Skip to main content

Knots

Introduction

Somehow it's the final blog of the semester! This time we're talking about knots. Knots are a topic in mathematics, specifically topology. Knots are exactly what they sound like; you make a knot when you tie your shoes, for example. The only difference is that mathematical knots have the ends of the strings tied together and they cannot be undone. We have simple knot examples, like the trefoil knot. This is a knot of three crossings. We can get even crazier by looking at knots of 8+ crossings, which will be discussed in the rest of this post.
(Image from centerofmathematics.blogspot.com)

Crossing number

Consider this knot. It has 10 crossings and is knot 10-139 in the knot atlas found at http://katlas.math.toronto.edu/wiki/10_139.
Unknotting number

The unknotting number is the sequence of crossing switches that give the unknot. From the knot atlas, I know the unknotting number of 10-139 is 3. This means that switching three crossings will give me the unknot. I have attempted to verify this using SnapPy. I was able to switch three crossings to produce the unknot, as seen below.

First, start with the knot projection.
Next switch the bottom left crossing seen in the above projection. This gives the knot below:
Now switch the bottom left crossing of the above projection. This gives:
Now switch the top right crossing of the above projection. After many, many Reidemeister moves, this is what we have. Note that this is the unknot!
Simply untwist that last crossing.
I'm pretty stoked that I was able to verify the unknotting number with the crossings I chose to switch. That was a lucky first try!

A coloring attempt

Next, I attempted to find a coloring for this knot projection. A knot projection is n-colorable if each strand has a number, at least two numbers are used, and at each crossing \(i+j-2k\equiv 0\), where \(i\) and \(j\) are the numbers on the undercrossings and \(k\) is the number on the overcrossings. Similarly, a knot projection is tricolorable if each strand has a color, at least two colors are used, and at each crossing either 1) all three colors come together or 2) all colors are the same. It was easier for me to attempt to color this knot with blues, pinks, and greens than to use modular arithmetic, but, as you can see, my tricolorability attempt failed given the choices I made for how to color this knot. I started with the right pink strand, then colored the top right crossing such that all three colors were present. From here, I did the same thing for the top left crossing. As you can see, I eventually ran into problems in two places. However, this does not mean that this knot isn't tricolorable. It means that there are a large number of ways to attempt to show tricolorability, but that this is not one of them. Because there are so many ways to color this projection, it can be hard to find one that works (or to prove a knot is not tricolorable by showing none work).


Writhe

Writhe is arguably the easiest computation for knots. We are assigning +1 and -1 to the crossings. Then, the writhe is simply the sum of these \(\pm\)1's divided by two.
Using the given orientation, I computed the writhe of this knot to be 5.
I think it's interesting that all of these crossings are +1's. I've stared at it and twisted my knot around so many times because it seems too coincidental, but hopefully I was able to visualize the crossings correctly!

Knot polynomials

The last thing we are going to calculate is the first two steps of the knot polynomial Q.
This part gave me a headache from staring at the projections so long trying to visualize what to do, but I am happy with how my drawings turned out. This project has been a fun dive into a brand new field of mathematics for me, and I think this was a good note to end the semester on. Math is really just learning how to learn new complicated things, so this was definitely very math-y in that sense.

Word count: 688

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Approximation of a Solid of Revolution

Most math teachers I've had have been able to break down Calculus into two very broad categories: derivatives and integrals. What is truly amazing, is how much you can do with these two tools. By using integration, it is possible to approximate the shape of a 2-D function that is rotated around an axis. This solid created from the rotation is known as a solid of revolution. To explain this concept, we will take a look at the region bounded by the two functions: \[ f(x) = 2^{.25x} - 1 \] and \[ g(x) = e^{.25x} - 1 \] bounded at the line y = 1. This region is meant to represent a cross section of a small bowl. While it may not perfectly represent this practical object, the approximation will be quite textured, and will provide insight into how the process works. The region bounded by the two functions can be rotated around the y-axis to create a fully solid object. This is easy enough to talk about, but what exactly does this new solid look like? Is

Come visit the quadric surfaces!

 They are in the display case.  The ruled surfaces will be joining them soon!

Solids of Revolution Revisited

Introduction In my previous blog post on solids of revolution, we looked at the object formed by rotating the area between \(f(x) = -\frac{1}{9}x^2+\frac{3}{4} \) and \( g(x)=\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2}e^{-x} \) around the \( x \) axis and bounded by \( x = 0 \) and \( x = 1.5 \). When this solid is approximated using 10 washers, the resulting object looks like this: When I was looking back over the 3D prints I’d created for this course, I noticed that the print for this example was the least interesting of the bunch. Looking at the print now, I feel like the shape is rather uninteresting. The curve I chose has such a gradual slope that each of the washers are fairly similar in size and causes the overall shape to just look like a cylinder. Since calculating the changes in the radiuses of the washers is a big part of the washer method, I don’t think this slowly decreasing curve was the best choice to illustrate the concept. The reason I had done this o