From: Greg Kuperberg Subject: 2-sphere bundles of joy Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1998 20:23:08 -0700 (PDT) For some work in geometric topology (maybe only to convince myself that I am not completely a librarian these days) I need to understand real 4-plane and 3-plane bundles over (reasonable) topological spaces. Specifically I think the following should be true: An oriented orthogonal 4-plane bundle E over some space X is an so(4)-bundle, and so(4) double-covers so(3) x so(3), so E yields two oriented orthogonal 3-plane bundles Lambda^+ and Lambda^-. These two auxiliary bundles can be defined as the self-dual and anti-self-dual subbundles of Lambda^2(E), so their names make some sense. Now E has characteristic classes w_2 = w_2(E) p_1 = p_1(E) chi = chi(E) Likewise Lambda^+ and Lambda^- have classes p^+- = p_1(Lambda^+-) w^+- = w_2(Lambda^+-). I am relatively sure that the relation w^+ = w^- = w_2 holds, and that it is the only relation required for a pair of 3-plane bundles Lambda^+- to be realized by a 4-plane bundle E. I am less sure of the following but I would also like it to be true: p^+ = p_1 + 2*chi p^- = p_1 - 2*chi Finally oriented orthogonal 3-plane bundles. If you such a bundle F, then there is an associated S^2 bundle. I would like to say that the total space Y (i.e., the fibration is S^2 -> Y -> X) has a canonical second cohomology class omega that restricts to [S^3] on each fiber. omega should be integral if the bundle F is spin, but possibly only half-integral if F is not spin. Moreover, I would like it to be the case that if pi:Y -> X is the bundle map, that omega^2 = pi^*(p_1(F))/4. (Of course I understand that these statements about omega could just as well be phrased as assertions about BSO(3)). Are all of these things true? Greg