The Brunerie number is ±2 - direct proof #741
Merged
+1,354
−85
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR contains a direct proof of the fact that the Brunerie number is ±2 (in fact, with my construction, it's -2). The proof itself is relatively straightforward (see Cubical.Homotopy.Group.Pi4S3.QuickProof -- you may suggest a better name...) but relies on some machinery concerning the equivalence
Sⁿ * Sᵐ ≃ Sⁿ⁺ᵐ
. The idea is to formulate π₃(A) asπ*₃(A) := ∥ S¹ * S¹ →∙ A ∥₂
(with an explicitly defined multiplication) and analyse the termη₁ : π₃*(S²)
defining the Brunerie number as a member of this group. We can then prove directly that it gets mapped to -2 under what is pretty much the usual equivalenceπ₃(S²) ≅ ℤ
.We get a bunch of terms corresponding to η on the way:
η₁ : π₃*(S²), η₂ : π₃*(S¹ * S¹), η₃ : π₃*(S³) , η₄ : π₃(S³)
which we can try to send to ℤ. This gives equivalent, but hopefully simpler, computations of the Brunerie number (I haven't tried this yet).