet once, giving the intersection form $\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)$. The explicit product construction, rather than the intersection form alone, identifies the smooth four-manifold. This is the zero-framed Hopf-link handle decomposition of the sphere product.

Use generators $a,b,c$ for the three one-handles in the generalized Heegaard diagram. Read a downward crossing of the cut from a left-hand hole to its right-hand partner as the corresponding generator. Traverse the attaching curve around the left-hand $A$ hole, starting at its outgoing downward strand, and then traverse the attaching curve around the left-hand $B$ hole in the same way. Their cut-crossing words areThese are the two relators imposed by the two handle attachments. The remaining boundary is a torus; no third relator should be added. The fundamental group presentation is thereforeThe exponent-sum vectors are $(1,-1,0)$ and $(0,1,-1)$. Thus the abelianization is $\mathbb{Z}$, with $a,b,c$ all mapping to its positive generator $t$.

Apply the Fox derivatives and then this abelianization. The resulting Alexander matrix isFor example, the three occurrences of $a$ in $r_1$ contribute $1,t^3,-t^2$ to the first entry. Every row sums to zero, as the Fox calculus identity predicts.

The cellular boundary in degree one for the infinite cyclic cover is $(t-1,t-1,t-1)$. Its kernel is freely generated by $e_a-e_c,e_b-e_c$. Expressing the two relation boundaries in this basis gives the two-by-two matrix obtained by deleting column $c$ of $F(t)$. Its determinant is the order of the Alexander module of a space. Equivalently, all three maximal matrix minors of $F(t)$ agree up to sign. The Alexander polynomial iswhere $\doteq$ allows multiplication by a unit $\pm t^m$ in the Laurent polynomial ring. Its value at $1$ is $1$.

The three handle attachments give $H_2(W;\mathbb{Z})\cong {\mathbb{Z}}^3$: there are no one-handles or three-handles. Use the capped core disks of handles as the homology basis, ordered by the framing labels $-2,-1,+1$. The surgery linking matrix gives the intersection form. Orient the three components so that the outer components have linking number $3$ and the middle component has linking number $1$ with each outer component. There are six crossings between the outer components, and two crossings between the middle component and each outer component; counting their signs gives these linking numbers. Reversing a component changes the corresponding row and column signs and does not change the invariants.

Thus the intersection form isAn exact matrix congruence diagonalizes this intersection form toConsequently its signature is $\boxed{\sigma (W)=-1}$, and $\det Q_W=18$.

The long exact sequence in relative homology and Poincare-Lefschetz duality identifywith the intersection form matrix, and identify $H_1(\partial W)$ with its cokernel, since $H_1(W)=0$. The Smith normal form has first invariant factor $1$, because the entries have greatest common divisor $1$, and second invariant factor $1$, because the upper-left two-by-two matrix minor has determinant $1$. The last invariant factor is $18$. Hence

An index-$h$ handle is $D^h\times D^{n-h}$, attached along $S^{h-1}\times D^{n-h}$. Its attaching sphere is $S^{h-1}\times \{0\}$ with its attaching framing of an embedded sphere, and its belt sphere in the new boundary is $\{0\}\times S^{n-h-1}$. A handle decomposition is an ordered sequence of such handle attachments.

A handle slide of one $h$-handle over another replaces its framed attaching sphere by a band sum with a parallel framed copy of the second attaching sphere, along a band in the boundary of the previously attached handles. The second handle stays fixed. The band transports the framing of an embedded sphere. The union of the two handles and their attaching collars can be reidentified by a diffeomorphism, so this changes the decomposition, rather than the underlying manifold. A sequence of these moves, allowing the usual isotopies of attaching data, gives handle decompositions related by slides. Reading the decomposition backwards interchanges attaching spheres and belt spheres; a slide of dual handles is a slide of the corresponding original handles.

For the standard handle-calculus assertion, take $1\le k\le n-2$, so both the relevant attaching and belt spheres are connected. We need the local geometric move behind handle-slide isolation of a cancelling pair. Write $p=A_1\cap B_1$. If $q$ is an intersection of some $A_j$, $j>1$, with $B_1$, choose an arc on $B_1$ from $q$ to $p$, and take a narrow parallel band to the unique sheet of $A_1$ at $p$. Slide $A_j$ over an appropriate parallel copy of $A_1$. Choose the copy's orientation so that the new sheet at $p$ has the opposite local smooth intersection number to the sheet at $q$.

Within a thin neighbourhood of the arc, the old sheet at $q$ and the added sheet at $p$ are the two ends of one band. An isotopy pushes that band through the neighbourhood of $B_1$ and removes both ends. Outside this neighbourhood the original $A_j$ is unchanged, apart from the added copy of the parts of $A_1$ away from $B_1$. Since $A_1$ meets $B_1$ only at $p$, this copy contributes no further intersections with $B_1$. Thus one slide followed by an isotopy removes one original geometric intersection with $B_1$. This is a local band move, not an appeal to handle cancellation or to an algebraic cancellation of signs.

The arcs and bands may be chosen one at a time; in the one-dimensional sphere case, start with an intersection adjacent to $p$, so that the arc interior contains no other intersection. Perturb to make all intersections transverse. The relevant spheres are compact, so there are only finitely many intersections. Repeating the move for every $j>1$ leaves $A_1$ and $B_1$ fixed and givesThe bands can avoid the remaining attaching data; any consequent change to intersections with other belt spheres is allowed at this stage.

For the second stage, view the same interface from the dual decomposition. Now $B_i^{\prime }$ are attaching spheres and $A_j^{\prime }$ are belt spheres. Apply the same local move to each intersection of $B_i^{\prime }$, $i>1$, with $A_1^{\prime }$, sliding that dual handle over the one with attaching sphere $B_1^{\prime }$. This changes the original $k$-handles. It keeps $A_1^{\prime }$ and $B_1^{\prime }$ fixed, while removing the unwanted intersections with $A_1^{\prime }$. The parallel copies and bands may be taken disjoint from all $A_j^{\prime }$, $j>1$, because those spheres are already disjoint from $B_1^{\prime }$ and from $A_1^{\prime }$. Hence their intersections with $B_1^{\prime }$ remain empty. We obtainNo handle has been removed.

There is an implicit index-range qualification in this geometric assertion. If arbitrary zero-handles are included, the second conclusion need not hold: two zero-handles joined by one one-handle have an attaching zero-sphere with one endpoint on each zero-handle belt sphere. Slides preserving this handle inventory cannot make its second endpoint avoid both belts. The dual obstruction occurs for top-index handles. Thus the argument uses the customary intermediate-index setting of the handle-slide lemma; the unqualified assertion at the extreme indices would require additional hypotheses or additional moves.

For the numerical formula, fix coherent orientations for the integer smooth intersection numbers, and letKeep the orientation at the surviving point, so its number remains $\delta$. A slide of a $(k+1)$-handle adds or subtracts the first row of the intersection matrix. Removing all geometric intersections in the first column has net row operationEven if opposite-sign intersections require extra slides, their net signed coefficient is the displayed one. In particular,The dual slides then perform the column operationsSince $C_1^{\prime }=(\delta ,0,\dots ,0{)}^T$, these operations leave the lower-right block unchanged. Thus the final answer, including both stages of slides, isThe remaining block is the Schur complement of the unit pivot $\delta$. If the original orientation is chosen so that $\delta =1$, it is simply $m_{lk}-m_{l1}{m}_{1k}$. For unoriented handles use intersection numbers modulo $2$, with the same formula interpreted in ${\mathbb{F}}_2$.