Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Paul A. Schweitzer, Steven Hurder - Differential Topology, Foliations, and Group Actions - Workshop On Topology January 6-17, 1992 Pontificia Universidade Catolica, (1994) - Libgen - Li

    Uploaded by

    Anton Baëza
    17 views290 pages

    Original Title

    Paul a. Schweitzer, Steven Hurder - Differential Topology, Foliations, And Group Actions_ Workshop on Topology January 6-17, 1992 Pontificia Universidade Catolica, (1994) - Libgen.li

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    17 views290 pages

    Paul A. Schweitzer, Steven Hurder - Differential Topology, Foliations, and Group Actions - Workshop On Topology January 6-17, 1992 Pontificia Universidade Catolica, (1994) - Libgen - Li

    Uploaded by

    Anton Baëza

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 290
    CONTEMPORARY MATHEMATICS 161 Differential Topology, Foliations, and Group Actions Workshop on Topology January 6-17, 1992 Pontificia Universidade Catélica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Paul A. Schweitzer, S.J. Steven Hurder Nathan Moreira dos Santos José Luis Arraut Editors American Mathematical Society Providence, Rhode Island EDITORIAL BOARD Craig Huneke, managing editor Clark Robinson J. T. Stafford Linda Preiss Rothschild Peter M. Winkler The Workshop on Topology was held at the Pontificia Universidade Catdélica of Rio de Janerio, from January 6-17, 1992, with support from CAPES, CNPq, FAPESP, FAPERJ, FINEP, OAS, NSF, CNRS, GMD, the Japanese government, PUC-Rio, IBM do Brisil, Coca-Cola do Brasil, Grupo Votorantim, Varig, Banco Itau, Livraria Canuto, and Restaurante Marangone. 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 57-06; Secondary 57R30, 57R20, 58A12, 57S17, 58F 15. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Workshop on Topology (1992: Pontificia Universidade Catélica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) Differential topology, foliations, and group actions/ Workshop on Topology, January 6-17, 1992, Pontificia Universidade Catélica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Paul A. Schweitzer. .. [et al.]. p. cm. — (Contemporary mathematics, ISSN 0271-4132; v. 161) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-8218-5170-5 (acid free) 1. Differential topology—Congresses. 2. Foliations (Mathematics) Congresses. I. Schweitzer, Paul A., 1937-. II. Title. IIT. Series: Contemporary mathematics (American Mathematical Society); v. 161. QA613.3.W67 1992 93-4652 514—de20 CIP Copying and reprinting. Individual readers of this publication, and nonprofit libraries acting for them, are permitted to make fair use of the material, such as to copy an article for use in teaching or research. Permission is granted to quote brief passages from this publication in reviews, provided the customary acknowledgment of the source is given. Republication, systematic copying, or multiple reproduction of any material in this publication (including abstracts) is permitted only under license from the American Mathematical Society. Requests for such permission should be addressed to the Manager of Editorial Services, American Mathematical Society, P.O. Box 6248, Providence, Rhode Island 02940-6248. Requests can also be made by e-mail to reprint-permission@math.ams.org. The appearance of the code on the first page of an article in this publication (including ab- stracts) indicates the copyright owner’s consent for copying beyond that permitted by Sections 107 or 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law, provided that the fee of $1.00 plus $.25 per page for each copy be paid directly to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, Massachusetts 01923. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying, such as copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works, or for © Copyright 1994 by the American Mathematical Society. All rights reserved. The American Mathematical Society retains all rights except those granted to the United States Government. Printed in the United States of America. ® The paper used in this book is acid-free and falls within the guidelines established to ensure permanence and durability. © Printed on recycled paper. ticles in this volume were printed from copy prepared by the authors. the articles in this volume were typeset by the authors using Aj4S-TEX, the American Mathematical Society’s TEX macro system. 10987654321 99 98 97 96 95 94 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .-------ee eee eee cece eee e cece eect eee eee eeeenees ix PROGRAM OF THE WORKSHOP ON TOPOLOGY ...... xi Foliations 1. Topological Obstructions to Smoothing Proper Foliations by JOHN CANTWELL and LAWRENCE CONLON .... 1 2. Deformations of Holomorphic Foliations by OMEGAR CALVO-ANDRADE ............. 2000s eeeee eee 21 3. Transverse Euler Classes of Foliations on Non-Atomic Foliation Cycles by STEVEN HURDER. and YOSHIHIKO MITSUMATSU .... 29 4. Foliated Cohomology and Characteristic Classes by NATHAN M. DOS SANTOS ............0cseceeseeeeeeeeee 41 5. A List of Questions about Foliations by REMI LANGEVIN ............cccceeeeeeeeeeeeeenneeeeeee 59 De Rham Theory and Singularities 6. Duality and De Rham Complex on Singular Varieties by A.G. ALEKSANDROV ............0ccceeeee eee eeeeeeeees 81 7. De Rham Theorems for Singular Varieties by JEAN-PAUL BRASSELET ... - 95 8. On the Equisingularity of Families of Corank 1 Generic Germs by M.A.S. RUAS «0.2... cece cee eee cece eee e eee ne eee en tenes 113 Two Surveys on Actions 9. Cohomology and Actions of Finite Groups by ALEJANDRO ADEM . 10. A Survey of Rigidity Theory for Anosov Actions by STEVEN HURDER ..............ceceeeeeeeenee eee eeeeeee 143 viii CONTENTS Low-Dimensional Topology 11. An Introduction to Geometric Topology: Geometric Structures on Manifolds of Dimensions 2and3 by NICOLAU CORCGAO SALDANHA ........--0:seee eee ee ee 175 12. On 4-Dimensional Bundle Theories by DUANE RANDALL ....... 0.0... c ccc e eee eeeeee ee eee eens 217 13. On Foliations, Concordance Spaces, and the Smale Conjectures by DUANE RANDALL and PAUL A. SCHWEITZER, S.J. .. 235 14. Generic 1-Parameter Families of Closed Space Curves by J.J. NUNO BALLESTEROS and M.C. ROMERO FUSTER 259 Characteristic Classes 15. Dependence Relations for Cheeger-Chern-Simons Invariants of Locally Symmetric Spaces by JOHAN L. DUPONT and FRANZ W. KAMBER ......... 271 16. Obstructions to Immersions of Projective Stiefel Manifolds by NELZA ELISABETE BARUFATTI ...........-.0:020000+ 281 INTRODUCTION This volume contains the Proceedings of the Workshop on Topology which took place at the Pontificia Universidade Catélica of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio) from January 6 to 17, 1992, with the participation of about a hundred mathematicians from Brazil and various other countries. The four minicourses and about forty lectures and contributed papers covered a variety of topics in differential and algebraic topology, including group actions, foliations, low dimensional topology, and connections with dif- ferential geometry, among others. The main area of concentration was foliation theory, reflecting the interests of most of the topology group at PUC-Rio, but there was a lively interchange on various other topics of current research in topology. The scientific program and the list of participants are included below. The contents of this volume reflect both this concentration and dis- persion. The first section consists of several articles on. various aspects of foliation theory, such as their characteristic classes, degree of differen- tiability, and singularities of holomorphic foliations. It also contains an excellent list of open problems for foliations research, the result of two problem sessions during the Workshop and much careful work by Remi Langevin in contact with many specialists in the field. Two articles in the second section, starting from different but comple- mentary perspectives, relate De Rham theory to singularities and strat- ifications. The third section contains two survey articles on actions — Alejandro Adem’s minicourse on finite group actions and cohomology and Hurder’s survey of rigidity of Anosov actions. Finally there are some papers in topology of low dimensions and characteristic classes, includ- ing the notes of Nicolau Saldanha’s elementary minicourse on geometric structures on 2- and 3-manifolds. Ron Stern’s minicourse on 4-manifolds is not included in this volume, nor is Etienne Ghys’ minicourse on the dy- namics of the horocyclic flow (based on his Séminaire Bourbaki lecture, Exposé 747, November 1991). The Organizing Committee of the Workshop was composed of Profs. Placido Andrade, José Luis Arraut, Marcos Craizer, Suely Druck, Nathan Moreira dos Santos, and Paul Schweitzer (chair), all from PUC-Rio, Lawrence Conlon (Washington University, St. Louis), Luiz Anténio Favaro (Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Carlos campus), Daciberg Lima Goncalves (Universidade de Sao Paulo), and Mrs. Maria Tereza Milagres Nascimento, secretary. x INTRODUCTION As in any meeting, the staff support was essential for its smooth func- tioning, and this was especially so in a period of financial crisis and at the beginning of a new fiscal year in Brazil. The excellent work of the Workshop Secretary Maria Tereza Milagres Nascimento made its success possible; she showed that she really deserves her maiden name ‘Milagres’ (which means ‘miracles’)! In the name of the Organizing Committee, I would like to thank her and other staff members of the Mathematics Department and other sections of PUC-Rio for their invaluable contribu- tions. We would also like to express our sincere and deep thanks to the many government organs and private companies whose financial support made the Workshop possible (listed under “Sources of Support” below), especially the CNPq (the main source of financial support) and the Vo- torantim Group (whose early support was essential). The four minicourse lecturers deserve our grateful appreciation for their excellent presenta- tions. In conclusion, on behalf of the editors of these Proceedings and the Workshop Organizing Committee, I would like to thank the American Mathematical Society for including this volume in the Contemporary Mathematics series. I am personally very grateful to Steve Hurder for doing the lion’s share of the work of editing this volume. I hope it will contribute to the continuing vitality of research in topology and related areas. Paul A. Schweitzer, S.J. Rio de Janeiro, June 1993 SOURCES OF SUPPORT We gratefully acknowledge support from the following government organs and private companies: Brazilian government organs: CAPES, CNPq, FAPESP, FAPERJ, FINEP; Foreign government organs: OAS, NSF (U.S.A.), CNRS (France), GMD (Germany), Japanese government; Private sources: PUC-Rio, IBM do Brasil, Coca-Cola do Brasil, Grupo Votorantim, Varig, Banco Itai, Livraria Canuto, Restaurante Marangone. PROGRAM OF THE WORKSHOP ON TOPOLOGY MINICOURSES Alejandro Adem, Cohomology and actions of finite groups. Etienne Ghys, The horocycle flow and ergodic theory. Ronald Stern, Recent developments in smooth 4-manifolds. Nicolau Saldanha, Geometric structures of 2 and 3-manifolds LECTURES Jacob Palis, Recent developments in the theory of chaotic dynamical systems. Steven Hurder, Geometric rigidity for lattice actions. William H. Meeks, The topological uniqueness of Heegaard and minimal surfaces in R3. Séstenes Lins, A string theory for 3-manifolds. J.P.Brasselet, De Rham theorems for singular varieties — a survey. José Seade, Invariants of 3-manifolds and surface singularities. Shigenori Matsumoto, The Lie affine foliations on 4-manifolds. Nathan M. dos Santos, Foliated cohomology and characteristic classes. Lawrence Conlon, Surgery and foliations of knot complements. Yoshihiko Mitsumatsu, Amenability of foliations and characteristic classes of SL(2, R)-actions on surfaces. Duane Randall, Topological bundles with fiber R*. Pawel Walczak, Mean curvature in the theory of foliations. Michel Boileau, Foliations with compact leaves and bounded cohomology. J. Omegar Calvo, Some irreducible components of the space of holomorphic foliations. Elmar Vogt, Foliating R" in codimension two by tori. Takashi Tsuboi, Rationality of certain foliations. Maria Aparecida Soares Ruas, Geometry and classification of singularities of surfaces in 3-space. Xavier Gémez-Mont, The index of vector fields on singular surfaces. Franz Kamber, Foliation reduction and the twistor correspondence. Paul Schweitzer, Contractibility of the space of foliations of S? x I. Maria del Carmen Romero Fuster, Topological properties of bitangent surfaces associated to generic families of curves. Daniel Lehmann, Realizing usual diagrams of algebraic topology in differential geometry. xi xii PROGRAM OF THE WORKSHOP ON TOPOLOGY Aleksandr G. Aleksandrov, On the De Rham complez of singular spaces. Marcos Craizer, Linearization of codimension one R?-actions near a compact orbit. José Maria Montesinos, Arithmetic 2-bridge knot orbifolds. Harold Rosenberg, The geometry of hypersurfaces of constant curvature. Nicolau Saldanha, Stability of compact actions of R”. Sandy Blank, Irrational foliations on tori. Alejandro Adem, A splitting theorem for the K-theory of a discrete group. Nelza Barufatti, Immersions of projective Stiefel manifolds. Remi Langevin, How to generalize entropy of maps to foliations, relations and operators. Ricardo Cruz, Non locally flat embeddings of circles in spheres. Fabiano Brito, Heinz’s problem for Weingarten surfaces. CONTRIBUTED TALKS Dirce K.H. Mochida, Geometric characterization of the singularities of height functions on surfaces in R*. Maria Gorete C. Andrade, A cohomological invariant for pairs of groups. Norikazu Hashiguchi, On the rigidity of PL-representation of a surface group. Pedro Luiz Pergher, On the equivariant bordism class of actions of (Z2)*. Oziride Manzoli Neto, Seifert surfaces for knotted manifolds. Richard Nelson Urzua, Cohomology of Z? actions in the affine group of T4. Rafael Ruggiero, Expansive dynamics and hyperbolic geometry. LIST OF PARTICIPANTS “*” designates student participants. Affiliations are those at the time of the Workshop. ADEM, Alejandro (Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison) ALEKSANDROV, Aleksandr G. (Moscow) ANDRADE, Antonio Aparecido de (UNESP +) ANDRADE, Maria Gorete Carreira* (UNESP) ANDRADE, Placido (PUC-Rio?) ANDRADE, Roseli Nozaki Grave de (UEM *) ARRAUT, José Luis (PUC-Rio) 1Univ. do Estado de Sao Paulo 2Pontificia Universidade Catélica do Rio de Janeiro 3Univ. Estadual de Maringé, Parané PROGRAM OF THE WORKSHOP ON TOPOLOGY x BALDIN, Nelio (UFSCar *) BARBOT, Thierry* (Ecole Normale Supérieure, Lyon) BARROS, Paulo Henrique Viana de (PUC-Rio) BARROS, Tomas Edson* (UNICAMP 5) BARROSO, Natalia* (PUC-Rio) BARUFATTI, Nelza Elizabete (ICMSC ®) BERGE, Analia* (Universidad de Buenos Aires) BLANK, Sandy (Northeastern Univ.) BOILEAU, Michel (Univ. Paul Sabatier, Toulouse) BRASSELET, Jean-Paul (CIRM - CNRS) BRITO, Fabiano (PUC-Rio) CALVO-ANDRADE, José Omegar (CIMAT, Guanajuato, México) CHAVES, Lucas Monteiro* (UNICAMP) CONLON, Lawrence (Washington Univ., St. Louis) CONTRERAS, Gonzalo (PUC-Rio) COSTA, André Vieira* (UFPe) CRAIZER, Marcos (PUC-Rio) CRUZ, Ricardo (UNICAMP) DA SILVA, Roberto Correa (IME-USP ") DIDIER, Maria Angela Caldas* (UFPe ®) DOS SANTOS, Josenildo (UFPe) DOS SANTOS, Nathan Moreira (PUC-Rio) DRUCK, Suely (PUC-Rio) EARP, Ricardo Sé (PUC-Rio) FANTI, Erminia de Lourdes Campelo (UNESP-IBILCE) FARINA, Leandro* (PUC-Rio) FAVARO, Luiz A. (ICMSC) FELIPE, Luis Humberto G.* (IMPA °) FERREIRA, Jorge (UEM) FIRMO, Sebastido (PUC-Rio) FRANCO, Valdeni Soliant (UEM) GAGLIANONE, Maria Angelica M.* (PUC-Rio) GARCIA, Nelson Martins (PUC-Rio) GHYS, Etienne (Ecole Normale Supérieure, Lyon) GOMEZ-MONT, Xavier (CIMAT, Guanajuato, México) ‘Universidade Federal de So Carlos, Sao Paulo *Universidade de Campinas ®Universidade de So Paulo, Sao Carlos Universidade de Sio Paulo *Universidade Federal de Pernambuco *Instituto de Matematica Pura e Aplicada PROGRAM OF THE WORKSHOP ON TOPOLOGY HACON, Derek (PUC-Rio) HASHIGUCHI, Norikazu (Univ. of Tokyo) HUNTLEY, Jonathan (Baruch College, New York) HURDER, Steven (Univ. of Minois at Chicago) IGLESIAS, Rodrigo* (Univ. Nacional del Sur, Argentina) KAMBER, Franz W. (Univ. of Illinois at Urbana) LACERDA, Jorge Ferreira de* (PUC-Rio) LANGEVIN, Remi (Univ. de Dijon) LEHMANN, Daniel (IUFM de Montpellier) LINS, Séstenes (UFPe) LOPES, Hélio C.V. (PUC-Rio) MANZOLI Neto, Oziride (ICMSC) MARKIEWICZ, Daniel Wolf* (PUC-Rio) MATHEUS, Carlos Jose* (IME-USP) MATSUMOTO, Shigenori (Nihon Univ.) MEDEIROS, Breno Fonseca de* (UF Pe) MEEKS III, William H. (Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst) MITSUMATSU, Yoshihiko (Chuo University) MOCHIDA, Dirce Kiyomi Hayashida (UFSCar) MONTORFANO, Carla* (UEM) MONTESINOS, José Maria (Univ. Complutense, Madrid) NOGUEIRA DA SILVA, Jose Antunes* (PUC-Rio) ORE, Mario Pedro* (PUC-Rio) PALIS, Jacob (IMPA) PEREIRA, Maria do Socorro (PUC-Rio) PERGHER, Pedro Luiz Queiroz (UFSCar) PIGNOL, Ricardo Jorge* (Univ. Nacional del Sur, Argentina) PONTUAL, Natalino* (PUC-Rio) RANDALL, Duane (Loyola Univ., New Orleans) REBELO, Julio Cesar de Souza* (PUC-Rio) RIGAS, Alcibiades (UNICAMP) ROMERO FUSTER, Maria del Carmen (Univ. Federal de Vicosa) ROSENBERG, Harold (Univ. de Paris VII) ROSSINI, Isabel Cristina (UNESP) RUAS, Maria Aparecida Soares (ICMSC) RUBINSTEIN, Beny* (PUC-Rio) RUGGIERO, Rafael (PUC-Rio) SALDANHA, Nicolau (PUC-Rio) SANTOS, Elizabeth Ferreira (IME-USP) SARMIENTO, Alberto* (PUC-Rio) PROGRAM OF THE WORKSHOP ON TOPOLOGY x SCHWEITZER, Paul (PUC-Rio) SEADE, José (Inst. Tecnol. Auténomo de México) SOUZA, Max Oliveira de Souza* (PUC-Rio) STERN, Ronald (Univ. of California at Irvine) TISCHLER, David (Queens College) TSUBOI, Takashi (Univ. of Tokyo) TSUCHIYA, Nobuo (Toin Univ. of Yokohama) TURNER, Stuart (PUC-Rio) URZUA, Richard Nelson (PUC-Rio) VOGT, Elmar (Freie Universitit, Berlin) WALCZAK, Pawet (Univ. of Lodz, Poland) WINKELNKEMPER, H. Elmar (Univ. of Maryland, College Park) Topological Obstructions to Smoothing Proper Foliations JOHN CANTWELL AND LAWRENCE CONLON ApstRact. The topology of a foliation can obstruct a given degree of dif. ferentiability. For compact, foliated manifolds of codimension one with all leaves proper, a necessary and sufficient condition is given for the foliation to be C?-smoothable and, equivalently, to be C°-smoothable. 1. Introduction Let M be a compact, orientable n—manifold and let F be a transversely ori- entable foliation of M with (n — 1)-dimensional leaves. If 9M #4 0, we assume that its components are leaves of F. We do not assume that the foliation F is smooth (of any class C*, k > 1), only that it is integral to an (n — 1)-plane distribution of class C°. Since there is a nowhere zero C® vector field, everywhere transverse to such a distribution, we obtain a one-dimensional C™ foliation F+ that is everywhere transverse to F. It follows easily, via the transverse C™ structure of F+, that the leaves of F inherit natural C® structures. This much smoothness is always easy to obtain when constructing foliations by cut-and-paste methods and it obviates a lot of technical difficulties associated with “badly crumpled” leaves. Because of a lemma of Nancy Kopell [7, Lemma 1(a)], foliators have known for some time that rather natural cut-and-paste constructions of foliations can easily fail to be transversely C?. This smoothness problem is rooted in quite visible qualitative properties of the foliation. In the present paper, it is our pur- pose to develop this theme for foliations whose leaves are all properly imbedded. submanifolds, showing that C?~smoothability and C°-smoothability are each 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 57R30; Secondary 57R10. Key words and phrases. proper foliation, C*-smoothable, depth, juncture. Research by the first author was partially supported by NSF Contract DMS-8900127. Research by the second author was partially supported by NSF Contract DMS-8822462. ‘This paper is in final form and no version of it will be submitted for publication elsewhere. © 1994 American Mathematical Society 0271-4132/94 $1.00 + $.25 per ‘page 2 JOHN CANTWELL AND LAWRENCE CONLON equivalent to “all leaves are at finite depth and all junctures are compact”, a highly visible property. This result is implicit in earlier work of the authors [2], but was obscured by the way that our exposition of the generalized Poincaré-Bendixson theory in [1, Section 6] used the C? hypothesis more than was absolutely necessary. In [2], that hypothesis was only needed to guarantee a suitable version of the theory of levels and an “octopus-like” decomposition [1, Proposition (6.3)] of each leaf. In Section 3, we will show that the theory of levels holds for smooth-leaved C® foliations, provided that every leaf is at finite depth. In Section 4, we will reformulate the proof of the decomposition in [1] so as to use no smoothness hypothesis, but only compactness of the junctures. Our result will then follow from the arguments in [2]. We also conjecture that the condition that all leaves be at finite depth and all junctures be “bounded” is sufficient for C'-smoothability. This is almost certainly true, but it must be classified as a conjecture until the details are checked. One of our motives in this work is to understand better the smoothness, or lack thereof, of the finite depth foliations of knot complements, constructed by David Gabai [5], (6]. Many of these cannot be constructed with only compact junctures, hence cannot be smooth of class C? [3, THEOREM III]. But it seems likely that all can be constructed so as to have only “bounded junctures” , hence, presumably, to be of class C1. 2. Definitions and statements of results The key concepts in this paper are “leaves of finite depth” and “junctures”. DEFINITION 2.1. A leaf L of F is at depth 0 if it is compact. If the term depth k, 0 < k < q—1, has been defined, then a leaf L is at depth q if L\ Lis a union of leaves at depths at most q—1, at least one of which is at depth q—1. Tf a leaf is not at some finite depth, it is said to be at infinite depth. Implicit in this definition is the fact that leaves at finite depth are necessarily proper (i.e., properly imbedded submanifolds). For C? foliations, the assumption that all leaves are proper implies that all leaves are at finite depth, but this fails for C® foliations. If all leaves are at finite depth, there may be no finite upper bound to the depths, even if the foliation is of class C™. The definition of the term “juncture” requires some preliminary considera- tions. Let L. be a leaf of F at depth k, and let z, € L,. Let J = [z,,2] be a nondegenerate arc in the leaf of the transverse, one-dimensional foliation F+ through z,. The interval notation makes sense after we fix a suitable transverse orientation for F. If L is a leaf at depth k +1, approaching L, on the side of the arc J, then LOI =LA (26,2) = {Ym} aa and we can number this sequence so that it converges monotonically to z.. TOPOLOGICAL OBSTRUCTIONS TO SMOOTHING PROPER FOLIATIONS 3 L, Ficure 1. A compact juncture LEMMA 2.2. There is a smallest integer £ > 1 and an integer K > 1 such that L, has a holonomy contraction f of J to x, with f(ym) = Ymse, Vm > K. Ifo is a loop on L,, based at z., the holonomy ho(ym) = Ym+u(o)e 18 defined for all large values of m, and v(a) € Z depends only on the homotopy class of a. PRoor. If LN (z.,z] = {ym}22-1, the Dippolito semistability theorem (4, Theorem 3] implies that, for some integer K > 1, no ym, with m > K, is fixed by every holonomy element of L,. But if \ is a loop on LZ, whose holonomy satisfies h,(yx) = yx+e, some £ > 1, it is clear that Ay(ym) = Ym+e, Vm > K. Choose so that £ is minimal and set f = hy. It is evident that, for any loop ¢ on L,, based at £4, ho(¥m) = Y¥m+n(o) is defined for all large values of m and for n(c) € Z depending only on the homotopy class of o. If o were a loop for which n(c) is not a multiple of £, one could find o’ = "0" such that ho: (Ym) = Ym+ar where 0 < a < 4, contradicting the minimality of 4. 0 COROLLARY 2.3. The map v : %(L+,2+) > Z is a homomorphism of groups. This corollary is clear and allows us to view v € H*(L,;Z). DEFINITION 2.4. The class v € H1(L,;Z) is called the cohomological L- juncture on L,. If we view v € H1(L,;R), then it can be represented by a suitable closed 1-form w € A1(L,). DEFINITION 2.5. If v = (w], where w is a compactly supported, closed 1-form on L,, then we say that the juncture v is compact. When the juncture is compact, it has Poincaré dual represented by a compact, connected submanifold N C L,. If the loop o does not meet N, then ho (ym) = 4 JOHN CANTWELL AND LAWRENCE CONLON Ym, for all m > 1 large enough that the left hand side is defined. In general, v(q) is the homological intersection number of o with N. From this, one obtains very simple pictures of the way in which a suitable neighborhood B of an end of L winds in on the leaf L,. We will see that B = [2 Bi, where each segment B; is homeomorphic to the manifold obtained by cutting L, apart along N. The segments are sequentially joined at boundary components. An example is pictured in Figure 1 in which L, is at depth 1 and L is at depth 2. This example should make clear the reason for the term “juncture”. DEFINITION 2.6. The foliated manifold (M, F) is C1-smoothable if there is a homeomorphism (M, F) & (M’, F’), where (M’, F’) is a C?-foliated manifold. We can state our main result. MAIN THEOREM. If every leaf of F is proper, the following are equivalent. (i) (M,F) is C?-smoothable. (ii) Every leaf of F is at finite depth and every juncture is compact. (iii) (M, F) is C°-smoothable. Since M is compact, any two Riemannian metrics on M differ only up to bounded distortion. Consequently, the relativization of these metrics to a leaf L, will also differ only up to bounded distortion. Such relativized metrics define a norm ||w|| on the 1-forms w € A!(L,) and w will be bounded relative to one such norm if and only if it is bounded relative to all. FicureE 2. A noncompact but bounded juncture DEFINITION 2.7. If v = [w], where w is a closed, bounded 1-form on L,, then the juncture v is said to be bounded. TOPOLOGICAL OBSTRUCTIONS TO SMOOTHING PROPER FOLIATIONS 5 An example is pictured in Figure 2, where L, is a cylinder S1 x R (metrically as well as topologically) and the Poincaré dual of the juncture is represented by the infinite singular cycle given by any triangulation of the line N = {1}xR. The fact that this juncture is bounded can be seen as follows. A normal neighborhood N = (1-6,1+6) x R of N in L, is the support of a closed form w € A}(L,) such that ws) = f(s) ds, V(s,t) EN, and Ite f(s) ds =1. Ive Clearly this form is bounded and v = [w]. The leaf L is a plane winding in on L, as pictured. This situation is easily realized in a suitable foliation of T? x [0,1], but the Kopell lemma implies that it cannot be of class C?. ConJEcTURE. If every leaf of F is at finite depth and if the junctures are all bounded, then (M, F) is C!-smoothable. 3. Finite depth We fix the assumption that every leaf of F is at some finite depth. We show that, in this case, the main results in the theory of levels [1, Section 4] hold without the C?-smoothness requirement that is usually essential. Let O(F) denote the family of open, F-saturated subsets of M. For later use, we recall here some fairly standard terminology related to open, F-saturated sets. If U € O(F) is connected, the notations 0, i: i 4 M, F = i-(F), and F+ = #-1(F+), respectively, ([2], [1], et al.,) are used for the transverse completion of U, its natural immersion into M, and the induced foliations of 6. + respectively. Recall that 0 is a (generally noncompact) manifold with boundary a finite union of leaves of F. The set 6U = i(0U) is called the border of U. LEMMA 3.1. IfU € O(F) and if L is a leaf of F|U, then LOU contains a leaf F which is a minimal set of F\U. PRooF. Indeed, let F C LMU have least depth of all the leaves in this set. Then FNU = F, so F is minimal for FU. O The proof of the following lemma uses the asymptotic limit set lim L of a leaf L of F. This is the compact, nonempty, F-saturated set limL =(\ZNK, K where K ranges over all compact subsets of Z and the closures L \ K are taken in M. Intuitively, each F-plaque P in lim L is the uniform limit of a sequence of disjoint plaques {P;}22, of L. 6 JOHN CANTWELL AND LAWRENCE CONLON LeMMA 3.2. Let @ #U € O(F) and let Y C U be the union of the minimal sets of F|U. Then Y is a nonempty, relatively closed subset of U. Proor. The set Y is nonempty by Lemma 3.1. Let {y;}22, C Y be a sequence of distinct points and suppose that lim;... yi = y € U. We must prove that y €Y. That is, we prove that the leaf Ly of F|U through y is a minimal set of FU. Set Ly = Ly,, Vi > 1. Let J C U be an F+-plaque through y. We can assume that all y; € J. Since L; is minimal and proper, it can only meet J in finitely many points, so we can assume that y; is the closest point of L;N J to y. In particular, each y; must be a fixed point for the holonomy of Ly around loops based at y. By Dippolito’s semi-stability theorem [4, Theorem 3], there is an imbedding L, x [0,1] + M such that Ly x {0} = Ly and Ly x {1/i} = Li, for all sufficiently large values of i. It follows that lim Ly = lim L; C M \U, hence that Ly is a minimal set of FU. O DEFINITION 3.3. For each integer k > 0, Cj is the union of all leaves at depths Sk. COROLLARY 3.4. For each k > 0, Cy is compact. Proor. For the compactness of Co, apply Lemma 3.2 to the case U = M. Inductively, suppose that C, is compact and let U, = M~ Cy. A leaf L C Ux is minimal for ¥|U; if and only if lim Z C Cx, which means that L has depth at most k +1. But L C U, implies that the depth of L is at least k + 1, proving that the union ¥,41 of minimal sets of F|U; is the union of all leaves of F at depth k + 1. By Lemma 3.2, this is a relatively closed subset of M \ C; hence Cri = Ck UYe41 is compact. O LEMMA 3.5. If L is a leaf of F, then L is a finite union of leaves. Proor. If L is compact (i.e., of depth 0), the assertion is trivial. Assume the assertion to be true for leaves at depths at most k > 0. Suppose that the depth of L is k+1, set Y = L\ L, a compact, F-saturated subset of Cy, and let U € O(F) denote the component of M \ Y containing L. Since U is connected, its border is 6U = Lj UL2 U---UL,, a finite union of leaves at depths at most k. By [1, Lemma 4.1] (the proof of which needed no smoothness assumptions), Y =1,UT,u---UL,. By the inductive hypothesis, this is a finite union of leaves, hence ZL = Y UL is also a finite union of leaves. O 4. Generalized Poincaré—Bendixson theory ‘We continue to assume that all leaves are at finite depth. We assume also that all junctures are compact. Our goal is to describe a decomposition of each leaf, corresponding to the way in which that leaf approaches leaves at lower depths (Theorem 4.3). This theorem was proven in [1, (6.3)] for C? foliations. It will be clear from the proof given here that the C?-smoothness hypothesis was really needed only to guarantee compactness of the junctures. But the proof in [1] TOPOLOGICAL OBSTRUCTIONS TO SMOOTHING PROPER FOLIATIONS 7 obscured that fact by deducing the theorem from a local version [1, (6.1)] that made more extensive use of the hypothesis. DEFINITION 4.1. Let (x, z] be a subarc of a leaf of F+, oriented by the trans- verse orientation of F. Let L. be the leaf of F through z. If (x,z] NL. = 9, we say that z projects (in the negative direction) to L, and we write p(z) = x € L,. Similarly, one defines projection to L, in the positive direction. Let L and L, be leaves of F and let B C L be a complete, connected, noncompact submanifold of dimension n — 1 (= dim(Z)). Suppose that No = OB is a compact, connected submanifold of L. Finally, suppose that each point of B projects to L, (say, in the negative direction) and remark that p: B — L, is locally a diffeomorphism. DEFINITION 4.2. We will say that B spirals on L, (on the positive side) if the following conditions are satisfied: (i) B = Us2o Bi, where, for each i > 0, B; is a complete, connected, sub- manifold of dimension n—1, 0B; = N;UN;+1 is a union of two compact connected components, Bj Bi+1 = Ni41 and int(B,) N int(B;) = 0 if i# Sj; (ii) there is a compact, connected, (n —2)-dimensional submanifold N C L. (called the juncture of the spiral) such that p|N; maps N; diffeomorphi- cally onto N, 0 0, p-*(y) N (Bi \ Ni+1) is a single point y;; (iv) for each y € L., the sequence p~1(y) = {y;}i>0 converges monotonically to y in [y, yo). Similarly, using projection to L. in the positive direction, one defines the notion of B spiraling on L, on the negative side. REMARK. The projection p carries int(B;) diffeomorphically onto L. \ N, i> 0. In particular, N does not separate L.. We are ready to state the major result of this section. THEOREM 4.3. Suppose that the foliated manifold (M,F) has all junctures compact. If L is a leaf at depth k, then L=AuUB'U---UB4, where A is a compact, connected, (n — 1)- dimensional manifold with boundary components N},...,N% and (i) ANBI=Ni,1 1 and K > 1 be as in Lemma 2.2. By [1, (3.3)], there is a decomposition Le = A,UBLU-++-U BE such that (i) Ax C L, is a compact, connected submanifold with boundary, dim A, = dim L,; (ii) each Blisa complete but unbounded component of L, ~ int(A.); (iii) BZ M.A, = OB is a component of 04., 1 K. If he(yx) = yx, then he(ym) = Ym, Vm > K. Proor. The final assertion was observed in the proof of Lemma 2.2. It is clear that, for K sufficiently large, each of the finitely many holonomy elements hg, o € Go, and each h,,, 1 K. Since the loops tT €G;,1< 4 K, and either hy or h7} will not move h;,(ym) further from L.. Thus, if ¢ = 1; *r7j, either hy or hz! is defined at every ym,m>K. O LEMMA 4.5. If Ax is chosen large enough, then any system G of generating loops, chosen as above, will have the property that he(ym) = Ym, VO €E G\ Go andVm>K. Proor. The juncture v € H1(L,;R) is represented by a compactly supported 1-form w, hence A, only need be large enough to engulf supp(w). O TOPOLOGICAL OBSTRUCTIONS TO SMOOTHING PROPER FOLIATIONS 9 LeMMA 4.6. If A, is chosen as in Lemma 4.5, the Poincaré dual of v is represented by a compact, connected, (n — 2)-dimensional submanifold N, C int(A.) with ON, = 0. PROOF. Since the contraction hy has ha(Ym) = Ym+e, we have v(A) = 1, so v is a nondivisible class in H1(L.;Z). Let i: 0A, + Ax be the inclusion. Any cycle c lying in a component of 0A, is homologous to an integral linear combina- tion of elements of some Gj, hence v(c) = 0 by Lemma 4.5. That is, i*(v|A.) = 0 and it follows that we can view v|A, as a nondivisible class in H1(A,,0A,;Z). It is standard that the Poincaré dual of this class is represented by a compact, con- nected, (n — 2)-dimensional submanifold N,, having no boundary and contained in int(A,). This same manifold represents the Poincaré dual in Hy—2(L.;Z) of the compactly supported class v. 0 PROOF OF THEOREM 4.3. The essential feature of N, is that v(c) is the in- tersection number of o with N,, for every loop o on Ls. Choose x € N,. For the choice of Go € G, generating 71(A,,x), we select T,01,...,0 80 that 7 is in general position with respect to N,, meeting that manifold exactly once with u(r) = +1, o% only meets N, at its endpoints, and v(o,) = 0,1 K,1 0 and 0 (3) => (1). The last of these implications is completely trivial. For the implication (1) = (2), note first that the C? hypothesis and the fact that every leaf is proper rule out the possibility that any leaf lies at infinite level {1, (5.4)]. In the terminology of [1], every leaf is a local minimal set at some finite level. In this case, it is elementary that the leaves at level k are exactly the leaves at depth k. The fact that all junctures are compact is the content of {1, (6.6)]. The hard step is the proof of the implication (2) => (3). We adapt the proof in [2], that smoothability of class C? implies C°°-smoothability, to prove this implication. For several technical steps whose proofs go through without change and shed no particular insight, we will refer the reader to [2]. 5.1. The Epstein-Millett hierarchy. The proof that (2) = (3) uses trans- finite induction on the Epstein-Millett hierarchy. We need the following defini- tion. DEFINITION 5.1. Let Y C M be an F-saturated subset, L C Y a leaf. Let x € L and let J be an open arc in a leaf of F+ containing x. If J can be chosen such that each leaf of F|Y meets J at most once, we say that L has locally trivial holonomy pseudogroup relative to Y. THEOREM 5.2 (MILLETT [8]). The proper foliated manifold determines a u- nique countable (possibly finite) ordinal y = y(M,F) and a unique filtration O=MoCMC+»CMaC-+-CM,=M by F-saturated subsets, order isomorphic to the set of ordinals 0 1 spirals corresponding to yi, ¥2,--. ,ye- If L’ is another leaf with L’N (x, z) = {z}921, a sequence converging strictly monotonically to z, it is clear that a holonomy transformation h,, a loop on F based at x, moves 2; if and only if it moves yi. Thus, the spirals on F provided by L and those provided by L’ must have the same juncture. 0 Let p: B — F bea spiral with juncture N C F' and write B = U2, B; as usual. For each i > 0, define 7: By \ Niz1 > Bi41 \ Ni+2 by projection. These maps assemble to a smooth imbedding : B > B, im(n) = U%2, Bi. We obtain a spiral collar of F on the side approached by the spiral by setting c= U b),21. 2EBoNNi This is a manifold with boundary and corners. It is foliated by F|C and F+|C, the leaves of the latter being the fibers of the submersion p : C > F. Relative to the foliation F|C, OC falls into a tangential part 0,C = FU Bo and a transverse part OnC = Uzen,[7(z),2] & N x [a,6], separated by the convex corner N x {b} = No and the concave corner N x {a} = Nj. One can also view C \ F as the quotient space of B x [a,b] by the identifications (x, a) = ((z), b). Spiral collars p : C — F are analogous to foliated products. Loops o on F, based at y € F, define holonomy h, on subares [y, z] C p—*(z), via lifts to leaves of F|C. Generally, the maximal such subare depends on the loop a, so the situation is less comfortable than it is in the case of an honest foliated product, but, with a little care, one can mimic much of the theory of foliated products. Let y € F\ N and let G C ™(F,y) be a set of generators {[7;]}{2o with the following properties: (i) the loop 79 meets N in exactly one point, having homological intersection number 7 * N = 1; (ii) the loop 7; lies entirely in F \ N, Vi>1. DEFINITION 5.15. The set G C ™(F,y), as above, will be called a generating system that respects the juncture N. LEMMA 5.16. Let p: C > F be a spiral collar with juncture N C F, and let G = {[r]}0 C m(F,y) be a generating system respecting the juncture. Then hy, : p(y) > p7"(y) is defined, Vi > 0, hry is a contraction of that fiber to y, and h,, € Homeo,(p~!(y)), Wi > 1. The spiral collar is completely determined (up to a homeomorphism that preserves all relevant structure) by {h-,}%o- The proof is completely analogous to the corresponding theorem for foliated bundles. Details can be left as an exercise for the reader. The following conse- quence is the analogue of Lemma 5.12. 14 JOHN CANTWELL AND LAWRENCE CONLON LemMa 5.17. The foliated manifold (C,F|C) is C®-smoothable if and only if there is h € Homeo(p1(y)) and a contraction f : p~*(y) + p7"(y) to y such that, for each i >1, hoh,, oh7! € Diff2(p-1(y)) and hohn = foh. DEFINITION 5.18. Let p: B — F be a spiral with juncture N, y € F\ N, p™1(y) = [y, yo], and let G = {[7;]}$2p be a generating system for (F,y) that respects N. The p-lift of G is the generating system G(B) for 71(B, yo) consisting of the homotopy classes of the p-lifts 7;,, of the loops 75" krack toy, i> 1,k>0. In the spiral collar p: C > F, let y € F \ N as above and p(y) NB = {ui}Eo- Let W_€ O(F|C) be the saturation of the open interval (yi, 90) = (7(yo), Yo)- Then W & B x [y1, yo] and the natural immersion i: W — C carries W onto C\F. Relative to the identification W = B x (yi, yo], one sees that i(z, yo) = x and i(r,y1) = (x). If o is a loop on B based at yo, let he € Homeo,[y1, yo) denote the corresponding total holonomy for W. LEMMA 5.19. [2, Lemma 3.6] If there exists h € Homeo v1, yo] such that, for each [o] € G(B), hoh, oh € Diff P[y1, yo] and is C°-tangent to the identity at y1 and yo, then h defines a C°-smoothing of (C \ F, F\(C \ F)). It will be necessary to extend the smoothing of the interior of the spiral to the boundary. The game plan for this is the content of the following basic proposition. PROPOSITION 5.20. [2, Proposition 3.7] The spiral collar (C,F|C) will be C%-smoothable so that the smoothed foliation is C°-flat at 0,C if, for suitably chosen functions € : G(B) — (0,00) and 7: G(B) — Z*, there is a homeomor- phism h € Homeo,[y1, yo], a8 in Lemma 5.19, with the property that hoh, oh-* and its first n(o) derivatives are e(c)-close to the identity and its first n(o) derivatives, respectively, Vo € G(B). The restriction of this smoothing to C \ F is diffeomorphic to the one induced by h as in Lemma 5.19. The proof that (2) = (3) will proceed, as we have said, by induction on the Epstein-Millett hierarchy in (U,F|U). The inductive hypothesis will be that h can be chosen as in Proposition 5.20 for each arbitrary choice of ¢ and 7. Thus, the vagueness about the “suitable choices” of € and 7 will cause no logical problems. The following definition will be needed for the appropriate formulation of our inductive hypothesis. DEFINITION 5.21. Let LZ be a leaf at depth k, let N C L be a compact, connected, oriented, nonseparating submanifold of codimension 1, and let x9 € L~N. Choose a decomposition L = AU B! U---U BY as in Theorem 4.3, with N U {xo} C int(A). An admissible generating system G(L) for m(L, x0), respecting N and the decomposition of L, is defined by induction on the depth k as follows. TOPOLOGICAL OBSTRUCTIONS TO SMOOTHING PROPER FOLIATIONS 15 (i) Ifk =0, then L = A and G(L) is any finite generating set for 71(A, 20). (ii) If k > 1, let Nj; C L; be the juncture for the spiral p; : Bia Lj, 1 F. If L is a leaf of F|U that is closed in U, then LNC is either empty or a finite union of spirals parallel to B. DEFINITION 5.24. A Dippolito decomposition 7 = QUV, U---U Vim is ad- missible if, for each j = ,m, i(8,V;) consists of one or two parallel spirals. If p; : B? — L; is one of these spirals, with juncture N; C L;, then G(V;) will denote the p;—lift of a generating system G(L;) for ™(L;) that respects N;. Applying Theorem 4.3 to the leaves of 6U, we obtain the following. Lema 5.25. If 04 U € O(F) is connected, then 0 has an admissible Dip- polito decomposition. LEMMA 5.26. [2, Lemma 3.11] Let 6 # U € O(F) be connected and irre- ducible. Let 0 = QUV,U---UVm be an admissible decomposition. IfY CU is the union of the relatively closed leaves of F inU and if O € O(F) is a component of UNY, then there is an admissible Dippolito decomposition O= PUW,U---UW,, each arm W; being of one of the following two types: j = BY) x {a’,b'] C B*G) x [a,b] = Vig), for some i(j) € {1,2,... ,m}; 16 JOHN CANTWELL AND LAWRENCE CONLON (ii) for some component F of 00, there is a spiral collar C of F, with corresponding spiral p: B — F, such that W; C C and 8,W; consists of spirals parallel to B. For the case that F is a border leaf of a foliated product, we describe a simplification of the above. DEFINITION 5.27. Suppose that F and L are leaves of F such that L projects to F. Ifp: L > F is the projection and if L = Uiez B; is a decomposition such that p|U;>, Bi is a spiral onto F, Wn € Z, then p : L = F is called a doubly infinite spiral. Clearly, a doubly infinite spiral p : L — F is an infinite cyclic covering. The following is an easy consequence of Lemma 5.23. LEMMA 5.28. Let U € O(F) be an irreducible foliated product and let F be a component of OU. Then, the relatively closed leaves of F|U form a family of parallel, doubly infinite spirals on F, relative to projection along the fibers of F+. DEFINITION 5.29. Let U € O(F) be an irreducible foliated product, F a component of oo, and let p: oF be projection along the F4+-fibers. Let L CU bea relatively closed leaf, N C F the juncture of the doubly infinite spiral p: L + F, y € FN, and yo € p“*(y) NL. If G = {r;}i>0 is a generating system for 7(F,y) that respects N, then the p-lift of G to yo is the set of lifts Tik of To *747# to loops on L at yo, Vi > 1 and Vk € Z. Lemma 5.30. (2, Lemma 3.13] Let U, p: L — F, and N all be as above. If G(F) is an admissible generating system for 71(F,y) that respects N, then the p-lift of G(F) is an admissible generating system G(L) for m(L, yo). 5.4, The smoothing homeomorphism. Let T be a foliated product, F a boundary component of & and let G(F) be an admissible generating system for 71(F,20). Let [29,2] be’ the leaf of FL issuing from x9, and view this as a compact interval in R. For each r € G(F), the total holonomy is h, € Homeo, [zo, 79]. PROPOSITION 5.31. [2, Proposition 4.1] Let €: G(F) > (0,00) n:G(F) > Zt be given. Then there exists h € Homeo,[2o, 2) such that, for each r € G(F), (i) the map h = hoh, oh7 is an element of Diff©(z0, 6] and is C°- tangent to the identity at ro and x); (ii) the map h and its first n(r) derivatives are uniformly e(r)- close to the identity and its first n(r) derivatives, respectively, on (xo, x6]. TOPOLOGICAL OBSTRUCTIONS TO SMOOTHING PROPER FOLIATIONS 17 In particular, by Lemma 5.12, foliated products 7 are C°°-smoothable. Let U € O(F) be connected and not a foliated product. Fix a Dippolito decomposition T= KUWU---UVm, where each V; = Bi x [0,1]. Since the two components of 0,V; are parallel spirals onto a leaf L;, we can write G(V;) = G(B?), the p;-lift of an admissible generating system G(L;) respecting the juncture. We will write ae) = Uc. j=1 and choose arbitrary functions ¢ : G(B) > (0,00) and n : G(B) > Z*. Let J; denote the leaf of F+ on which the total holonomy transformations h,, [o] € G(V;), are defined, 1 < j < m. As usual, J; is coordinatized as a compact subinterval of R. PROPOSITION 5.32. [2, Proposition 4.2] The C°-foliated manifold (O,F) is homeomorphic to a C®-foliated manifold (i, F) such that (i) F is C%—flat at a0; (ii) the smoothing homeomorphism carries I; onto itself, so we set hy = hI; € Homeo,(1;), 1 Z* so that na(r) > n(r) and limgoo Na(T) = 00, Vr € G(F). By hypothesis, we can choose corresponding smoothing homeomorphisms hg on [2,24] = [20,24] NWa. Set Alfa, 24] = ha, 18 JOHN CANTWELL AND LAWRENCE CONLON Va € Zt, and h|(ZU {20, x}) = id. It is elementary to check that h has all the required properties. O ‘We assume that the foliated product U is irreducible and let X denote the union of the relatively closed leaves of F|U. This is a nonempty, relatively closed subset of U, the union of parallel, doubly infinite spirals p: L — F, F Cc a. ‘The common juncture of these spirals will be denoted, as usual, by N C F and we can assume that 9 € F\ N. By Lemma 5.22, G(F) respects a decomposition F=AUB'U.---U B* such that N C int(A). Lemma 5.34. In proving Proposition 5.31, no generality is lost in assuming that G(F) respects N. Proor. It is only necessary to make a finite change in setting up G(F’) so that it respects N. If G(F) = G(A) U (Uf_, 07 'G(B*)o;), we can rechoose the finite generating set G(A) and the finitely many paths o;, 1 < i 1. The contraction h,, is topologically conjugate to any other contraction, hence to a smooth one that is C°-tangent to the identity at xp and . All assertions follow. Suny, assume the proposition for all irreducible foliated products U with (U) < a, some a > 2, and suppose that 7(U) = a. Let {W,} be a (possibly finite) enumeration of the connected components of U\ X and let Ly be a component of OW;, Vk. By Lemma 5.13, (We) < (UV) = Remark that U \ L; = W is a foliated product, which is irreducible if and only if L; = X. In this case, W = W, and 7(W) < a, so the inductive hy- pothesis smooths (W, F) and, for a suitable choice of € and 7 in that smoothing, Lemma 5.20 can be applied in spiral collars of the two components of 0 to smooth @, F ). If X is a finite union of leaves, essentially the same argument works. If X is an infinite union of leaves, we can take the indices k € Z* and ap- ply the inductive hypothesis to W,,, relative to any choices of €, : G(L%) — (0, 00) and mj, : G(Lx) + Z*, Vk > 1. By letting €, | 0 and m 1 co rapidly enough, we achieve two things. The first is to smooth (W,F), hence also to smooth (U,F|U) by the method of proof of Lemma 5.19, and the second is to extend TOPOLOGICAL OBSTRUCTIONS TO SMOOTHING PROPER FOLIATIONS 19 this smoothing to ,F) by Lemma 5.20, applied to spiral collars of the two components of OU. O PROOF OF PROPOSITION 5.32. By Proposition 5.31 and Lemma 5.12, we as- sume that U is irreducible, hence has a spiral collar for each component of 00. Again, we proceed by induction on y(U). Suppose that (U) = 1. Then F|U has all leaves relatively closed, hence fibers U over S!. The holonomy of each component of OU is generated by a single contraction that produces the spiral, so an easy application of Proposition 5.20 proves this case. For the inductive step, assume that 7(U) = a > 2 and that the assertion has been proven for all smaller ordinals. Let X C U be the union of all relatively closed leaves of F in U. Let {W;} be an enumeration of the set of connected components of U \ X. Each W, is irreducible. If every W;,, is a foliated product and L C X is a leaf, thn W =UNL must, itself, be a foliated product, generally not irreducible. In this case, apply Proposition 5.31, together with Proposition 5.20, to smooth (U7, F) relative to the given € and n. At most finitely many components of U \ X fail to be foliated products. Thus, assuming that there are such components, we denote them by Ui,U2,... ,Uq. These are irreducible and y(Uk)

    You might also like