text:
# Hawking Radiation of Dirac Particles in an Arbitrarily Accelerating Kinnersley Black Hole

## I Introduction

It has been more than a quarter century since Hawking’s remarkable discovery  that a black hole is not completely black but can emit radiation from its event horizon. An important subject in black hole physics is to reveal the thermal properties of various black holes. Last few decades has witnessed much progress on investigating the thermal radiation of scalar fields or Dirac particles in some stationary axisymmetry black holes. Nevertheless most of these efforts (see , for examples) were concentrated on studying the thermal properties of static or stationary black holes. Because a realistic black hole in astrophysics can radiate or absorb matter surrounding it, it is nonstationary and evolves in the time. Thus the thermal properties of non-stationary spacetimes are more interesting than that of static or stationary black holes, and worth much more studies about them. A well-known method to determine the location and the temperature of the event horizon of a dynamical black hole is to calculate vacuum expectation value of the renormalized energy momentum tensor . But this method is very complicated, it gives only an approximate value of the location and that of the temperature. Thus it is of limited use and meets great difficulties in many cases.

To study the Hawking evaporation of the non-stationary black holes, Zhao and Dai  suggested a new method of the generalized tortoise coordinate transformation (GTCT) which can give simultaneously the exact values of the location and the temperature of the event horizon of a non-stationary black hole. By generalizing the common tortoise-type coordinate $`r_{}=r+\frac{1}{2\kappa }\mathrm{ln}(rr_H)`$ in a static or stationary spacetime  (where $`\kappa `$ is the surface gravity of the studied event horizon) to a similar form in a non-static or non-stationary spacetime  and allowing the location of the event horizon $`r_H`$ to be a function of the advanced time $`v=t+r_{}`$ and/or the angles $`\theta ,\phi `$, the GTCT method reduces Klein-Gordon or Dirac equation in a known black hole spacetime to a standard wave equation near the event horizon. For instances, the location of the event horizon is a constant ($`r_H=2M`$) in the Schwarzschild black hole while it is a function of the advanced time ($`r_H=r_H(v)`$) in a Vaidya-type space-time. This method has been applied to investigate the thermal radiation of scalar particles in the non-uniformly accelerating Kinnersley “photon rocket” solution  and in the non-uniformly accelerating Kerr black hole  as well.

However, it is very difficult to investigate the quantum thermal effect of Dirac particles in the non-stationary black holes. The difficulty lies in the non-separability of variables for the Chandrasekhar-Dirac equation  in the most general spacetimes. The Hawking radiation of Dirac particles has been studied only in some non-static black holes . Recently we  have tackled with the evaporation of Dirac particles in a non-stationary axisymmetric black hole. Making use of the GTCT method, we consider the asymptotic behaviors of the first-order and second-order forms of Dirac equation near the event horizon. Using the relations between the first-order derivatives of Dirac spinorial components, we eliminate the crossing-terms of the first-order derivatives in the second-order equations and recast each equation to a standard wave equation near the event horizon. Not only can we re-derive all results obtained by others , but also we find that the Fermionic spectrum of Dirac particles displays another new effect dependent on the interaction between the spin of Dirac particles and the angular momentum of black holes. This spin-rotation effect is absent from the Bosonic spectrum of Klein-Gordon particles.

It is natural to see whether or not our method can work effective in other cases. In this paper, we apply it to deal with the Hawking effect of Dirac particles in a non-spherically symmetric and non-stationary Kinnersley black hole, namely Kinnersley “photon rocket” solution . The local event horizon of a dynamical black hole is determined here by the null hypersurface condition. We use different methods to deduce the location of the event horizon and find that they all give the same result. By means of a GTCT, we can also derive the event horizon equation from the limiting form of the first-order Dirac equation near the event horizon. The location and the shape of the Kinnersley black hole is not spherically symmetric . Then we turn to the second-order Dirac equation. With the aid of a GTCT, we adjust the temperature parameter in order that each component of Dirac spinors satisfies a simple wave equation after being taken limits approaching the event horizon. We demonstrate that both the shape and the temperature of the event horizon of Kinnersley black hole depend on not only the time, but also on the angles. The location and the temperature coincide with those obtained by investigating the Hawking effect of Klein-Gordon particles in the accelerating Kinnersley black hole . But the thermal radiation spectrum of Dirac particles shows a new effect dependent on the interaction between the spin of Dirac particles and the angular acceleration of black holes. This effect displayed in the Fermi-Dirac spectrum is absent in the Bose-Einstein distribution of Klein-Gordon particles. We find that this spin-acceleration coupling effect does not exist in a non-uniformly rectilinearly accelerating Kinnersley black hole.

The paper is outlined as follows: In Sec. 2, we introduce the most general GTCT and derive the equation that determines the location of the event horizon from the null surface condition. Sec. 3 is devoted to discussing the Hawking radiation of Dirac particles in the Kinnersley spacetime. First, we work out the explicit form of Dirac equation in the Newman-Penrose  formalism and investigate the asymptotic behavior of the first-order Dirac equation near the event horizon. The equation that determines the location of the event horizon can be inferred from the vanishing determinant of the coefficients of the first-order derivative terms. Next, we use the relations between the first-order derivative terms to eliminate the crossing-term of the first-order derivatives in the second-order Dirac equation near the event horizon, and adjust the parameter $`\kappa `$ introduced in the GTCT so as to recast each second-order equation into a standard wave equation near the event horizon. In the meantime, we can get an exact expression of the Hawking temperature. Then the second-order equation is manipulated by separation of variables and the thermal radiation spectrum of Dirac particles are obtained by Damour-Ruffini-Sannan’s method . In Sec. 4, we give a brief discussion about the new effect which represents the interaction between the spin of particles with spin-$`1/2`$ and the angular acceleration of black holes.

## II Kinnersley black hole and its event horizon

The Kinnersley metric , generally called as the “photon rocket” solution, is interpreted as the external gravitational field of an arbitrary accelerating mass. In the advanced Eddington-Finkelstein coordinate system $`[v;r;\theta ;\phi ]`$, the line element of Kinnersley’s rocket solution reads

$$ds^2=2dv\left(Gdvdrfr^2d\theta +gr^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi \right)r^2\left(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\phi ^2\right),$$
(1)
where $`2G=12M(v)/r2ar\mathrm{cos}\theta r^2W^{}W`$, $`W=fig\mathrm{sin}\theta `$, $`W^{}=f+ig\mathrm{sin}\theta `$, $`f=b\mathrm{sin}\phi +c\mathrm{cos}\phi a\mathrm{sin}\theta `$, and $`g=(b\mathrm{cos}\phi c\mathrm{sin}\phi )\mathrm{cot}\theta `$. The metric (1) is of type-D under Petrov classification. The arbitrary function $`M(v)`$ describes the change in the mass of the source as a function of the advanced time; $`a=a(v)`$, $`b=b(v)`$ and $`c=c(v)`$ are acceleration parameters: $`a`$ is the magnitude of acceleration, $`b`$ and $`c`$ are the rates of change of its direction. The co-moving spherical coordinate system is oriented in such a way that the direction $`\theta =0`$ to the north pole always coincides with the direction of the acceleration.

The spacetime geometry of an evaporating black hole is characterized by three surfaces: the timelike limit surface, the apparent horizon and the event horizon. According to York , the horizons of a dynamical black hole may be obtained to first order in luminosity by note that (i) the apparent horizons are the outermost “trapped” surfaces that the expansion of null-geodesic congruences (or null rays parametrized by $`v`$) $`\vartheta 0`$; (ii) the event horizons are null surfaces where the acceleration of null-geodesic congruences $`d^2r/dv^20`$, or equivalently they are determined via the Raychadhuri equation by the requirement that $`d\vartheta /dv0`$ as they must be strictly null, and (iii) the timelike limit surfaces are defined as surfaces such that $`g_{vv}=0`$.

It is generally accepted that the event horizon is necessarily a null surface and is defined by the outermost locus traced by outgoing photons that can “never” reach arbitrarily large distances . In a nonstationary black hole spacetime, the event horizon should still be a null surface that satisfies the null surface condition: $`g^{ij}_iF_jF=0`$, and the event horizon determined by the above null hypersurface condition is, in fact, a local event horizon. We shall adopt this definition and use different methods to derive the equation that determines the location of local event horizon of an arbitrarily accelerating Kinnersley black hole. We find that each method can give the same result consistently.

First, let’s seek the local event horizon of Kinnersley spacetime (1) by using of the null surface condition. From the null surface equation $`F(v,r,\theta ,\phi )=0`$, namely $`r=r(v,\theta ,\phi )`$, one can easily obtain

$$_vF+_rF_vr=0,_\theta F+_rF_\theta r=0,_\phi F+_rF_\phi r=0.$$
(2)
Substituting (2) into the explicit expression of the null surface condition $`g^{ij}_iF_jF=0`$ in the Kinnersley metric (1)

$`\left(2G+r^2W^{}W\right)(_rF)^2+2_rF\left(_vFf_\theta F+g_\phi F\right)`$ (3)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}(_\theta F)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}(_\phi F)^2=0,`$ (4)
one gets

$$2G+r^2W^{}W2_vr+2f_\theta r2g_\phi r+\frac{(_\theta r)^2}{r^2}+\frac{(_\phi r)^2}{r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }=0.$$

The local event horizon is the hypersurface $`r=r_H(v,\theta ,\phi )`$ that satisfies the above equation or

$`1{\displaystyle \frac{2M}{r_H}}2ar_H\mathrm{cos}\theta 2r_{H,v}+2fr_{H,\theta }2gr_{H,\phi }`$ (5)
$`+\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\theta }}{r_H}}\right)^2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi }}{r_H\mathrm{sin}\theta }}\right)^2=0,`$ (6)
in which $`r_{H,v}=_vr_H`$, $`r_{H,\theta }=_\theta r_H`$ and $`r_{H,\phi }=_\phi r_H`$ can be viewed as parameters depicting the evolution of the event horizon.

When $`a=b=c=0`$ but $`M0`$, the event horizon of Vaidya black hole is located at $`r_H=2M/(12r_{H,v})`$; When $`M=b=c=0`$ and $`a=const`$, the Rindler event horizon of the uniformly rectilinearly accelerating observer satisfies

$$12ar_H\mathrm{cos}\theta 2ar_{H,\theta }\mathrm{sin}\theta +\frac{r_{H,\theta }^2}{r_H^2}=0,$$

it is a paraboloid of revolution $`r_H=1/a(\mathrm{cos}\theta \pm 1)`$.

In the case where $`M(v)`$, $`a(v)`$, $`b(v)`$ and $`c(v)`$ are not equal to zero, Eq. (6) has in general three roots. In this general case, the analysis is a little involved, and will not be discussed here. There should exist two kinds of event horizon: Rindler-type horizon and Schwarzschild-type horizon. All of them depend not only on $`v`$, but also on $`\theta `$, $`\phi `$. It means that the location of the event horizon and the shape of the black hole change with time. The location of event horizon is in accord with that obtained in the case of discussing about the thermal effect of Klein-Gordon particles in the same spacetime .

Next, we adopt the GTCT method to deduce the equation of local event horizon. As the Kinnersley metric is lack of any symmetry, we introduce the most general form of the GTCT  as follows

$`r_{}=r+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}\mathrm{ln}\left(rr_H\right),v_{}=vv_0,`$ (7)
$`\theta _{}=\theta \theta _0,\phi _{}=\phi \phi _0,`$ (8)
namely,

$`dr_{}=dr+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa (rr_H)}}\left(drr_{H,v}dvr_{H,\theta }d\theta r_{H,\phi }d\phi \right),`$ (9)
$`dv_{}=dv,d\theta _{}=d\theta ,d\varphi _{}=d\phi ,`$ (10)
where $`r_H=r_H(v,\theta ,\phi )`$ is the location of the event horizon, $`\kappa `$ is an adjustable parameter and is unchanged under tortoise transformation. All parameters $`v_0,\theta _0`$ and $`\phi _0`$ are arbitrary constants characterizing the initial state of the hole.

Applying the GTCT (8) to the null hypersurface equation (4) and taking the $`rr_H(v_0,\theta _0,\phi _0)`$, $`vv_0`$, $`\theta \theta _0`$ and $`\phi \phi _0`$ limits, the event horizon equation is then obtained by letting the term in the bracket before $`(\frac{}{r_{}}F)^2`$ to be zero, ***Throughout the paper, we make a convention that all coefficients in the front of each derivatives term take values at the event horizon $`r_H=r_H(v_0,\theta _0,\phi _0)`$ when a GTCT is made and followed by taking limits approaching the event horizon, e.g., $`G`$, $`f`$, $`g`$ and $`W`$ take their values at $`v=v_0`$, $`\theta =\theta _0`$ and $`\phi =\phi _0`$.

$$2G2r_{H,v}+r_H^2W^{}W+2fr_{H,\theta }2gr_{H,\phi }+\frac{r_{H,\theta }^2}{r_H^2}+\frac{r_{H,\phi }^2}{r_H^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}=0.$$
(11)
Eq. (11) is just the same equation (6) when $`v=v_0`$, $`\theta =\theta _0`$ and $`\phi =\phi _0`$. Because here we deal with the case of a slow evaporation of black holes, we need later only consider the situation very close to the initial state of the event horizon, namely $`r_Hr_H(v_0,\theta _0,\phi _0)`$ when $`vv_0`$, $`\theta \theta _0`$ and $`\phi \phi _0`$. This assertion is due to that the GTCT approach is a local analysis method, the latter originating from that Hawking radiation comes from vacuum fluctuations near the event horizon.

## III Hawking evaporation of Dirac particles

Now we turn to investigating the quantum feature of the Kinnersley spacetime, especially the thermal radiation of electrons, that is, we must derive the Hawking temperature of the event horizon and the thermal radiation spectrum of Dirac particles from the event horizon. To this end, we work out the spinor form of Dirac equation in the Newman-Penrose (NP)  formalism. We choose a complex orthogonal null-tetrad system in the Kinnersley black hole such that its directional derivatives are

$`D`$ $`=`$ $`_r,\mathrm{\Delta }=_v+G_r,`$ (12)
$`\delta `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}r}}\left(r^2W_r+_\theta +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}_\phi \right),`$ (13)
$`\overline{\delta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}r}}\left(r^2W^{}_r+_\theta {\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}_\phi \right).`$ (14)
It is not difficult to determine the non-vanishing complex NP spin coefficients in the above null-tetrad as follows Here and hereafter, we denote $`G_{,r}=dG/dr`$, etc.

$`\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{r}},\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{G}{r}}+ig\mathrm{cos}\theta ,\gamma =(G_{,r}+ig\mathrm{cos}\theta )/2,`$ (15)
$`\tau ={\displaystyle \frac{W}{\sqrt{2}}},\stackrel{~}{\pi }={\displaystyle \frac{W^{}}{\sqrt{2}}},\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\theta }{2\sqrt{2}r}}+{\displaystyle \frac{W^{}}{\sqrt{2}}},\beta ={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\theta }{2\sqrt{2}r}},`$ (16)
$`\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}r}}\left[(2rGr^2G_{,r})W^{}+r^2W_{,v}^{}+G_{,\theta }{\displaystyle \frac{iG_{,\phi }}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}\right].`$ (17)
The dynamical behavior of spin-$`1/2`$ particles in curved spacetime is described by the four coupled Chandrasekhar-Dirac equations  expressed in the following spinor form

$`(D+ϵ\rho )F_1+(\overline{\delta }+\stackrel{~}{\pi }\alpha )F_2={\displaystyle \frac{i\mu _0}{\sqrt{2}}}G_1,`$ (18)
$`(\mathrm{\Delta }+\mu \gamma )F_2+(\delta +\beta \tau )F_1={\displaystyle \frac{i\mu _0}{\sqrt{2}}}G_2,`$ (19)
$`(D+ϵ^{}\rho ^{})G_2(\delta +\stackrel{~}{\pi }^{}\alpha ^{})G_1={\displaystyle \frac{i\mu _0}{\sqrt{2}}}F_2,`$ (20)
$`(\mathrm{\Delta }+\mu ^{}\gamma ^{})G_1(\overline{\delta }+\beta ^{}\tau ^{})G_2={\displaystyle \frac{i\mu _0}{\sqrt{2}}}F_1,`$ (21)
where $`\mu _0`$ is the mass of Dirac particles. Inserting the needed NP spin coefficients and making substitutions $`P_1=\sqrt{2}rF_1`$, $`P_2=F_2`$, $`Q_1=G_1`$, $`Q_2=\sqrt{2}rG_2`$ into Eq. (21), we obtain

$`𝒟_0P_1+\left(r^2W^{}𝒟_2\right)P_2=i\mu _0rQ_1,`$ (22)
$`2r^2_1^{}P_2+\left(^{}r^2W𝒟_0\right)P_1=i\mu _0rQ_2,`$ (23)
$`𝒟_0Q_2\left(^{}r^2W𝒟_2\right)Q_1=i\mu _0rP_2,`$ (24)
$`2r^2_1Q_1\left(r^2W^{}𝒟_0\right)Q_2=i\mu _0rP_1,`$ (25)
in which we have defined operators

$`n=_v+G𝒟_n+(G_{,r}ig\mathrm{cos}\theta )/2,𝒟_n=_r+n/r,`$ (26)
$`=_\theta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{cot}\theta {\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}_\phi ,^{}=_\theta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{cot}\theta +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{sin}\theta }}_\phi .`$ (27)
Because the Chandrasekhar-Dirac equation (21) can be satisfied by identifying $`G_1`$, $`G_2`$ with $`F_2^{}`$, $`F_1^{}`$, respectively, so one may deal with a pair of components $`(P_1,P_2)`$ only. Although Eq. (25) can not be decoupled, to deal with the Hawking radiation, one should be concerned about the asymptotic behavior of Eq. (25) near the horizon only. Under the transformation (8), Eq. (25) with respect to ($`P_1,P_2`$) can be reduced to the following limiting form near the event horizon

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{r_{}}}P_1+\left(r_{H,\theta }{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}}r_{H,\phi }+r_H^2W^{}\right){\displaystyle \frac{}{r_{}}}P_2=0,`$ (28)
$`\left(r_{H,\theta }+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}}r_{H,\phi }+r_H^2W\right){\displaystyle \frac{}{r_{}}}P_12r_H^2\left(Gr_{H,v}\right){\displaystyle \frac{}{r_{}}}P_2=0,`$ (29)
after being taken the $`rr_H(v_0,\theta _0,\phi _0)`$, $`vv_0`$, $`\theta \theta _0`$ and $`\phi \phi _0`$ limits. If the derivatives $`\frac{}{r_{}}P_1`$ and $`\frac{}{r_{}}P_2`$ in Eq. (29) are not equal to zero, the existence condition of non-trivial solutions for $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ is that its determinant vanishes, which gives the above-head equation (11). This treatment can be thought of as another derivation of the location of event horizon. It is interesting to note that a similar procedure applying to another pair of components $`(Q_1,Q_2)`$ will bring about the same result.

To investigate the Hawking radiation of spin-$`1/2`$ particles, we need deal with the behavior of the second-order Dirac equations near the event horizon. A direct calculation gives the second-order form of Dirac equations for ($`P_1,P_2`$) components as follows

$`\left[2r^2_0𝒟_0+(r^2W^{}𝒟_1)(^{}r^2W𝒟_0)\mu _0^2r^2\right]P_1`$ (30)
$`+2r^2\left[(r^2W^{}𝒟_1)_1^{}_0(r^2W^{}𝒟_2)\right]P_2=0,`$ (31)
and

$`\left[2r^2𝒟_1_1^{}+(^{}r^2W𝒟_1)(r^2W^{}𝒟_2)\mu _0^2r^2\right]P_2`$ (32)
$`+\left[𝒟_1(^{}r^2W𝒟_0)(^{}r^2W𝒟_1)𝒟_0\right]P_1=0.`$ (33)
Given the GTCT in Eq. (8) and after some lengthy calculations, the limiting form of Eqs. (30,32), when $`r`$ approaches $`r_H(v_0,\theta _0,\phi _0)`$, $`v`$ goes to $`v_0`$, $`\theta `$ goes to $`\theta _0`$ and $`\phi `$ goes to $`\phi _0`$, yields

$`𝒦P_1+[A+r_H^2G_{,r}+2r_H^2G+2r_H^3W^{}W+2ig\mathrm{cos}\theta _02r_H^2f\mathrm{cot}\theta _0`$ (34)
$`+\mathrm{cot}\theta _0(r_{H,\theta }+{\displaystyle \frac{ir_{H,\phi }}{\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}})(r_{H,\theta \theta }+{\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi \phi }}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}})]{\displaystyle \frac{}{r_{}}}P_1+2r_H^2[G_{,\theta }`$ (35)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}}G_{,\phi }+r_H^2W_{,v}^{}+W^{}(2r_HGr_H^2G_{,r})]{\displaystyle \frac{}{r_{}}}P_2=0,`$ (36)
and

$`𝒦P_2+[A+3r_H^2G_{,r}+r_H(6G4r_{H,v})+6r_H^3W^{}W2r_H^2f\mathrm{cot}\theta _0`$ (37)
$`+(4r_Hf\mathrm{cot}\theta _0)r_{H,\theta }\left(4gr_H+i\mathrm{cot}\theta _0\right){\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi }}{\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}}`$ (38)
$`(r_{H,\theta \theta }+{\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi \phi }}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}})]{\displaystyle \frac{}{r_{}}}P_2=0.`$ (39)
In the above, the operator stands for the term involving the second-order derivatives

$`𝒦=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{A}{2\kappa }}+2r_H^2(2Gr_{H,v})+2r_H^4W^{}W+2r_H^2(fr_{H,\theta }gr_{H,\phi })\right]{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{r_{}^2}}`$ (40)
$`+2r_H^2{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{r_{}v_{}}}2\left(fr_H^2+r_{H,\theta }\right){\displaystyle \frac{^2}{r_{}\theta _{}}}+2\left(gr_H^2{\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi }}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{^2}{r_{}\phi _{}}}.`$ (41)
By the event horizon equation (6) or (11), we know that the coefficient $`A`$ is an infinite limit of $`0/0`$-type. Using the L’ Hôspital rule, we arrive at its obvious result

$`A`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{rr_H}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{2r^2(Gr_{H,v})+r^4W^{}W+2r^2(fr_{H,\theta }gr_{H,\phi })+r_{H,\theta }^2+\frac{r_{H,\phi }^2}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }}{rr_H}}`$ (42)
$`=`$ $`2r_H^2G_{,r}+2r_H^3W^{}W2r_H^1(r_{H,\theta }^2+r_{H,\phi }^2/\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0).`$ (43)
Now let us select the adjustable parameter $`\kappa `$ in the operator $`𝒦`$ such that

$$r_H^2\frac{A}{2\kappa }+2r_H^2(2Gr_{H,v})+2r_H^4W^{}W+2r_H^2(fr_{H,\theta }gr_{H,\phi }),$$

which means the surface gravity of the horizon is

$$\kappa =\frac{r_H^2G_{,r}+r_H^3W^{}Wr_H^1(r_{H,\theta }^2+r_{H,\phi }^2/\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0)}{r_H^2(12G)r_H^4W^{}W+r_{H,\theta }^2+r_{H,\phi }^2/\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}.$$
(44)
With such a parameter adjustment and using relations (29), Eqs. (34,37) can be recast into the following standard wave equation near the horizon in an united form

$$\left[\frac{^2}{r_{}^2}+2\frac{^2}{r_{}v_{}}2C_3\frac{^2}{r_{}\theta _{}}+2\mathrm{\Omega }\frac{^2}{r_{}\phi _{}}+2(C_2+iC_1)\frac{}{r_{}}\right]\mathrm{\Psi }=0,$$
(45)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`C_3`$, $`C_2`$, $`C_1`$ shall be regarded as finite real constants. The physical meaning of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is that it can be interpreted as the angular velocity of the black hole due to deformation. For completeness, they are listed as follows

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=g\frac{r_{H,\phi }}{r_H^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0},C_3=f+\frac{r_{H,\theta }}{r_H^2},$$

while both $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ are real,

$`2(C_2+iC_1)={\displaystyle \frac{2G}{r_H}}G_{,r}+2ig\mathrm{cos}\theta _0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\theta _0}{r_H^2}}\left(r_{H,\theta }{\displaystyle \frac{ir_{H,\phi }}{\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}}\right)`$ (46)
$`2f\mathrm{cot}\theta _0+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{r_H^3}}\left(r_{H,\theta }^2+{\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi }^2}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{r_H^2}}\left(r_{H,\theta \theta }+{\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi \phi }}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}}\right)`$ (47)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{C_3i\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}{(Gr_{H,v})r_H^2}}\left[r_H^2W_{,v}^{}+W^{}(2r_HGr_H^2G_{,r})+G_{,\theta }{\displaystyle \frac{i}{\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}}G_{,\phi }\right]`$ (48)
for $`\mathrm{\Psi }=P_1`$, and

$`2(C_2+iC_1)={\displaystyle \frac{2G}{r_H}}+G_{,r}+2r_HW^{}W2f\mathrm{cot}\theta _0`$ (49)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cot}\theta }{r_H^2}}\left(r_{H,\theta }+{\displaystyle \frac{ir_{H,\phi }}{\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{r_H^2}}\left(r_{H,\theta \theta }+{\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi \phi }}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}}\right)`$ (50)
for $`\mathrm{\Psi }=P_2`$. The expression in Eq. (47) is very complicated, but one can notice that the last term in the square bracket is proportional to $`\nu (r_H)`$ (i.e. the value of the spin coefficient $`\nu `$ at the event horizon $`r_H`$).

Because all coefficients in Eq. (45) can be viewed as constants approximately, the wave equation can be manipulated like an ordinary differential one. Now separating variables as $`\mathrm{\Psi }=R(r_{})\mathrm{\Theta }(\theta _{})\mathrm{\Phi }(\phi _{})e^{i\omega v_{}}`$ and substituting it into Eq. (45), one gets

$`\mathrm{\Theta }^{}=\lambda \mathrm{\Theta },\mathrm{\Phi }^{}=(\sigma +im)\mathrm{\Phi },`$ (51)
$`R^{\prime \prime }=2i(\omega m\mathrm{\Omega }C_1+iC_0)R^{},`$ (52)
where $`C_0=C_2\lambda C_3+\sigma \mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`\lambda `$ is a real constant introduced in the separation variables, $`\omega `$ the energy of electrons, $`m`$ the quantum number of its azimuthal angular momentum. The solutions are

$`\mathrm{\Theta }=e^{\lambda \theta _{}},\mathrm{\Phi }=e^{(\sigma +im)\phi _{}},`$ (53)
$`R=R_1e^{2i(\omega m\mathrm{\Omega }C_1)r_{}2C_0r_{}}+R_0.`$ (54)
The ingoing wave and the outgoing wave to Eq. (45) are, respectively,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{in}}=e^{i\omega v_{}+(\sigma +im)\phi _{}+\lambda \theta _{}},`$ (55)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{out}}=\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{in}}e^{2i(\omega m\mathrm{\Omega }C_1)r_{}2C_0r_{}},(r>r_H).`$ (56)
Near the event horizon, we have $`r_{}(2\kappa )^1\mathrm{ln}(rr_H)`$. Clearly, the outgoing wave $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{out}}(r>r_H)`$ has a logarithm singular and is not analytic at the event horizon $`r=r_H`$, but can be analytically extended from the outside of the hole into the inside of the hole through the lower complex $`r`$-plane (i.e., $`(rr_H)(r_Hr)e^{i\pi }`$) to

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{out}}}=\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{in}}e^{2i(\omega m\mathrm{\Omega }C_1)r_{}2C_0r_{}}e^{i\pi C_0/\kappa }e^{\pi (\omega m\mathrm{\Omega }C_1)/\kappa },(r<r_H).$$
(57)
According to the method suggested by Damour and Ruffini  and developed by Sannan , the relative scattering probability of the outgoing wave at the horizon is easily obtained

$$\left|\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{out}}}{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{out}}}}\right|^2=e^{2\pi (\omega m\mathrm{\Omega }C_1)/\kappa }.$$
(58)
The thermal radiation spectrum of Dirac particles from the event horizon of the hole is given by the Fermionic distribution

$$𝒩(\omega )=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\omega )}{e^{(\omega m\mathrm{\Omega }C_1)/T_H}+1},$$
(59)
in which $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\omega )`$ is the barrier factor of certain modes, and the Hawking temperature $`T_H=\kappa /(2\pi )`$ is obviously expressed as

$$T_H=\frac{1}{4\pi r_H}\times \frac{Mr_Hr_H^3a\mathrm{cos}\theta _0r_{H,\theta }^2r_{H,\phi }^2/\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}{Mr_H+r_H^3a\mathrm{cos}\theta _0+2^1(r_{H,\theta }^2+r_{H,\phi }^2/\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0)}.$$
(60)
It follows that the temperature depends not only on the time $`v`$, but also on the angles $`\theta `$ and $`\phi `$ because it is determined by the surface gravity $`\kappa `$, a function of $`v,\theta `$, and $`\phi `$. The temperature is consistent with that derived from the investigation of the thermal radiation of Klein-Gordon particles in the Kinnersley black hole .

## IV Spin-acceleration coupling effect

There are two parts in the thermal radiation spectrum (59), one is the rotational energy $`m\mathrm{\Omega }`$; another is $`C_1`$ due to the coupling between the spin of electrons and the angular momentum of the black hole. Comparing the thermal spectrum of spin-$`1/2`$ particles with that of scalar particles , we find that an extra term $`C_1`$ appears in the former and is absent in the latter. From its explicit expression,

$`C_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{C_3\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}{2(Gr_{H,v})}}\left[r_H^2g_{,v}+(2r_HGr_H^2G_{,r})g{\displaystyle \frac{G_{,\phi }}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}}\right]`$ (63)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{sin}\theta _0}{2(Gr_{H,v})}}\left[r_H^2f_{,v}+(2r_HGr_H^2G_{,r})f+G_{,\theta }\right]`$
$`+g\mathrm{cos}\theta _0+{\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi }\mathrm{cos}\theta _0}{2r_H^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}},(\mathrm{\Psi }=P_1)`$
$`C_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{r_{H,\phi }\mathrm{cos}\theta _0}{2r_H^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0}},(\mathrm{\Psi }=P_2)`$ (64)
one can find that $`C_1=0`$ for $`\mathrm{\Psi }=P_1,P_2`$ in the non-uniformly rectilinearly accelerating black hole ($`b=c=0`$ and $`r_{H,\phi }=0`$). Further more, if we only consider the second term in Eq. (63), then we can rewrite the “spin-dependent” term as

$$\omega _s\frac{sr_{H,\phi }\mathrm{cos}\theta _0}{r_H^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0},(s=1/2,\mathrm{\Psi }=P_1;s=1/2,\mathrm{\Psi }=P_2)$$
(65)
for different spin states $`s=\pm 1/2`$ respectively. Here we are interested especially in this term because it is obviously related to the spin of electrons in different helicity states. The factor $`r_{H,\phi }`$ describes the deformation of black hole during its evolution, while the factor $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _0`$ comes from the scalar product between the spin vector of electrons and the “deformation angular momentum” $`r_{H,\phi }/(r_H^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _0)`$ of the black hole. One can notice that this “deformation angular momentum” is also contained in the expression of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Thus this new term represents the spin-acceleration coupling effect which can be interpreted as the interaction between the angular variation of the black hole and the spin of the particles.

One can observe that $`\omega _s`$ vanishes at the equator $`\theta =\pi /2`$ and diverges in $`s\theta ^2`$ near the north pole $`\theta 0`$ and in $`s(\pi \theta )^2`$ near the south pole $`\theta \pi `$. In general, the dependence of $`C_1`$ upon the mass $`M`$ and the acceleration parameters ($`a,b,c`$) is indirect and non-trivial because they are involved in the expression of $`r_H`$. To understand this point better, we consider a particular case where we take $`M`$, $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ as constants and set $`\theta =\theta _0=\pi /2`$. In this case, we have $`2G=12M/rr^2f^2`$, $`f=b\mathrm{sin}\phi +c\mathrm{cos}\phi a`$ and $`g=0`$ as well as $`r_{H,v}=r_{H,\theta }=0`$. Thus the event horizon equation becomes

$$r_H^22Mr_H+r_{H,\phi }^2=0,$$
(66)
and it has solutions $`r_H=M(1\pm \mathrm{cos}\phi )`$; $`M(1\pm \mathrm{sin}\phi )`$, which demonstrate that the event horizon is a triangle function of $`\phi `$. Without loss of generality, let’s take one solution as $`r_H=M(1+\mathrm{cos}\phi )`$. Then the Hawking temperature is

$$T_H=\frac{\mathrm{cos}\phi }{2\pi M(1+\mathrm{cos}\phi )(3\mathrm{cos}\phi )}.$$

Further, we have $`C_3=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{sin}\phi /M(1+\mathrm{cos}\phi )^2`$. For $`\mathrm{\Psi }=P_2`$, $`C_1`$ vanishes; while for $`\mathrm{\Psi }=P_1`$ due to $`f_{,v}=G_{,\theta }=0`$, it becomes

$$C_1=\frac{\mathrm{sin}\phi (\mathrm{cos}\phi 2)(b\mathrm{sin}\phi +c\mathrm{cos}\phi a)}{\mathrm{sin}^2\phi +M^2(1+\mathrm{cos}\phi )^4(b\mathrm{sin}\phi +c\mathrm{cos}\phi a)^2}.$$
(67)
Obviously $`C_1`$ is linearly dependent on $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ if $`M=0`$. We note that $`r_H=2M`$, $`T_H=1/(8\pi M)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }=C_1=0`$ at $`\phi =\phi _0=0`$.

In the general case where $`M`$, $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ are arbitrary functions of the advance time $`v`$, to analysis $`C_1`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`T_H`$ is, however, very complicated. It needs us first to determine the explicit expression of $`r_H`$ in terms of these parameters, but this topic apparently exceeds the context of this paper. We wish to discuss them in other circumstances.

## V Conclusions

Equations (11) and (60) give the location and the temperature of the event horizon of the Kinnersley black hole, which depend not only on the advanced time $`v`$ but also on the angles $`\theta ,\phi `$. Eq.(59) shows the thermal radiation spectrum of Dirac particles in the arbitrarily accelerating Kinnersley spacetime, in which an extra term $`C_1`$ appears. We find that $`C_1`$ vanishes when $`b=c=0`$ and $`r_{H,\phi }=0`$. This means that this term does not exist in the rectilinearly accelerating Kinnersley black hole. We contend that this new effect probably arise from the interaction between the spin of Dirac particles and the acceleration of the evaporating black hole. Besides, we notice that this spin-acceleration coupling effect appearing in the Fermionic thermal spectrum of Dirac particles is not shown in the Bosonic spectrum of scalar particles.

In summary, we have studied the Hawking radiation of Dirac particles in an arbitrarily accelerating Kinnersley black hole whose mass changes with time. The location and the temperature of the event horizon of the accelerating Kinnersley black hole are just the same as those obtained in the discussion on thermal radiation of Klein-Gordon particles in the same spacetime. But the thermal spectrum of Fermi-Dirac distribution of particles with spin-$`1/2`$ displays an extra interaction effect between the spin of Dirac particles and the angular acceleration of black holes. The character of this term is its obvious dependence on the different spin states. This spin-acceleration coupling effect is absent from the thermal radiation spectrum of Klein-Gordon particles. In addition, our discussion here is easily generalized to the most general case of a non-uniformly accelerating Kinnersley black hole with electric charge $`Q(v)`$, magnetic charge $`P(v)`$ and cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ ($`2G=12M(v)/r+(Q^2+P^2)/r^24a\mathrm{cos}\theta (Q^2+P^2)/r2ar\mathrm{cos}\theta r^2(f^2+g^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta )\mathrm{\Lambda }r^4/3`$).

## Acknowledgment

This work was supported in part by the NSFC in China. We especially thank our referee for his several advice on improving this manuscript and for clarifying the incorrect statement on the observational possibility of the spin-acceleration coupling effect in astrophysics.


format: text

text:
# Bestvina’s normal form complex and the homology of Garside groups

## 1. Introduction

The main goal of this note is to establish the following result:

###### Main Theorem.

Garside groups admit finite $`K(\pi ,1)`$s.

A Garside group $`G`$ is the group of fractions of a Garside monoid $`G^+`$, where $`G^+`$ contains a ‘Garside element’ $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ whose divisors form a finite lattice $`𝒟`$ that generates $`G^+`$. (We give a complete definition in §2.) These groups, first introduced by Dehornoy and Paris in , generalize Artin groups of finite type, and they share many formal properties with Artin groups of finite type.

The construction of these $`K(\pi ,1)`$s is concrete and is based on the lattice $`𝒟`$. That is, given the lattice $`𝒟`$, our proof of the Main Theorem is constructive, and one can easily compute the (co)homology of the associated Garside group (see Theorem 3.6). Topological properties of subcomplexes of the geometric realization $`|𝒟|`$ give information on the end connectivity of any Garside group, which yields a simple condition implying that a given Garside group is a duality group (see 4.2 and 4.4).

The construction of these $`K(\pi ,1)`$s mimics a construction given by Bestvina in the case of Artin groups of finite type . This construction is also used by Brady, as well as Brady and Watt, in their constructions of new $`K(\pi ,1)`$s for Artin groups of finite type ( and ). The argument given here indicates that this construction is “functorial,” in that it works for any group admitting a lattice generating set, not just the Artin groups of finite type. In particular we extend Bestvina’s results on a weak nonpositive curvature condition for Artin groups of finite type to all Garside groups. Under a mild tameness condition on the Garside element (Definition 6.10), this implies that every solvable subgroup of the Garside group is virtually a finitely generated abelian group (Corollary 6.13).

###### Acknowledgments.

We thank Patrick Dehornoy for conversations at geometric group theory conferences in Montreal and Lyon, and in particular for pointing out that he and Lafont have an independent method of computing the homology of Garside groups .

## 2. Garside groups and the Deligne normal forms

In terms of the word problem and normal forms, Garside groups behave much like Artin groups of finite type . Here we collect relevant information about the word problem for Garside groups. Most of this has to do with issues in the positive monoid $`G^+`$.

Let $`M`$ be a monoid and let the *indivisible* elements (often called ‘atoms’) be those $`mM`$ such that $`m1`$ and if $`m=ab`$ then either $`a=1`$ or $`b=1`$. Let $`m`$ be the supremum of the lengths of all expressions of $`m`$ in terms of indivisible elements. The monoid $`M`$ is *atomic* if it is generated by its indivisible elements, and the norm $`m`$ of any element is finite. In an atomic monoid one can define a *partial order* via left (or right) divisibility: $`a<b`$ if $`ac=b`$ for some $`cM\{1\}`$; $`ab`$ if $`ac=b`$ for some $`cM`$. Conversely, if $`M`$ is a finitely generated monoid where the partial order given by divisibility contains no infinite descending chains, then $`M`$ is atomic, with $`a`$ being the length of the longest expression.

###### Definition 2.1 (Garside monoid).

An atomic monoid $`M`$ is *Garside* if it satisfies

1. left and right cancellation laws hold in $`M`$,
2. any two elements of $`M`$ admit a least common multiple and a greatest common divisor on both the left and the right,
3. there exists an element $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ such that the left and right divisors of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are the same, there are finitely many of them, and they form a set of generators for $`M`$.

The element $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is called a *Garside element*. We denote the set of divisors of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by $`𝒟`$, and call this generating set the *simple divisors*.

Garside monoids satisfy Ore’s criterion, hence they embed in their group of fractions, and thus we may define a *Garside group* to be the group of fractions of a Garside monoid.

###### Remark 2.2.

Many of the properties of these groups were described in the case of the braid groups by Garside in ; hence the name “Garside group”. When first introduced in , however, these groups were called “small Gaussian”, while “Garside” was used for a slightly more restrictive condition (which required that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be the least common multiple of the indivisible elements). As it has developed that the definition given above is more natural and more useful, the name “Garside” has now been generally adopted for this class of monoids and their groups of fractions .

The classic examples of Garside groups are the Artin groups of finite type, where the Garside element is commonly denoted $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. These groups also admit presentations based on other monoids, such as the ones explored by Bessis, Brady and Watt, where the Garside element is not the usual $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, but rather a Coxeter element $`\delta `$ (, , and ). This collection contains many other groups (see , , ,  and ).

We denote an Garside group by $`G`$ and let $`G^+`$ be its positive monoid. The inverse of an element $`gG`$ will be denoted by $`\overline{g}`$. We note that the partial order given by left (or right) divisibility extends to the group by defining $`g<h`$ when $`\overline{g}hG^+\{1\}`$, for $`g,hG`$. (Because Garside monoids are cancellative, this partial order is equivalent to the partial order defined above when restricted to the positive monoid.)

Let $`gG^+`$. The *left front* of $`g`$ is defined to be the left gcd of $`g`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\text{LF}(g)=g\mathrm{\Delta }`$. If $`\mu 𝒟`$ satisfies $`\mu <g`$ then $`\mu <\text{LF}(g)`$. One can use left fronts to define a normal form in $`G^+`$, and this normal form is commonly referred to as the *left greedy normal form*.

###### Proposition 2.3.

*(3.5 in )* Let $`G^+`$ be an Garside monoid. Then $`g`$ may be uniquely represented as a product of simple divisors, $`g=\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _n`$, where $`\mu _i=\text{LF}(\mu _i\mathrm{}\mu _n)`$.

###### Proposition 2.4.

*(3.10 in )* For all $`g,hG^+`$, $`\text{LF}(gh)=\text{LF}(g\text{LF}(h))`$.

There is an analogously defined *right greedy* normal form in which one begins by taking the (oddly named) *right front* $`\text{RF}(g)`$ to be the right gcd of the monoid element $`g`$ and the Garside element $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then as in Proposition 2.3 each $`gG^+`$ can be uniquely represented as the product of simple divisors $`g=\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n`$ where $`\mu _i=\text{RF}(\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _i)`$. We make reference to this right greedy normal form in our discussion of ascending and descending links in the sections that follow.

###### Proposition 2.5.

*(2.2 and 2.3 in )* Let $`G^+`$ be an Garside monoid with Garside element $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then there is a permutation $`\sigma `$ of the set of simple divisors $`𝒟`$ such that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\mu =\sigma (\mu )\mathrm{\Delta }$$

for all $`\mu 𝒟`$. In particular, there is an $`m`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }^m`$ is central. Further, if $`\mu 𝒟`$ can be expressed as the product of $`n`$ indivisibles, then $`\sigma (\mu )`$ can also be expressed as the product of $`n`$ indivisibles.

###### Definition 2.6 (Complements).

If $`\mu 𝒟`$ then by definition there is an element $`\mu ^{}G^+`$ such that $`\mu \mu ^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }`$. We call $`\mu ^{}`$ the *right complement* of $`\mu `$, and note that because $`\mu ^{}`$ is a right divisor of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\mu ^{}𝒟`$, and thus $`𝒟`$ is closed under right complements.

There is also a left complement of $`\mu `$, $`{}_{}{}^{}\mu `$, where $`{}_{}{}^{}\mu \mu =\mathrm{\Delta }`$. If we right multiply this last equation by $`\mu ^{}`$ we get $`{}_{}{}^{}\mu \mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }\mu ^{}`$, hence $`{}_{}{}^{}\mu =\sigma (\mu ^{})`$. While this formula shows that one does not have to use the notation $`{}_{}{}^{}\mu `$, we do use this notation since it is easier to understand than $`\sigma (\mu ^{})`$.

Since $`𝒟`$ is a generating set for the positive monoid $`G^+`$, and every element of $`𝒟`$ divides $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, in order to represent elements of the group $`G`$, it suffices to invert the Garside element. Thus we get a set of normal forms for an Garside group that closely parallel those of Deligne for Artin groups of finite type.

###### Theorem 2.7.

Every element $`gG`$ can be expressed uniquely as $`g=\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _k\mathrm{\Delta }^n`$ ($`n`$) where the prefix $`\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _k`$ is in $`G^+`$, it is in left greedy normal form, and $`\mu _1\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

###### Definition 2.8 (Deligne normal forms).

We refer to the normal form given in Theorem 2.7 as the *Deligne normal form* of the Garside group $`G`$. We denote the Deligne normal form of an element $`gG`$ by $`\text{DNF}(g)`$. Thus DNF can be thought of as a map from $`G`$ to the free monoid $`\{𝒟\{\mathrm{\Delta }^1\}\}^{}`$, providing a (set theoretic) section of the natural surjection $`\{𝒟\{\mathrm{\Delta }^1\}\}^{}G`$.

In the next section we’ll be working with the Cayley graph of a Garside group with respect to the set of simple divisors $`𝒟`$. We’ll make use of the following lemma.

###### Lemma 2.9.

Let $`\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n`$ be a word in $`𝒟^{}`$ in left greedy normal form, where $`\mu _1\mathrm{\Delta }`$. If $`\eta 𝒟`$, then the left greedy normal form for $`\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n\eta `$ begins with at most one $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

###### Proof.

It is clear that right multiplication by $`\eta `$ can produce no $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ or one $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, so it suffices to show that $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n\eta `$. If $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n\eta `$, then $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2b=\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n=\eta `$ for some $`bG^+`$. Thus, shifting one of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$s past $`b`$ we get

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma (b)\mathrm{\Delta }=\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n\eta ,$$

hence

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma (b)^{}\eta =\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n$$

and therefore $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n`$, which is a contradiction. ∎

## 3. The $`K(\pi ,1)`$ Complexes

Recall that a *flag complex* $`X`$ is a simplicial complex where every complete subgraph on $`n`$-vertices in $`X^{(1)}`$ is the $`1`$-skeleton of an $`(n1)`$-simplex in $`X`$. Thus a flag complex is determined by its $`1`$-skeleton.

Fix an Garside group $`G`$, whose positive monoid is $`G^+`$, with Garside element $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and simple divisors $`𝒟`$. Let $`𝒞_𝒟`$ be the Cayley graph with respect to the lattice generating set $`𝒟`$. That is, $`𝒞_𝒟`$ has vertices corresponding to the elements of $`G`$ and directed, labelled edges corresponding to right multiplication by elements of $`𝒟`$. Let $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ be the flag complex induced by the graph $`𝒞_𝒟`$; thus each complete subgraph of $`𝒞_𝒟`$ is the $`1`$-skeleton of a simplex in $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$. The action of $`G`$ on $`𝒞_𝒟`$ by left multiplication extends to an action of $`G`$ on $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$. This action is free since it is free on the set of vertices and $`G`$ is torsion-free . We establish our Main Theorem by proving

###### Theorem 3.1.

The complex $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ is a contractible $`G`$-complex, and $`G\backslash \widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ is a finite $`K(G,1)`$.

In order to establish Theorem 3.1 we show that $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ admits a product structure. Let $`𝒳_𝒟`$ be the full subcomplex of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ induced by vertices associated with the set of all $`gG`$ where the Deligne normal form of $`g`$ contains no $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$s. The complex $`𝒳_𝒟`$ can also be thought of as a *coset complex* where the vertices correspond to cosets of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Coset representatives can be taken from the positive monoid $`G^+`$, and represented by the prefixes that occur in the Deligne normal forms. There is an edge between two vertices in this complex if their coset representatives differ by right multiplication by some $`\mu 𝒟\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is the flag complex induced by this graph.

###### Lemma 3.2.

The complex $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ is homeomorphic to the product $`𝒳_𝒟\times `$.

###### Proof.

A $`k`$-simplex in $`𝒳_𝒟`$ corresponds to a collection of elements $`a_iG^+`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }a_i`$, $`a_0<\mathrm{}<a_k`$ and $`a_k<a_0\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Similarly, a $`k`$-simplex in $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ consists of elements $`a_iG`$ where $`a_0<\mathrm{}<a_k`$ (using the extension of the partial order to $`G`$) and $`a_ka_0\mathrm{\Delta }`$. We give $``$ the standard simplicial structure where the vertices correspond to the integers.

There are projections from the $`0`$-skeleton of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ onto the $`0`$-skeleta of $`𝒳_𝒟`$ and $``$ defined via the Deligne normal forms. Let $`gG`$ have Deligne normal form $`\text{DNF}(g)=\mu _0\mathrm{}\mu _k\mathrm{\Delta }^n`$. Define $`\pi _+`$ to be the map sending $`g`$ to $`\mu _0\mathrm{}\mu _k`$ and $`\pi _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the map sending $`g`$ to $`n`$. Both maps can be thought of as (set theoretic) retractions of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟^{(0)}`$; $`\pi _+`$ retracts the vertices of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ onto the vertices of $`𝒳_𝒟`$ while $`\pi _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ can be viewed as retracting the vertices of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ onto the vertices corresponding to the infinite cyclic subgroup $`\mathrm{\Delta }<G`$.

We form continuous maps from $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ to $`𝒳_𝒟`$ and $``$ by extending $`\pi _+`$ and $`\pi _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ linearly over simplices. Since $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is a flag complex, it suffices to show that $`\pi _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\pi _+`$ take edges of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ to edges or vertices of their target spaces. For the rest of this discussion, fix an edge $`e`$ in $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ and let the bounding vertices of $`e`$ correspond to the group elements $`a\mathrm{\Delta }^n`$ and $`a\mathrm{\Delta }^n\mu `$ where $`aG^+`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }a`$, and $`\mu 𝒟`$. The Deligne normal form for $`a\mathrm{\Delta }^n\mu `$ is then either $`\text{DNF}(a\sigma ^n(\mu ))\mathrm{\Delta }^n`$, or $`\text{DNF}(b)\mathrm{\Delta }^{n+1}`$ if it’s the case that $`a=b(^{}[\sigma ^n(\mu )])`$. (The element $`a\sigma ^n(\mu )`$ is divisible by at most one $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by Lemma 2.9.)

The map $`\pi _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ takes $`e`$ of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ to the edge $`[n,n+1]`$ (when right multiplying by $`\mu `$ introduces a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$) or it collapses $`e`$ to the vertex corresponding to $`n`$ (when $`{}_{}{}^{}[\delta ^n(\mu )]`$ is not a right divisor of $`a`$). Hence the map $`\pi _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ extends to a map from $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ onto $``$.

Similarly the map $`\pi _+`$ extends to edges. Let $`e`$ be as before, so that $`\pi _+`$ maps the vertex $`a\mathrm{\Delta }^n`$ to $`a`$ and

$$\pi _+(a\mathrm{\Delta }^n\mu )=\{\begin{array}{cc}a\sigma ^n(\mu )\hfill & \text{if }a\text{ is not right divisible by }{}_{}{}^{}[\sigma ^n(\mu )]\hfill \\ b=a\left({}_{}{}^{}[\sigma ^n(\mu )]\right)^1\hfill & \text{otherwise}\hfill \end{array}.$$

So $`\pi _+`$ takes $`e`$ to an edge of $`𝒳_𝒟`$, except in the case where $`\mu =\mathrm{\Delta }`$, in which case $`{}_{}{}^{}[\delta ^n(\mu )]=^{}\mathrm{\Delta }=1`$, and $`\pi _+`$ collapses $`e`$ to a vertex.

Since $`\pi _+`$ and $`\pi _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ extend to $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟^{(1)}`$, and all three spaces are flag complexes, these maps extend to all of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$. Thus we have a continuous map $`\pi :\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟𝒳_𝒟\times `$ given on the level of vertices by $`\pi (g)=(\pi _+(g),\pi _\mathrm{\Delta }(g))`$. It’s clear that $`\pi `$ is surjective.

There is also a natural return map $`\varpi :𝒳_𝒟\times \widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ that on the level of vertices is described by $`(a,n)a\mathrm{\Delta }^n`$. The cells in $`𝒳_𝒟\times `$ are of the form $`\sigma \times I`$, where $`\sigma `$ is a $`k`$-simplex in $`𝒳_𝒟`$, and $`I`$ is a vertex or edge. By definition the simplex $`\sigma `$ corresponds to a collection of elements $`a_iG^+`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }a_i`$, $`a_0<\mathrm{}<a_k`$ and $`a_k<a_0\mathrm{\Delta }`$. If $`I=[n,n+1]`$ then there is then a simplicial subdivision of the cell $`\sigma \times I`$ induced by taking the simplices

$$\{\{a_0\mathrm{\Delta }^n<\mathrm{}<a_k\mathrm{\Delta }^n<a_0\mathrm{\Delta }^{n+1}\},\mathrm{},\{a_k\mathrm{\Delta }^n<a_0\mathrm{\Delta }^{n+1}<\mathrm{}<a_k\mathrm{\Delta }^{n+1}\}\}.$$

With this subdivision, $`𝒳_𝒟\times `$ is a simplicial complex (in fact a flag complex), and so in order to extend $`\varpi `$ to a map of complexes, it suffices to check that the $`\varpi `$ can be extended to a simplicial map between the $`1`$-skeleta.

In the simplicial subdivision of $`𝒳_𝒟\times `$, there is an edge between $`(a,n)`$ and $`(b,m)`$ if $`|mn|1`$ and $`a\mathrm{\Delta }^n<b\mathrm{\Delta }^ma\mathrm{\Delta }^{n+1}`$, or similarly $`b\mathrm{\Delta }^m<a\mathrm{\Delta }^nb\mathrm{\Delta }^{m+1}`$. Because the two cases are symmetric we may use the previous set of inequalities without loss of generality, and we note that either $`m=n`$ or $`m=n+1`$.

If $`m=n`$ then by dividing out $`\mathrm{\Delta }^n`$ we see that $`a<ba\mathrm{\Delta }`$ hence $`b=a\mu `$ for some $`\mu 𝒟`$. Thus $`(b,m)`$ maps to the vertex associated with $`a\mu \mathrm{\Delta }^n=a\mathrm{\Delta }^n\sigma ^n(\mu )`$ which is joined to the vertex associated with $`a\sigma ^n`$ by an edge labelled $`\sigma ^n(\mu )`$.

If $`m=n+1`$ then by dividing out $`\mathrm{\Delta }^n`$ we see that $`a<b\mathrm{\Delta }a\mathrm{\Delta }`$ hence $`b=a\mu ^1`$ for some $`\mu 𝒟`$. Thus $`b\mathrm{\Delta }=a\mu ^{}`$ and the pair $`(b,m)`$ maps to the vertex associated with $`a\mu ^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^n=a\mathrm{\Delta }^n\sigma ^n(\mu ^{})`$ and so there is an edge joining $`\varpi (a,n)`$ and $`\varpi (b,m)`$ when $`(a,n)`$ is joined to $`(b,m)`$ in the simplicial decomposition of $`𝒳_𝒟\times `$.

Since the composition $`\varpi \pi `$ is the identity on $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$, the two complexes are homeomorphic. ∎

###### Remark 3.3.

The complex $`𝒳_𝒟`$, viewed as a coset complex, admits a left $`G`$ action. The kernel of this action is $`\mathrm{\Delta }^m`$, where $`m`$ is the smallest power of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which is central, and hence it descends to an action by the quotient group $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }=G/\mathrm{\Delta }^m`$. The action of $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ on $`𝒳_𝒟`$ has finite stabilizers, namely conjugates of the subgroup $`\mathrm{\Delta }/\mathrm{\Delta }^m`$.

The projection $`\pi _+`$ of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ onto $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is equivariant with respect to the $`G`$-actions, but the inclusion of $`𝒳_𝒟`$ as a subcomplex of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ is not.

###### Lemma 3.4.

The complex $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is contractible.

###### Proof.

We use the norm $`a`$ — where $`a`$ is the maximum length of a representative of $`a`$ as a product of indivisible elements — to define a Morse function $`\nu :𝒳_𝒟[0,\mathrm{})`$. On the level of vertices, which are represented by the coset representatives, $`\nu (a)=a`$; the map is then extended linearly over the simplices. To see that this map is non-constant on edges, consider the two possibilities: for $`aG^+`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }a`$, and $`\mu 𝒟\{\mathrm{\Delta }\}`$, the left greedy normal form of $`a\mu `$ begins with zero or one $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. If it contains no $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, then $`a\mu `$ is another coset representative and $`\nu (a\mu )=a\mu a+\mu >a`$. Otherwise $`a=b\sigma (\mu ^{})`$ for some coset representative $`bG^+`$. and right multiplication by $`\mu `$ corresponds to an edge from $`b`$ to $`a`$. Again, $`\nu (a)=b\sigma (\mu ^{})b+\sigma (\mu ^{})>b`$.

In order to establish that $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is contractible it suffices to show that the descending links of vertices are contractible (cf. ). Identifying the vertices with elements $`aG^+`$ whose left greedy normal form does not begin with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, one can describe the descending link of $`a`$ as the subcomplex induced by the vertices $`\{b|b<a\text{ and }b\mu =a\text{ for some }\mu 𝒟\}.`$ Thus the vertices of $`\text{Lk}_{}(a)`$ correspond to those $`\mu 𝒟`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }a\mu `$. If we express $`a`$ in *right* greedy normal form, so $`a=\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _k`$ where $`\mu _k=\text{RF}(a)`$ is the right front of $`a`$, then $`\mathrm{\Delta }a\mu `$ if and only if $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\text{RF}(a\mu )=\text{RF}(\mu _k\mu )`$. This occurs precisely when $`\mu _k^{}\mu `$. Thus the descending link is the subcomplex spanned by the simple divisors $`\mu 𝒟\{\mathrm{\Delta }\}`$ that are greater than the right complement of the right front of $`a`$, and the vertex corresponding to $`\text{RF}(a)^{}`$ is a cone point for $`\text{Lk}_{}(a)`$. ∎

Because $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is contractible, $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟𝒳_𝒟\times `$ is also contractible. The $`G`$ action on $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ is free, and the quotient $`G\backslash \widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ is finite, hence $`G`$ admits a finite $`K(\pi ,1)`$. In principle one can compute the homology of $`G`$ from this $`K(\pi ,1)`$. This process can be made quite concrete if one knows the lattice $`𝒟`$.

###### Definition 3.5.

Let $`𝒟_n`$ denote the set of all ordered $`n`$-tuples of elements of $`𝒟`$, $`[\mu _1|\mathrm{}|\mu _n]`$, such that the product $`\mu _1\mathrm{}\mu _n`$ is an element of $`𝒟`$. Note that the largest $`n`$ for which this set is non-empty is the maximal length of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with respect to the indivisible elements, that is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

###### Theorem 3.6.

Let $`G`$ be a Garside group with simple divisors $`𝒟`$, and let $`B_𝒟`$ be the quotient of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ under the action of $`G`$. Then $`B_𝒟`$ has one $`k`$-cell for every element in $`𝒟_k`$. In particular, if $`d=\mathrm{\Delta }`$, then there is a free resolution of $``$ as a trivial $`G`$-module of the form

$$0G^{|𝒟_d|}\mathrm{}G^{|𝒟_2|}G^{|D|}G\stackrel{\mathit{ϵ}}{}0.$$

###### Proof.

One can describe the complex $`B_𝒟=G\backslash \widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ using a variation on the standard bar construction. Since the $`1`$-skeleton of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ is the Cayley graph of $`G`$ with respect to $`𝒟`$, the complex $`B_𝒟`$ contains a single vertex, and a loop for each $`\mu 𝒟`$. Inductively one proceeds by considering each factorization $`\mu =\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _k`$ where $`\mu `$ and each $`\mu _i`$ are in $`𝒟`$. Such a factorization gives rise to a $`k`$-simplex $`[\mu _1|\mu _2|\mathrm{}|\mu _k]`$ whose codimension $`1`$ faces attach to the $`(k1)`$ cells of $`B_𝒟^{(k1)}`$ corresponding to $`[\mu _2|\mathrm{}|\mu _k]`$, $`[\mu _1|\mathrm{}|\mu _i\mu _{i+1}|\mathrm{}|\mu _k]`$, and $`[\mu _1|\mathrm{}|\mu _{k1}]`$. Thus the resolution of $``$ as a trivial $`G`$-module induced by the universal cover $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ resonates with the standard bar resolution of a group, only instead of using the entire multiplication table as in the bar resolution, one restricts to the partial multiplication in the lattice $`𝒟`$. ∎

###### Question 3.7.

Given an Garside group $`G`$, is it always possible to find an Garside monoid $`M`$ where $`G`$ is the group of fractions of $`M`$, and the Garside element $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ satisfies $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\text{cd}(G)`$? One suspects not, but this is possible for Artin groups of finite type, as we show in §5.

## 4. The end connectivity of Garside groups

Just as one can compute the (co)homology of an Garside group using the poset $`𝒟`$, one can also get concrete information about the end connectivity of $`𝒳_𝒟`$ by looking at the (co)homology of certain subcomplexes of the geometric realization of the poset of simple divisors $`|𝒟|`$. Recall that a contractible, locally finite complex $`X`$ is *$`n`$-connected at infinity* if given any compact subcomplex $`CX`$, there is a subcomplex $`DX`$ such that every map $`\varphi :S^iXD`$ extends to a map $`\widehat{\varphi }:B^{i+1}XC`$, for $`1in`$. The property of being $`0`$-connected at infinity is usually called “one ended” and $`1`$-connected at infinity is usually referred to as “simply connected at infinity”. Similarly $`X`$ is *$`n`$-acyclic at infinity* if given any compact subcomplex $`CX`$, there is a subcomplex $`DX`$ such that $`i`$-cycles supported outside of $`D`$ bound $`(i+1)`$-chains supported outside of $`C`$. If $`G`$ admits a finite $`K(\pi ,1)`$, then the end connectivity of the universal covers of all finite $`K(\pi ,1)`$s is the same, and the end connectivity is therefore a property of the group $`G`$.

In §3 we establish that $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is contractible by examining the descending links of vertices with respect to the Morse function $`\nu :𝒳_𝒟[0,\mathrm{})`$. The ascending links of vertices can be used to describe the connectivity at infinity of $`𝒳_𝒟`$. Using this idea, Bestvina was able to show that if $`A`$ is an Artin group of finite type, with cohomological dimension $`n`$, then $`A`$ is $`(n2)`$-connected at infinity . (As we discuss below, this implies that $`A`$ is a duality group.) Arbitrary Garside groups are not highly connected at infinity, and in particular, they are not all duality groups. The main result in this section is that the lattice $`𝒟`$ determines the connectivity at infinity of $`𝒳_𝒟`$ and hence it determines the connectivity at infinity of the associated Garside group.

Let $`𝒫𝒟`$ be the subposet $`𝒟\{\mathrm{\Delta }\}`$, and for any element $`\mu 𝒟`$ let $`𝒫𝒟_\mu `$ be the subposet consisting of all elements which do not have $`\mu `$ as a left divisor

$$𝒫𝒟_\mu :=\{\eta 𝒟|\mu \eta \}.$$

The ascending links of vertices can be described in terms of the geometric realizations of these subposets. Namely, if $`aG^+`$, then just as $`\text{Lk}_{}(a)`$ is the subposet of elements greater than or equal to the right complement of the right front $`\text{RF}(a)^{}`$; the ascending link is then $`\text{Lk}_{}(a)|𝒫𝒟_{\text{RF}(a)^{}}|`$.

###### Theorem 4.1.

Let $`G`$ be an Garside group with simple divisors $`𝒟`$, and let $`𝒳_𝒟`$ be the coset complex. If the reduced homology groups $`\stackrel{~}{H}_i(𝒫𝒟)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H}_i(𝒫𝒟_\mu )`$, for $`in`$, are trivial, then $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is $`n`$-acyclic at infinity.

###### Proof.

We quickly sketch this argument since it is similar to the one used by Bestvina for Artin groups of finite type  and by Bestvina and Feighn for $`\text{Out}(F_n)`$ .

One starts by listing the coset representatives $`\{1=a_0,a_1,\mathrm{},a_m,\mathrm{}\}`$ such that $`a_ia_j`$ if $`i<j`$. Define $`K_m`$ to be the subcomplex of $`𝒳_𝒟`$ induced by the vertices corresponding to $`\{a_0,\mathrm{},a_m\}`$ and $`K_1=\mathrm{}`$. The complement $`𝒳_𝒟K_{m1}`$ is then the complement $`𝒳_𝒟K_m`$ with the ascending link $`\text{Lk}_{}(a_m)`$ coned off. (The vertex corresponding to $`a_m`$ forms the cone point.)

For $`i>0`$ the ascending link of the vertex associated to $`a_i`$ is homeomorphic to the complex $`|𝒫𝒟_{\text{RF}(a_i)^{}}|`$; the ascending link of $`a_0=1`$ is $`|𝒫𝒟|`$. Let $`C(\text{Lk}_{}(a))`$ denote the cone on the ascending link. Applying Mayer-Vietoris to the union

$$𝒳_𝒟K_{m1}=\{𝒳_𝒟K_m\}_{\text{Lk}_{}(a_m)}C(\text{Lk}_{}(a_m))$$

yields

$$\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{H}_i(\text{Lk}_{}(a_m))\stackrel{~}{H}_i(𝒳_𝒟K_m)\stackrel{~}{H}_i(𝒳_𝒟K_{m1})\mathrm{}$$

where the term corresponding to $`C(\text{Lk}_{}(a_m))`$ has been removed since cones are contractible. Because the complex $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is contractible, and each $`\stackrel{~}{H}_i(\text{Lk}_{}(a_m))`$ is assumed to be trivial (for $`in`$), we see by induction that $`\stackrel{~}{H}_i(𝒳_𝒟K_m)=0`$ for all $`in`$ and all $`m`$. ∎

###### Corollary 4.2.

The Garside group $`G`$ is $`(n+1)`$-connected at infinity if the reduced homology groups $`\stackrel{~}{H}_i(𝒫𝒟)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H}_i(𝒫𝒟_\mu )`$, for $`in`$, are trivial.

###### Proof.

Since $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ is a free, cocompact $`G`$-space, the end connectivity of $`G`$ is the same as the end connectivity of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$.

The complex $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$ can be filtered by subcomplexes of the form $`\widehat{K}_m=K_m\times [m,m]`$ where $`K_m`$ is the compact subcomplex of $`𝒳_𝒟`$ described in the proof of Theorem 4.1. The complement $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟\widehat{K}_m`$ decomposes into the union of two contractible pieces $`U_m=\{𝒳_𝒟\times [m,\mathrm{})\}\widehat{K}_m`$ and $`V_m=\{𝒳_𝒟\times (\mathrm{},m]\}\widehat{K}_m`$. The intersection $`U_mV_m`$ deformation retracts onto $`𝒳_𝒟K_m`$, hence by Mayer-Vietoris $`\stackrel{~}{H}^i(\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟\widehat{K}_m)\stackrel{~}{H}^{i1}(𝒳_𝒟K_m)`$. It follows by Theorem 4.1 that if the homology of $`|𝒫𝒟|`$ and each $`|𝒫𝒟_\mu |`$ is trivial for $`in`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{H}^i(\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟\widehat{K}_m)=0`$ for $`in+1`$ and all $`m`$.

Since $`U_m`$ and $`V_m`$ are contractible, van Kampen’s Theorem implies that $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟\widehat{K}_m`$ is simply connected, assuming that the complexes $`|𝒫𝒟|`$ and $`|𝒫𝒟_\mu |`$ are connected. Thus by the Hurewicz Theorem, the complements $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟\widehat{K}_m`$ are actually $`(n+1)`$-connected, and therefore $`G`$ is $`(n+1)`$-connected at infinity. ∎

###### Definition 4.3 (Duality groups).

A group $`G`$ of type FP (eg, a group with a finite $`K(\pi ,1)`$-space) is a *duality group* if it is $`n`$-dimensional and $`(n2)`$-acyclic at infinity. Equivalently, it is an $`n`$-dimensional duality group if its cohomology with group ring coefficients is torsion free and concentrated in dimension $`n`$. The term ‘duality’ is appropriate since in an $`n`$-dimensional duality group there is a natural isomorphism between the group’s homology and cohomology giving $`H_i(G,M)H^{ni}(G,H^n(G;G)M)`$ for all $`i`$ and all $`G`$-modules $`M`$. The module $`H^n(G,G)`$ is called the dualizing module. (See  for further background on duality groups.)

###### Proposition 4.4.

Let $`G`$ be a Garside group with simple divisors $`𝒟`$. If the cohomology of $`|𝒫𝒟|`$ and each $`|𝒫𝒟_\mu |`$ is torsion free and concentrated in dimension $`n2`$, then $`G`$ is an $`n`$-dimensional duality group.

###### Proof.

The cohomology group $`H^i(G,G)`$ is isomorphic to the direct limit of the induced system $`H^{i1}(\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟\widehat{K}_m)`$. By the proof of Corollary 4.2 we see that

$$\stackrel{~}{H}^i(G,G)=\underset{}{lim}\left\{\stackrel{~}{H}^{i2}(𝒳_𝒟K_m)\right\}=\stackrel{~}{H}_c^{i1}(𝒳_𝒟)$$

Given that the cohomology of each complex $`|𝒫𝒟|`$ and $`|𝒫𝒟_\mu |`$ is concentrated in dimension $`n2`$, it follows from the Mayer-Vietoris sequence in cohomology that there is a short exact sequence

$$0\stackrel{~}{H}^{i2}(\text{Lk}_{}(a_n))\stackrel{~}{H}^{i2}(𝒳_𝒟K_n)\stackrel{~}{H}^{i2}(𝒳_𝒟K_{n1})0.$$

Since the ascending links are finite, $`\stackrel{~}{H}^{n2}(\text{Lk}_{}(a_m))`$ is free abelian, and a quick induction shows that

$$\stackrel{~}{H}^{i2}(𝒳_𝒟K_n)\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}\stackrel{~}{H}^{i2}(|𝒫𝒟_{\text{RF}(a_i)^{}}|)$$

and so taking the direct limit we get

$$\stackrel{~}{H}^i(G,G)=\stackrel{~}{H}_c^{i1}(𝒳_𝒟)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\stackrel{~}{H}^{i2}(|𝒫𝒟_{\text{RF}(a_i)^{}}|)$$

hence $`H^i(G,G)`$ is torsion free and concentrated in dimension $`n`$ if the reduced cohomology of $`|𝒫𝒟|`$ and each $`|𝒫𝒟_\mu |`$ is torsion free and concentrated in dimension $`(n2)`$. ∎

## 5. Examples

The standard examples of Garside groups are the Artin groups of finite type which are associated to the finite Coxeter groups. Recall that a Coxeter system $`(𝒲,S)`$ consists of a finite set $`S=\{s_1,s_3,\mathrm{},s_n\}`$ and a group $`𝒲`$ with presentation

$$𝒲=s_1,s_2,\mathrm{},s_ns_i^2=1,(s_is_j)^{m(i,j)}=1$$

where $`m(i,j)\{2,3.\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\}`$. The associated Artin group $`𝒜`$ is the group with presentation

$$𝒜=s_1,s_2,\mathrm{},s_nprod(i,j)=prod(j,i)$$

where $`prod(i,j)`$ is the alternating product $`s_is_js_i\mathrm{}`$ of length $`m(i,j)`$. The pair $`(𝒜,S)`$ is called an Artin system. If $`𝒲`$ is finite, $`𝒜`$ is said to be of *finite type*. The map $`𝒜𝒲`$ sending each $`s_i`$ to the generator of the same name is a quotient homomorphism.

For finite type $`𝒜`$, the monoid of positive words defined by the presentation above is Garside. The indivisible elements are the generators $`S`$, and the lattice $`𝒟`$ is in one to one correspondence with the Coxeter quotient $`𝒲`$, with $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ corresponding to the maximal length element of $`𝒲`$.

Our construction of $`\widehat{𝒳}_𝒟`$, and especially $`𝒳_𝒟`$, is exactly that of Bestvina for finite type Artin groups based on these monoids . However, there are other natural Garside monoids whose groups of fractions are the Artin groups of finite type. The most well-known of these is the Birman-Ko-Lee braid monoid  which was shown by Bessis, Digne, and Michel to be a Garside monoid . This has been generalized by Bessis, Brady, and Brady and Watt, to all Artin groups of finite type (, , and ). We briefly describe these monoids.

Let $`(𝒲,S)`$ be a finite Coxeter system and let $`𝒜`$ be the associated Artin group. Let $`R`$ be the set of all reflections in $`𝒲`$, that is, all conjugates of $`s_1,\mathrm{}s_n`$. For $`w𝒲`$, let $`|w|_R`$ denote the minimal length of an expression for $`w`$ as a product of reflections. If $`uv=w`$ in $`W`$ and $`|u|_R+|v|_R=|w|_R`$, we write $`u_lw`$ and $`v_rw`$. These define partial orderings on $`𝒲`$. Let $`\delta 𝒲`$ be the product $`\delta =s_1\mathrm{}s_n`$. Then $`\delta `$ is called a Coxeter element of $`𝒲`$. (The choice of ordering of the generators does not matter; permuting the generators gives a conjugate Coxeter element.) The set

$$𝒟_\delta =\{w𝒲w_l\delta \}=\{w𝒲w_r\delta \}$$

contains $`R`$ and is a lattice with respect to both partial orderings. Define $`M_\delta `$ to be the monoid with generators $`𝒟_\delta `$ and relations $`uv=w`$ whenever $`uv=w`$ in $`𝒲`$, and $`u_lw_l\delta `$. This monoid, which Bessis calls the *dual monoid* is small Gaussian and its group of fractions is isomorphic to $`𝒜`$.

###### Proposition 5.1.

Let $`(𝒜,S)`$ be an Artin system of finite type and let $`M_\delta `$ be its associated dual monoid. Then the complex $`\widehat{𝒳}_{𝒟_\delta }`$ is a $`K(𝒜,1)`$ whose dimension $`n=|S|`$ = is the cohomological dimension of $`𝒜`$.

It is easy to see that the cohomological dimension of $`𝒜`$ at least $`n`$ since $`𝒜`$ contains a free abelian group of rank $`n`$.

###### Remark 5.2.

In the case of $`2`$\- and $`3`$-generator finite type Artin groups, the complex $`\widehat{𝒳}_{𝒟_\delta }`$ is the same as the $`K(𝒜,1)`$-complexes constructed by Brady in . Brady shows that in these dimensions, this complex can be given a piecewise Euclidean CAT(0) metric. Recent work of Brady and McCammond, however, shows that the analogous metric in higher dimensions will fail to be CAT(0) for at least some of the Artin groups . While the question of whether Artin groups are CAT(0) is still open, in the next section we are able to show that Garside groups satisfy a weak version of non-positive curvature.

###### Example 5.3 (Dihedral type).

Let $`𝒜`$ be an Artin group of finite dihedral type, that is, the associated Coxeter group $`𝒲`$ is the dihedral group of order $`2n`$, $`D_n`$. In this case we make take the standard generators of $`𝒜`$ to be $`s`$ and $`t`$ where the image of $`s`$ and $`t`$ in $`D_n`$ correspond to reflections meeting at an angle of $`\pi /n`$. The Coxeter element $`\delta =st`$ is then a rotation through an angle of $`2\pi /n`$.

There are $`n`$ distinct reflections in $`𝒲`$. Viewed as elements of $`𝒜`$, the set of reflections is

$$R=\{s,t,\overline{t}st,st\overline{s},\overline{ts}tst,sts\overline{ts},\mathrm{}\}$$

and the set of divisors is simply $`𝒟_\delta =R\{\delta \}`$. The complex $`\widehat{𝒳}_{𝒟_\delta }`$ is thus the product of an $`n`$-valent tree and $``$. The orbit space $`𝒜\backslash \widehat{𝒳}_{𝒟_\delta }`$ has a single vertex, a loop based at that vertex for each element of $`𝒟_\delta `$ and a $`2`$-cell for each element of $`R`$: $`\{[s|t],[t|\overline{t}st],[\overline{t}st|\overline{ts}tst],\mathrm{}\}`$. The link of the vertex in $`𝒜\backslash \widehat{𝒳}_{𝒟_\delta }`$ is topologically the suspension of $`n`$ points, one for each element of $`R`$. The suspension points correspond to the two ends, $`\{\delta ^+,\delta ^{}\}`$, of the loop $`\delta `$, and the arc corresponding to a reflection $`r`$ is subdivided by two internal vertices $`r^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{}r_{}^{+}`$.

###### Example 5.4 (Braid groups).

Let $`𝒜`$ be the braid group on $`n+1`$ strings. Then the reflections $`R`$ consist of braids $`r_{i,j},i<j`$, which interchange the $`i`$th and $`j`$th strings and leave the other strings fixed (with a fixed convention on over- or under-crossing) and the element $`\delta `$ is the braid which crosses the first string over to the last position and shifts all the other strings one place to the left. The complex $`𝒜\backslash \widehat{𝒳}_{𝒟_\delta }`$ is $`n`$-dimensional and has one $`n`$-cell for each expression of $`\delta `$ as a product of $`n`$-reflections.

## 6. Curvature

A CAT(0) group is a group which acts properly and cocompactly on a CAT(0) metric space. The existence of such an action has many algebraic consequences for the group (see .) It is not known whether all Artin groups—or even those of finite type—are CAT(0) groups. (See , , and  for some partial results on this question.) Bestvina showed that the Artin groups of finite type, modulo their centers, satisfy a combinatorial convexity property which was good enough to get some interesting corollaries. Many of these arguments work in the context of Garside groups as well.

###### Definition 6.1 (Geodesics).

We define a *geodesic* in $`𝒳_𝒟`$ to be any path whose sequence of edge labels corresponds to a Deligne normal form with no $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$s. If $`\text{DNF}(v)=b_1b_2\mathrm{}b_n\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$ with $`b_n\mathrm{\Delta }`$, then $`b_1,b_2,\mathrm{},b_n`$ are the edge labels for the geodesic from $`1`$ to $`v`$. The geodesic from $`v`$ to $`w`$ is the left translation by $`v`$ of the geodesic from $`1`$ to $`v^1w`$.

###### Definition 6.2 (Distance).

We define a *nonsymmetric* distance $`d(v,w)`$ from a vertex $`v`$ to a vertex $`w`$ in $`𝒳_𝒟`$ as follows: if $`\text{DNF}(v^1w)=b_1b_2\mathrm{}b_n\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$, where $`b_n\mathrm{\Delta }`$, then $`d(v,w)=b_1b_2\mathrm{}b_n`$.

###### Lemma 6.3.

The geodesic from $`v`$ to $`w`$ is the inverse of the geodesic from $`w`$ to $`v`$.

###### Proof.

An edge path is a geodesic if and only if every subpath of length two is a geodesic. If $`a`$ and $`b`$ are simple divisors, then the path $`a,1,b`$ is a geodesic if and only if $`{}_{}{}^{}ab`$ is in Deligne normal form. We must show that $`{}_{}{}^{}ba`$ is also in Deligne normal form. If not, then $`{}_{}{}^{}ba={}_{}{}^{}bsa^{}`$, where $`s,{}_{}{}^{}bs,`$ and $`a^{}`$ are also simple divisors. Then

$${}_{}{}^{}ab=\mathrm{\Delta }(^{}ba)^1\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }(^{}bsa^{})^1\mathrm{\Delta }={}_{}{}^{}(a^{})(^{}bs)^{}={}_{}{}^{}as({}_{}{}^{}bs)^{}$$

and so $`{}_{}{}^{}ab`$ was not in Deligne normal form. ∎

###### Proposition 6.4.

We can orient the edges of $`𝒳_𝒟`$ in terms of the Morse function. Then for any two vertices $`v`$ and $`w`$ in $`𝒳_𝒟`$, all edges of the geodesic from $`v`$ to $`w`$ whose orientation points toward $`v`$ occur at the beginning of the path, and these are followed by edges oriented toward $`w`$.

###### Proof.

Assume to the contrary that $`x,y,z`$ are consecutive vertices on the geodesic from $`v`$ to $`w`$ and that $`x<y>z`$. Thus there are divisors $`b`$ and $`c`$ in $`𝒟`$ such that $`xb=y`$ and $`yc=z\mathrm{\Delta }`$. It follows that the first letter in the left greedy normal form for $`x(bc)=z\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. But then by Proposition 2.4, $`\text{LF}(xb)=\mathrm{\Delta }`$. But $`xb=y`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }y`$. ∎

###### Corollary 6.5.

If $`p`$ is a vertex on the geodesic from $`v`$ to $`w`$ and $`vpw`$, and $`u`$ is any vertex, then there is a strict inequality:

$$d(u,p)<\mathrm{max}\{d(u,v),d(u,w)\}.$$

###### Definition 6.6 (Centers).

Let $`T`$ be a finite set of vertices in $`𝒳_𝒟`$. For a vertex $`v`$ in $`𝒳_𝒟`$, let $`r(T,v)=max_{tT}d(t,v)`$. The *circumscribed radius* $`r(T)`$ is the smallest integer $`r`$ such that $`r=r(T,v)`$ for some vertex $`v`$. Any such vertex is called a *center* of $`T`$.

###### Proposition 6.7.

The set of centers of $`T`$ span a simplex in $`𝒳_𝒟`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is a flag complex, it suffices to show that any two centers are connected by a single edge. Suppose $`v_1`$ and $`v_2`$ are centers and that the geodesic between them passes through a third vertex $`w`$. Then for every $`tT`$,

$$d(t,w)<\mathrm{max}\{d(t,v_1),d(t,v_2)\}r(T)$$

which contradicts the minimality of $`r(T)`$. ∎

Let $`m`$ be the smallest power of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which is central in $`G`$ and let $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }=G/\mathrm{\Delta }^m`$. Recall that for $`\mu 𝒟`$, $`\sigma (\mu )=\mathrm{\Delta }\mu \mathrm{\Delta }^1𝒟`$.

###### Corollary 6.8.

Let $`H`$ be a finite subgroup of $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then $`H`$ fixes the barycenter of some simplex in $`𝒳_𝒟`$, and therefore there are only finitely many conjugacy classes of finite subgroups in $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Moreover, up to conjugacy, the finite subgroups of $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are of one of two types:

1. cyclic generated by $`\mu \mathrm{\Delta }^j`$, where $`\mu 𝒟`$ satisfies $`\mu \sigma ^j(\mu )\sigma ^{2j}(\mu )\mathrm{}\sigma ^{(t1)j}(\mu )=\mathrm{\Delta }`$ for some $`t\mathrm{\Delta }`$, or
2. the direct product of a cyclic group of type (1) and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$ commutes with $`\mu `$.

###### Proof.

The first statement follows immediately from Proposition 6.7. Suppose $`H`$ stabilizes the simplex $`1<\mu _1<\mu _2<\mathrm{}<\mu _{t1}`$ and acts transitively on the vertices. Following Bestvina’s argument (, Lemma 4.6), one can show that $`H`$ preserves the cyclic order on the vertices induced by the linear ordering above. Let $`hH`$ be an element which takes the vertex $`1`$ to the vertex $`\mu =\mu _1`$, so $`h=\mu \mathrm{\Delta }^j`$ for some $`j`$. Then for $`i=1,2,\mathrm{}t1`$, $`h^i=\mu \sigma ^j(\mu )\sigma ^{2j}(\mu )\mathrm{}\sigma ^{(i1)j}(\mu )\mathrm{\Delta }^{ij}`$ and the length ordering implies that $`\mu \sigma ^j(\mu )\sigma ^{2j}(\mu )\mathrm{}\sigma ^{(i1)j}(\mu )=\mu _i`$. (If the product on the left produced a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ at any stage, then some $`\mu _i`$ would have shorter length than the previous one.) It follows that $`h^t`$, which fixes the entire simplex, must equal $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{tj+1}`$ which gives the equation in (1) above. Finally, note that if $`h^{}H`$ takes the vertex $`1`$ to the vertex $`\mu _k`$, then $`h^{}h^k`$ fixes the entire simplex and hence must be a power of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ which commutes with $`\mu `$. ∎

###### Definition 6.9 (Translation Length).

For $`gG`$, let $`|g|_𝒟`$ denote the word length of $`g`$ with respect to the generating set $`𝒟`$. The *translation length* of $`g`$, denoted $`\tau (g)`$, is defined to be

$$\tau (g)=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{|g^n|_𝒟}{n}$$

In order to use the convexity property of $`𝒳_𝒟`$, we will need a relation between the word length $`|g|_𝒟`$ and the distance $`d(,g())`$ in $`𝒳_𝒟`$, where $`G`$ is understood to act on $`𝒳_𝒟`$ via the projection onto $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

###### Definition 6.10.

The Garside element $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is *tame* if there exists a constant $`c`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }^ncn`$ for all $`n`$.

Note that by definition, the norm $`||||`$ on $`G^+`$ satisfies a reverse triangle inequality: $`aba+b`$. Thus, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^nn\mathrm{\Delta }`$, but it is not obvious that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is tame. On the other hand, we know of no Garside groups for which this condition fails.

###### Lemma 6.11.

Suppose $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is tame. Then for all $`gG`$, $`|g|_𝒟\frac{1}{c}d(,g())`$.

###### Proof.

The normal form $`g=\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _k\mathrm{\Delta }^j`$ is an expression of minimal length for $`g`$ as a word in $`𝒟`$ (), thus $`|g|_𝒟=k+|j|`$. Let $`a=\mu _1\mu _2\mathrm{}\mu _kG^+`$. Then there exists $`bG^+`$ with $`ab=\mathrm{\Delta }^k`$. It follows that $`d(,g())=aa+b\mathrm{\Delta }^kckc|g|_𝒟`$. ∎

###### Proposition 6.12.

If $`G`$ is a Garside group with tame $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, then the set of translation lengths of elements of $`G`$ is bounded away from zero.

###### Proof.

Let $`gG`$. We first consider the case where the image of $`g`$ in $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ has finite order. By Corollary 6.8, there exists an $`N`$ such that the order of every torsion element in $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ divides $`N`$. Thus, $`g^N=\mathrm{\Delta }^{km}`$ for some $`k0`$ (since $`G`$ is torsion-free). It follows that $`\tau (g)=\frac{|km|}{N}\frac{m}{N}`$.

Now suppose the image of $`g`$ in $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ has infinite order. Let $`T_n`$ be the set of vertices in $`𝒳_𝒟`$, $`T=\{,g(),g^2(),\mathrm{},g^{n1}()\}`$. Let $`r_n`$ be the circumscribed radius of $`T_n`$. We claim that for any $`n`$, $`r_n<r_{n+d}`$ where $`d=\mathrm{\Delta }`$. For suppose $`r_n=r_{n+d}`$. If $`z`$ is a center of $`T_{n+d}`$, then it is also a center for any subset of $`T_{n+d}`$ whose circumscribed radius is $`r_n`$. In particular, $`z`$ is a center for each of the sets $`T_n,g(T_n),g^2(T_n),\mathrm{},g^d(T_n)`$. It follows that $`z,g(z),g^2(z),\mathrm{},g^d(z)`$ are all centers of $`g^d(T_n)`$, hence they span a simplex. But the dimension of the complex $`𝒳_𝒟`$ is $`d1`$ so we must have $`g^k(z)=z`$ for some $`kd`$. Since vertex stabilizers in $`G_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are finite, this contradicts the assumption that the image of $`g`$ has infinite order.

Thus we have $`r_d<r_{2d}<r_{3d}\mathrm{}.`$ and so $`r_{nd}n`$ for all $`n`$. In particular, for some $`0<id`$, we must have $`d(,g^{nd+i}())n`$, and hence by Lemma 6.11, $`|g^{nd+i}|_𝒟\frac{n}{c}`$. It now follows that $`\tau (g)\frac{1}{cd}.`$

###### Corollary 6.13.

If $`G`$ is a Garside group with tame $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, then every solvable subgroup of $`G`$ is virtually a finitely generated abelian group.

###### Proof.

The proof is the same as for Bestvina’s Corollaries 4.2 and 4.4. ∎