DOCSLIB.ORG

Canonical, Tangent, and Cotangent Sheaf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Canonical, Tangent, and Cotangent Sheaf Canonical, tangent, and cotangent sheaf Wanlong Zheng January 7, 2020 This short article aims to explain some geometric intuitions behind these objects: canonical sheaf, tangent sheaf, and cotangent sheaf. Nothing appearing in this article is original. Contents 1 Basics 1 1.1 Cotangent . .1 1.2 Tangent . .2 1.3 Euler sequence . .2 2 Cohomology of the tangent sheaf 3 2.1 Geometric understandings . .3 0 2.1.1 H of TX ...........................................3 1 2.1.2 H of TX ...........................................4 2.2 An example(s) with rings . .4 3 Canonical sheaves/divisors 5 3.1 Conormal, normal, adjunction . .5 3.2 Dualizing sheaf . .6 3.2.1 Relative dualizing sheaf . .7 3.3 Stability in terms of canonical sheaf . .7 1 Basics 1.1 Cotangent Although it seems very unnatural, but cotangent (or conormal) is a more natural object than tangent (or normal) sheaf/bundle. We will start with cotangent. Cotangent is closely related with “differentials” of a function. Definition. Let f : X Y be a morphism of schemes, and ∆ : X X ×Y X the diagonal morphism. Denote by W an open set of X ×Y X which contains ∆(X) as a closed subscheme. If I is the sheaf of ideals ! ! 1 of ∆(X) in W, then the sheaf of relative differentials of X over Y is the sheaf ∗ 2 ΩX/Y = ∆ (I/I ). As a consequence (or another equivalent way to define this), we could cover X and Y by affine opens Y ⊃ U = Spec(A) and X ⊃ V = Spec(B) with f(V) ⊂ U, and the sheaf of relative differentials is obtained ∼ by glueing the sheaves (ΩB/A) associated to the modules of differentials ΩB/A. We quickly recall here that the module ΩB/A is the free module generated by symbols fdb j b 2 Bg dividing out by d(b + b0) = db - db0, d(bb0) = bdb0 + b0db and da = 0 for all a 2 A. Example. 2 • Take B = k[x, y] and A = k, then 3x dy + 4dx 2 ΩB/A. In general, if B is generated by A by some xi’s, then taking dxi and the relations among them suffice to define Ω. • If B = A/I, then db = 0 since any b is the image of some a. So Ω = 0. Similarly for localizations. 2 3 2 • Take B = C[x, y]/(y - x ), and A = C, then ΩB/A = (Bdx ⊕ Bdy)/(2ydy - 3x dx). 1.2 Tangent Definition. The tangent sheaf of X is the dual TX = HomOX (ΩX/k, OX). Generally we assume X is nonsingular, and in this case TX is locally free of rank n = dim X. Using the universal property of differentials: Proposition. If B is an A-module, and Ω = ΩB/A the module of differentials and d : B Ω the natural map, then for any B-module M and for any A-derivation d0 : B M, there exists a unique B-module map f : Ω M with d0 = f ◦ d. ! ! ! we see that elements in TX(Spec(A)) correspond to k-derivations A A, agreeing with our experi- ences in differential geometry. ! At stalk level (cf bundle at a point) x 2 X, tangent sheaf is simply the Zariski tangent space: 2 (TX)x = Homk(m/m , k) where m is the maximal ideal of the local ring OX,x. 1.3 Euler sequence The version commonly considered in algebraic geometry is the short exact sequence: ⊕(n+1) 0 OPn OPn (1) TPn 0. At the level of global sections (H0!also form! a short exact sequence),! ! those of T (tangent sheaf/bundle) n n+1 are vector fields. Thinking of P as C n f0g, we have vector fields d/dxi, and for any set of n + 1 d n linear homogeneous functions v1, ::: , vn+1, the vector field vi descends to a vector field on P . dxi And this map is surjective. P How about the kernel? Pretending Pn is a sphere, then we need a “normal” vector field in C3, which, d when we project down, would give 0. So the kernel is E = xi . dxi 2 In particular, this is really saying the Euler relation for a homogeneous polynomial of degree d (although symbolically I really should have used partials): d xi f = d · f. dxi X The dual of this sequence gives: ⊕(n+1) 0 ΩPn/k OPn (-1) OPn 0. ! ! ! ! 2 Cohomology of the tangent sheaf The standard reference is Hartshorne’s Deformation Theory. The goal is to explain (including the meaning of those words) the following results from deformation theory: 0 • H (X, TX) measures infinitesimal (first-order) automorphisms, 1 • H (X, TX) measures infinitesimal deformations, 2 2 • H (X, TX) measures obstructions to deformations (if H = 0 we call unobstructed). To explain this, it is necessary to introduce the dual number D := Spec k[]/(2), which plays a very important role in deformation theory. The first observation is that, since dual number captures enough information (linear part of a function), tangent sheaf for an affine k-scheme X = Spec(A) is just: TX = Homk(Spec(A ⊗ D), X). 2.1 Geometric understandings 0 2.1.1 H of TX This section is devoted to explaining why the global sections of tangent sheaf for a curve X correspond to infinitesimal automorphisms of X. Here I quote from an answer in stackexchange that summarizes this result: The basic idea that underlies their description is that given a manifold X, with a Lie group of automor- phisms G, every tangent vector at the origin of G (ie an element of the Lie algebra of G) induces a vector field V on X in the obvious way - namely given z 2 Lie(G), at every point x 2 X, the tangent vector Vx tz is represented by the curve fe (x)gt2(-1,1) ⊂ X. In the cases described in the book, they’re claiming that this association yields an isomorphism between the appropriate spaces. The rest is also taken from the same answer following the previous paragraph. 0 0 Definition. Let X be a scheme over k. A deformation of X0 over D is a pair (X , i), where X is a scheme flat over D, i : X , X0 is a closed immersion, and the induced map 0 ! i ×D k : X X ×D k 0 0 is an isomorphism. Two deformations are equivalent! if there is an isomorphism f : X1 X2 with i2 = f ◦ i1. ! 3 0 0 Note some author simply requires X flat over D with X ×D k isomorphic to X. We could get this by dividing the action of the group of automorphisms of X over k. In any situation, it’s important to keep the intuitions in mind. Then the result we want it: Proposition. Let (X0, i) be a deformation of a k-scheme X over D. Then the automorphism group of (X0, i) is 0 naturally isomorphic to H (X, TX). First notice that H0 is independent of the choice of deformation, so we could simply work with the 0 trivial deformation X = X ×k D. We have a contravariant sheaf AX of automorphism groups associated to X: for any k-scheme S, AX(S) := AutS(X ×k S). Let’s assume this is really a sheaf (in a sufficiently fine Grothendieck topology that we care). In particular, Spec(k) , Spec(D) induces a restriction map AX(D) AX(k), and the automorphisms of the trivial deformation is the kernel of this group homomorphism (this will also be the version of definition given in the Stacks! Project). ! In good cases, the sheaf AX is representable by a group scheme G. Then the above group homomor- phism becomes: Homk(Spec(D), G) Homk(Spec(k), G), G and the kernel of which you could convince yourself! is the tangent space of at origin, or the Lie algebra of G. Example. Let X be a geometrically irreducible smooth proper genus g curve over C. Riemann-Roch says 0 1 dimk H (X, TX) = 3 if g = 0 (or X = P ). These 3 dimensional sections come from the 3 dimensional group scheme PGL(2, C) acting on P1. If g = 1, then elliptic curves have a group structure, so dim H0 = 1 comes from the action of X on itself. If g ≥ 2, there are only finitely many automorphism. Note that we are talking about automorphisms of X and infinitesimal automorphisms of X at the same time. It should? be the case that the infinitesimal automorphisms form the Lie algebra of the Lie group of automorphisms, although we only care about the vector space structrue. Anyway, dimensions are the same. 1 2.1.2 H of TX Suppose X is a smooth variety over k and X0 an infinitesimal deformation of X. There is a result called “Infinitesimal Lifting Property” which says over an affine piece, deformation must be trivial. 0 0 So we take an affine cover Ui of X, and correspondingly Ui of X . By the mentioned result, φi : 0 -1 Ui ×Spec(k) Spec(D) Ui is a trivialization, and φj φi gives a cocycle in a sheaf of automorphism group. But we just saw the this is in the tangent sheaf. ! There is another argument in the context of complex manifold, which considers the deformation of the complex structures by perturbing the transition functions. See Kodaira’s Complex Manifolds and Deformation of Complex Structures chapter 4. 2.2 An example(s) with rings This example is taken from Szendroi’s˝ notes on deformations. Suppose we have an associative ring A, and we want to perturb the multiplication, by a ∗ b := ab + f(a, b) 4 for some f 2 Hom(A ⊗ A, A) the space of all multiplications.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Euler Sequence and Koszul Complex of a Module
    Ark. Mat. DOI: 10.1007/s11512-016-0236-4 c 2016 by Institut Mittag-Leffler. All rights reserved Euler sequence and Koszul complex of a module Bj¨orn Andreas, Dar´ıo S´anchez G´omez and Fernando Sancho de Salas Abstract. We construct relative and global Euler sequences of a module. We apply it to prove some acyclicity results of the Koszul complex of a module and to compute the cohomology of the sheaves of (relative and absolute) differential p-forms of a projective bundle. In particular we generalize Bott’s formula for the projective space to a projective bundle over a scheme of characteristic zero. Introduction This paper deals with two related questions: the acyclicity of the Koszul com- plex of a module and the cohomology of the sheaves of (relative and absolute) differential p-forms of a projective bundle over a scheme. Let M be a module over a commutative ring A. One has the Koszul complex · ⊗ · · · Kos(M)=Λ M A S M,whereΛM and S M stand for the exterior and symmetric algebras of M. It is a graded complex Kos(M)= n≥0 Kos(M)n,whosen-th graded component Kos(M)n is the complex: 0 −→ ΛnM −→ Λn−1M ⊗M −→ Λn−2M ⊗S2M −→ ... −→ SnM −→ 0 It has been known for many years that Kos(M)n is acyclic for n>0, provided that M is a flat A-module or n is invertible in A (see [3]or[10]). It was conjectured in [11]thatKos(M) is always acyclic. A counterexample in characteristic 2 was given in [5], but it is also proved there that Hμ(Kos(M)μ)=0 for any M,whereμ is the minimal number of generators of M.
    [Show full text]
  • Koszul Cohomology and Algebraic Geometry Marian Aprodu Jan Nagel
    Koszul Cohomology and Algebraic Geometry Marian Aprodu Jan Nagel Institute of Mathematics “Simion Stoilow” of the Romanian Acad- emy, P.O. Box 1-764, 014700 Bucharest, ROMANIA & S¸coala Normala˘ Superioara˘ Bucures¸ti, 21, Calea Grivit¸ei, 010702 Bucharest, Sector 1 ROMANIA E-mail address: [email protected] Universite´ Lille 1, Mathematiques´ – Bat.ˆ M2, 59655 Villeneuve dAscq Cedex, FRANCE E-mail address: [email protected] 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 14H51, 14C20, 14F99, 13D02 Contents Introduction vii Chapter 1. Basic definitions 1 1.1. The Koszul complex 1 1.2. Definitions in the algebraic context 2 1.3. Minimal resolutions 3 1.4. Definitions in the geometric context 5 1.5. Functorial properties 6 1.6. Notes and comments 10 Chapter 2. Basic results 11 2.1. Kernel bundles 11 2.2. Projections and linear sections 12 2.3. Duality 17 2.4. Koszul cohomology versus usual cohomology 19 2.5. Sheaf regularity. 21 2.6. Vanishing theorems 22 Chapter 3. Syzygy schemes 25 3.1. Basic definitions 25 3.2. Koszul classes of low rank 32 3.3. The Kp,1 theorem 34 3.4. Rank-2 bundles and Koszul classes 38 3.5. The curve case 41 3.6. Notes and comments 45 Chapter 4. The conjectures of Green and Green–Lazarsfeld 47 4.1. Brill-Noether theory 47 4.2. Numerical invariants of curves 49 4.3. Statement of the conjectures 51 4.4. Generalizations of the Green conjecture. 54 4.5. Notes and comments 57 Chapter 5. Koszul cohomology and the Hilbert scheme 59 5.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometry of Algebraic Curves
    Geometry of Algebraic Curves Fall 2011 Course taught by Joe Harris Notes by Atanas Atanasov One Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 E-mail address: [email protected] Contents Lecture 1. September 2, 2011 6 Lecture 2. September 7, 2011 10 2.1. Riemann surfaces associated to a polynomial 10 2.2. The degree of KX and Riemann-Hurwitz 13 2.3. Maps into projective space 15 2.4. An amusing fact 16 Lecture 3. September 9, 2011 17 3.1. Embedding Riemann surfaces in projective space 17 3.2. Geometric Riemann-Roch 17 3.3. Adjunction 18 Lecture 4. September 12, 2011 21 4.1. A change of viewpoint 21 4.2. The Brill-Noether problem 21 Lecture 5. September 16, 2011 25 5.1. Remark on a homework problem 25 5.2. Abel's Theorem 25 5.3. Examples and applications 27 Lecture 6. September 21, 2011 30 6.1. The canonical divisor on a smooth plane curve 30 6.2. More general divisors on smooth plane curves 31 6.3. The canonical divisor on a nodal plane curve 32 6.4. More general divisors on nodal plane curves 33 Lecture 7. September 23, 2011 35 7.1. More on divisors 35 7.2. Riemann-Roch, finally 36 7.3. Fun applications 37 7.4. Sheaf cohomology 37 Lecture 8. September 28, 2011 40 8.1. Examples of low genus 40 8.2. Hyperelliptic curves 40 8.3. Low genus examples 42 Lecture 9. September 30, 2011 44 9.1. Automorphisms of genus 0 an 1 curves 44 9.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Math 632: Algebraic Geometry Ii Cohomology on Algebraic Varieties
    MATH 632: ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY II COHOMOLOGY ON ALGEBRAIC VARIETIES LECTURES BY PROF. MIRCEA MUSTA¸TA;˘ NOTES BY ALEKSANDER HORAWA These are notes from Math 632: Algebraic geometry II taught by Professor Mircea Musta¸t˘a in Winter 2018, LATEX'ed by Aleksander Horawa (who is the only person responsible for any mistakes that may be found in them). This version is from May 24, 2018. Check for the latest version of these notes at http://www-personal.umich.edu/~ahorawa/index.html If you find any typos or mistakes, please let me know at [email protected]. The problem sets, homeworks, and official notes can be found on the course website: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mmustata/632-2018.html This course is a continuation of Math 631: Algebraic Geometry I. We will assume the material of that course and use the results without specific references. For notes from the classes (similar to these), see: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~ahorawa/math_631.pdf and for the official lecture notes, see: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mmustata/ag-1213-2017.pdf The focus of the previous part of the course was on algebraic varieties and it will continue this course. Algebraic varieties are closer to geometric intuition than schemes and understanding them well should make learning schemes later easy. The focus will be placed on sheaves, technical tools such as cohomology, and their applications. Date: May 24, 2018. 1 2 MIRCEA MUSTA¸TA˘ Contents 1. Sheaves3 1.1. Quasicoherent and coherent sheaves on algebraic varieties3 1.2. Locally free sheaves8 1.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Tensor Categorical Foundations of Algebraic Geometry
    Tensor categorical foundations of algebraic geometry Martin Brandenburg { 2014 { Abstract Tannaka duality and its extensions by Lurie, Sch¨appi et al. reveal that many schemes as well as algebraic stacks may be identified with their tensor categories of quasi-coherent sheaves. In this thesis we study constructions of cocomplete tensor categories (resp. cocontinuous tensor functors) which usually correspond to constructions of schemes (resp. their morphisms) in the case of quasi-coherent sheaves. This means to globalize the usual local-global algebraic geometry. For this we first have to develop basic commutative algebra in an arbitrary cocom- plete tensor category. We then discuss tensor categorical globalizations of affine morphisms, projective morphisms, immersions, classical projective embeddings (Segre, Pl¨ucker, Veronese), blow-ups, fiber products, classifying stacks and finally tangent bundles. It turns out that the universal properties of several moduli spaces or stacks translate to the corresponding tensor categories. arXiv:1410.1716v1 [math.AG] 7 Oct 2014 This is a slightly expanded version of the author's PhD thesis. Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background . .1 1.2 Results . .3 1.3 Acknowledgements . 13 2 Preliminaries 14 2.1 Category theory . 14 2.2 Algebraic geometry . 17 2.3 Local Presentability . 21 2.4 Density and Adams stacks . 22 2.5 Extension result . 27 3 Introduction to cocomplete tensor categories 36 3.1 Definitions and examples . 36 3.2 Categorification . 43 3.3 Element notation . 46 3.4 Adjunction between stacks and cocomplete tensor categories . 49 4 Commutative algebra in a cocomplete tensor category 53 4.1 Algebras and modules . 53 4.2 Ideals and affine schemes .
    [Show full text]
  • SERRE DUALITY and APPLICATIONS Contents 1
    SERRE DUALITY AND APPLICATIONS JUN HOU FUNG Abstract. We carefully develop the theory of Serre duality and dualizing sheaves. We differ from the approach in [12] in that the use of spectral se- quences and the Yoneda pairing are emphasized to put the proofs in a more systematic framework. As applications of the theory, we discuss the Riemann- Roch theorem for curves and Bott's theorem in representation theory (follow- ing [8]) using the algebraic-geometric machinery presented. Contents 1. Prerequisites 1 1.1. A crash course in sheaves and schemes 2 2. Serre duality theory 5 2.1. The cohomology of projective space 6 2.2. Twisted sheaves 9 2.3. The Yoneda pairing 10 2.4. Proof of theorem 2.1 12 2.5. The Grothendieck spectral sequence 13 2.6. Towards Grothendieck duality: dualizing sheaves 16 3. The Riemann-Roch theorem for curves 22 4. Bott's theorem 24 4.1. Statement and proof 24 4.2. Some facts from algebraic geometry 29 4.3. Proof of theorem 4.5 33 Acknowledgments 34 References 35 1. Prerequisites Studying algebraic geometry from the modern perspective now requires a some- what substantial background in commutative and homological algebra, and it would be impractical to go through the many definitions and theorems in a short paper. In any case, I can do no better than the usual treatments of the various subjects, for which references are provided in the bibliography. To a first approximation, this paper can be read in conjunction with chapter III of Hartshorne [12]. Also in the bibliography are a couple of texts on algebraic groups and Lie theory which may be beneficial to understanding the latter parts of this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Report No. 26/2008
    Mathematisches Forschungsinstitut Oberwolfach Report No. 26/2008 Classical Algebraic Geometry Organised by David Eisenbud, Berkeley Joe Harris, Harvard Frank-Olaf Schreyer, Saarbr¨ucken Ravi Vakil, Stanford June 8th – June 14th, 2008 Abstract. Algebraic geometry studies properties of specific algebraic vari- eties, on the one hand, and moduli spaces of all varieties of fixed topological type on the other hand. Of special importance is the moduli space of curves, whose properties are subject of ongoing research. The rationality versus general type question of these spaces is of classical and also very modern interest with recent progress presented in the conference. Certain different birational models of the moduli space of curves have an interpretation as moduli spaces of singular curves. The moduli spaces in a more general set- ting are algebraic stacks. In the conference we learned about a surprisingly simple characterization under which circumstances a stack can be regarded as a scheme. For specific varieties a wide range of questions was addressed, such as normal generation and regularity of ideal sheaves, generalized inequalities of Castelnuovo-de Franchis type, tropical mirror symmetry constructions for Calabi-Yau manifolds, Riemann-Roch theorems for Gromov-Witten theory in the virtual setting, cone of effective cycles and the Hodge conjecture, Frobe- nius splitting, ampleness criteria on holomorphic symplectic manifolds, and more. Mathematics Subject Classification (2000): 14xx. Introduction by the Organisers The Workshop on Classical Algebraic Geometry, organized by David Eisenbud (Berkeley), Joe Harris (Harvard), Frank-Olaf Schreyer (Saarbr¨ucken) and Ravi Vakil (Stanford), was held June 8th to June 14th. It was attended by about 45 participants from USA, Canada, Japan, Norway, Sweden, UK, Italy, France and Germany, among of them a large number of strong young mathematicians.
    [Show full text]
  • Strictly Nef Vector Bundles and Characterizations of P
    Complex Manifolds 2021; 8:148–159 Research Article Open Access Jie Liu, Wenhao Ou, and Xiaokui Yang* Strictly nef vector bundles and characterizations of Pn https://doi.org/10.1515/coma-2020-0109 Received September 8, 2020; accepted February 10, 2021 Abstract: In this note, we give a brief exposition on the dierences and similarities between strictly nef and ample vector bundles, with particular focus on the circle of problems surrounding the geometry of projective manifolds with strictly nef bundles. Keywords: strictly nef, ample, hyperbolicity MSC: 14H30, 14J40, 14J60, 32Q57 1 Introduction Let X be a complex projective manifold. A line bundle L over X is said to be strictly nef if L · C > 0 for each irreducible curve C ⊂ X. This notion is also called "numerically positive" in literatures (e.g. [25]). The Nakai-Moishezon-Kleiman criterion asserts that L is ample if and only if Ldim Y · Y > 0 for every positive-dimensional irreducible subvariety Y in X. Hence, ample line bundles are strictly nef. In 1960s, Mumford constructed a number of strictly nef but non-ample line bundles over ruled surfaces (e.g. [25]), and they are tautological line bundles of stable vector bundles of degree zero over smooth curves of genus g ≥ 2. By using the terminology of Hartshorne ([24]), a vector bundle E ! X is called strictly nef (resp. ample) if its tautological line bundle OE(1) is strictly nef (resp. ample). One can see immediately that the strictly nef vector bundles constructed by Mumford are actually Hermitian-at. Therefore, some functorial properties for ample bundles ([24]) are not valid for strictly nef bundles.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction There will be no specific text in mind. Sources include Griffiths and Harris as well as Hartshorne. Others include Mumford's "Red Book" and "AG I- Complex Projective Varieties", Shafarevich's Basic AG, among other possibilities. We will be taught to the test: that is, we will be being prepared to take orals on AG. This means we will de-emphasize proofs and do lots of examples and applications. So the focus will be techniques for the first semester, and the second will be topics from modern research. 1. Techniques of Algebraic Geometry (a) Varieties and Sheaves on Varieties i. Cohomology, the basic tool for studying these (we will start this early) ii. Direct Images (and higher direct images) iii. Base Change iv. Derived Categories (b) Topology of Complex Algebraic Varieties i. DeRham Theorem ii. Hodge Theorem iii. K¨ahlerPackage iv. Spectral Sequences (Specifically Leray) v. Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch (c) Deformation Theory and Moduli Spaces (d) Toric Geometry (e) Curves, Jacobians, Abelian Varieties and Analytic Theory of Theta Functions (f) Elliptic Curves and Elliptic fibrations (g) Classification of Surfaces (h) Singularities, Blow-Up, Resolution of Singularities 2. Problems in AG (mostly second semester) (a) Torelli and Schottky Problems: The Torelli question is "Is the map that takes a curve to its Jacobian injective?" and the Schottky Prob- lem is "Which abelian varieties come from curves?" (b) Hodge Conjecture: "Given an algebraic variety, describe the subva- rieties via cohomology." (c) Class Field Theory/Geometric Langlands Program: (Curves, Vector Bundles, moduli, etc) Complicated to state the conjectures. (d) Classification in Dim ≥ 3/Mori Program (We will not be talking much about this) 1 (e) Classification and Study of Calabi-Yau Manifolds (f) Lots of problems on moduli spaces i.
    [Show full text]
  • A Degree-Bound on the Genus of a Projective Curve
    A DEGREE-BOUND ON THE GENUS OF A PROJECTIVE CURVE EOIN MACKALL Abstract. We give a short proof of the following statement: for any geometrically irreducible projective curve C (not necessarily smooth nor reduced) of degree d and arithmetic genus g, defined over an arbitrary field k, one has g ≤ d2 − 2d + 1. As a corollary, we show vanishing of the top cohomology of some twists of the structure sheaf of a geometrically integral projective variety. Notation and Conventions. Throughout this note we write k for a fixed but arbitrary base field. A variety defined over k, or a k-variety, or simply a variety if the base field k is clear from context, is a separated scheme of finite type over k. A curve is a proper variety of pure dimension one. 1. Introduction The observation that curves of a fixed degree have genus bounded by an expression in the degree of the curve is classical, dating back to an 1889 theorem of Castelnuovo. An account of this result, that holds only for smooth and geometrically irreducible curves, was given by Harris in [Har81]; see also [Har77, Chapter 4, Theorem 6.4] for a particular case of this theorem. In [GLP83], Gruson, Lazarsfeld, and Peskine give a bound similar in spirit to Castelnuovo's for geometrically integral projective curves. The most general form of their result states that for any n 2 such curve C ⊂ P of degree d and arithmetic genus g, one has g ≤ d − 2d + 1 but, this bound can be sharpened when C is assumed to be nondegenerate.
    [Show full text]
  • Vector Bundles and Projective Varieties
    VECTOR BUNDLES AND PROJECTIVE VARIETIES by NICHOLAS MARINO Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Department of Mathematics, Applied Mathematics, and Statistics CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY January 2019 CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY Department of Mathematics, Applied Mathematics, and Statistics We hereby approve the thesis of Nicholas Marino Candidate for the degree of Master of Science Committee Chair Nick Gurski Committee Member David Singer Committee Member Joel Langer Date of Defense: 10 December, 2018 1 Contents Abstract 3 1 Introduction 4 2 Basic Constructions 5 2.1 Elementary Definitions . 5 2.2 Line Bundles . 8 2.3 Divisors . 12 2.4 Differentials . 13 2.5 Chern Classes . 14 3 Moduli Spaces 17 3.1 Some Classifications . 17 3.2 Stable and Semi-stable Sheaves . 19 3.3 Representability . 21 4 Vector Bundles on Pn 26 4.1 Cohomological Tools . 26 4.2 Splitting on Higher Projective Spaces . 27 4.3 Stability . 36 5 Low-Dimensional Results 37 5.1 2-bundles and Surfaces . 37 5.2 Serre's Construction and Hartshorne's Conjecture . 39 5.3 The Horrocks-Mumford Bundle . 42 6 Ulrich Bundles 44 7 Conclusion 48 8 References 50 2 Vector Bundles and Projective Varieties Abstract by NICHOLAS MARINO Vector bundles play a prominent role in the study of projective algebraic varieties. Vector bundles can describe facets of the intrinsic geometry of a variety, as well as its relationship to other varieties, especially projective spaces. Here we outline the general theory of vector bundles and describe their classification and structure. We also consider some special bundles and general results in low dimensions, especially rank 2 bundles and surfaces, as well as bundles on projective spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • LECTURES on the BIRATIONAL GEOMETRY of Mg
    LECTURES ON THE BIRATIONAL ∗ GEOMETRY OF M g E. SERNESI 1 Unirationality vs. uniruledness My lectures will be devoted to the birational geometry of M g, the moduli space of stable curves of genus g, which is a projective variety obtained as a compactification of Mg, the quasi-projective moduli variety, or moduli space, of complex projective nonsingular curves of genus g. Stable curves are certain types of singular curves of arithmetic genus g (we don’t need to define them) which are added as new elements to obtain M g. Recall that M g is a normal irreducible projective variety of dimension 3g − 3 if g ≥ 2. Moreover it has a universal property: for each family f : C → S of stable curves of genus g the map ψf : S → M g, sending a point s ∈ S to the −1 isomorphism class [f (s)] of its fibre, is a morphism. ψf is the functorial morphism defined by f. If a family f : C → S is such that the functorial morphism ψf : S → M g is dominant, then we say that f is a family with general moduli, and that the family contains the general curve of genus g, or a curve with general moduli. We know the following to be true: rational for 0 ≤ g ≤ 6 ([11],[12],[13],[22],[23]) unirational for 7 ≤ g ≤ 14 (Severi,[18],[3],[24]) rationally connected for g = 15 ([2]) M g is of k-dim = −∞ if g = 16 ([4]) of k-dim ≥ 2 if g = 23 ([6]) of general type if g ≥ 22 ([10],[9],[5],[7]) ∗Lectures given at the 2nd NIMS School in Algebraic Geometry, Daejeon, Korea, May 12-15, 2008.
    [Show full text]