The moves appeared very different and hard to translate when we looked at these when Matveev visited - I do not consider special spines and triangulations the same, particularly when it comes to details of proofs. On the other hand, I do not consider branch surfaces and triangulations the same but learned the hard way that branched surfaces allowed more general operations that were beneficial. I am willing to join and see what's up.
William H. "Bus" Jaco Regents Professor, Grayce B. Kerr Chair, and Head Department of Mathematics
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Henry Segerman segerman@math.okstate.edu wrote:
Triangulations and special spines are the same thing. Or at least they are in my mind, I can translate them back and forth.
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:17 PM William Jaco jaco@math.okstate.edu wrote:
Are you going to be doing Matveev's proof or trying to translate it to triangulations?
William H. "Bus" Jaco Regents Professor, Grayce B. Kerr Chair, and Head Department of Mathematics
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Henry Segerman < segerman@math.okstate.edu> wrote:
Hi all,
Trent and I will be reading Matveev's proof that the set of (one vertex, or ideal) triangulations of a given 3-manifold are connected under 2-3 moves, 4:30-5:30 on Wednesdays. Let me know if anyone else is interested in joining in.
Henry
Mdtop mailing list Mdtop@mathdept.okstate.edu http://cauchy.math.okstate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mdtop