DOCSLIB.ORG

G-Structures

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
G-Structures CHAPTER 3 G-structures 3.1. Geometric structures on vector spaces 3.1.1. Linear G-structures Many types of geometric structures on manifolds M are of infinitesimal type: they are collections of structures on the tangent spaces TxM, ”varying smoothly” with respect to x M (think e.g. about Riemannian metrics on M). Hence, the first step is to understand2 (the meaning of) such structures on general finite dimensional vector spaces V . The basic idea is to characterize the geometric structures of interest via ”the frames adapted to the structure”: for many types of geometric structures on vector spaces V , one can make sense of frames adapted to the given structure; for instance, for an inner-product on V , one looks at frames which are orthonormal with respect to the given inner product; or, for an orientation on V , one looks at oriented frames; etc. This process of defining the notion of frames adapted to a geometric structure depends of course on the type of structures one considers. But, for most of them, this process can be divided into several steps which we now describe. Start with a class truct of geometric structures- for instance: S truct inner products, orientations, complex structures, symplectic structures, etc S 2{ } (to be discuss in more detail later on). Hence, for any finite dimensional vector space V one has the set truct(V ) of truct-structures on V and one is interested in pairs S S (V,σ) consisting of a vector space V and an element σ truct(V ). The steps we men- tioned are: 2S S1: One has a notion of isomorphism of such pairs (V,σ). In particular, we can talk about the automorphism group Aut(V,σ) GL(V). ⇢ S2: One has a a standard model, which is Rn with ”a canonical” truct-structure S n σcan truct(R ). 2S It is a model in the sense that any n-dimensional vector space V endowed with σ n 2 truct(V ) is isomorphic to (R ,σcan) (just that the isomorphism is not canonical!). S S3: Of capital importance is the group of automorphisms of the standard model: n G := Aut(R ,σcan) GLn. ⇢ 81 82 M. CRAINIC, DG-2015 S4: While we identify a frame φ =(φ1,...,φn) of V with the associated linear isomorphism φ : Rn V , the condition that φ is adapted to a given structure ! n σ truct(V ) means that φ is an isomorphism between (R ,σcan) and (V,σ). This gives2S rise to the space of adapted frames Fr(V,σ) Fr(V) ⇢ and the main idea is that σ is encoded in Fr(V,σ). To point out the main properties of Fr(V,σ) we will use the right action of GLn on Fr(V) (page 65) and, for two frames φ and φ0 of V , we denote by [φ : φ0] GL 2 n the resulting matrix of coordinate changes- defined by φ = φ [φ : φ ]. With these: 0 · 0 φ Fr(V,σ), A G= φ A Fr(V,σ). • φ,2φ Fr(V,σ)=2 [φ): φ ]· G.2 • 0 2 ) 0 2 Equivalently, Fr(V,σ)isaG-invariant subspace of Fr(V) on which G acts transi- tively. Note that the previous discussion can be carried out without much trouble in all the examples we will be looking at. However, the general discussion is not very precise- as it appeals to our imagination for making sense of some of the ingredients. Of course, it can be made precise by axiomatizing the notion of ”class truct of geo- metric structures on vector spaces” (e.g. using the language of functors).S However, the philosophy that geometric structures are characterized by their adapted frames leads to a di↵erent approach in which the class of geometric structures truct is associated to the group G and a G-structure on V is encoded in the frameS bundle: Definition 3.1. Let G be a subgroup of GLn(R). A linear G-structure on an n- dimensional vector space V is a subset Fr(V ) S⇢ satisfying the axioms: A1: is G-invariant, i.e.: φ ,A G = φ A . A2:S if φ,φ then [φ : φ ] 2GS. 2 ) · 2S 0 2S 0 2 We denote by truct (V ) the space of linear G-structures on V . S G Remark 3.2. The second axiom implies that all the frames φ induces the same element in the quotient, 2S σ Fr(V)/G. S 2 Conversely, starting from σ (which can be any element in this quotient), can be recovered as the set of all framesS φ Fr that represent σ . In other words,S 2 S truct (V ) = Fr(V)/G. S G Remark 3.3 (isomorphisms; the standard model). One can now check that the pre- vious discussion (the steps S1-S4) can be carried out for the abstractly defined notion of linear G-structures- i.e. the tructG of the previous definition. To do that, note that one can talk about: S 1. isomorphisms between two linear G-structures: given i on Vi, i 1, 2 , an isomorphism between the pairs (V , ) is any linear isomorphismS 2{ } i Si A : V V 1 ! 2 3.1. Geometric structures on vector spaces 83 with the property that (φ ,...,φ ) = (A(φ ),...,A(φ )) . 1 n 2S1 ) 1 n 2S2 2. the standard linear G-structure on Rn can n Fr(R ) SG ⇢ consisting of frames which, interpreted as matrices , are elements of G. (We use here the conventions from pages 64-65. Hence the way that we interpret n a frame φ =(φ1,...,φn) of R as a matrix is by interpreting each vector φi as a column vector: 1 φi [φi]= ... 0 n1 φi so that φ is identified with @ A 1 1 φ1 ... φn [φ]=([φ1],...,[φn]) = ... ... ... 0 n n1 φ1 ... φn @n A In this way the right action of GLn on Fr(R ) will be identified with the usual multiplication of matrices.) With these, one can carry out steps S1-S4 for truct and one can show that, S G indeed, for any tructG(V ) (playing the role of σ in the general discussion at the start), the resultingS2S space of adapted frames Fr(V, )isprecisely . S S 3.1.2. Example: Inner products Recall that a linear metric (inner product) on the vector space V is a symmetric bilinear map g : V V R ⇥ ! with the property that g(v, v) 0 for all v V , with equality only for v = 0. There is an obvious notion of frames≥ of V adapted2 to g: the orthonormal ones, i.e. the ones of type φ =(φ1,...,φn)with (3.4) g(φ ,φ )=δ i, j. i j i,j 8 However, it is instructive to find them going through stepst S1-S4 mentioned at the beginning of this chapter. S1: Given two vector spaces endowed with inner products, (V,g), (V 0,g0), it is clear what an isomorphism between them should be: any linear isomorphism A : V V 0 with the property that ! g0(A(u),A(v)) = g(u, v) u, v V. 8 2 One also says that A is an isometry between (V,g) and (V 0,g0). n S2: The standard model is R with the standard inner product gcan: g (u, v)= u, v = ui vi, can h i · Xi 84 M. CRAINIC, DG-2015 or, in the matrix notation: v1 1 n (3.5) gcan(u, v)=(u ...u ) ... = u [v]. · 0vn 1 · @ A (recall that [v]=vT stands for v interpreted as a column matrix- see page 65). We leave it as an exercise to show that, indeed, any vector space endowed with an inner n product, (V,g), is isomorphic to (R ,gcan). S3: The symmetry group of the standard model becomes ˆ ˆ n G = A GLn(R):gcan(A(u), A(v)) = gcan(u, v) for all u, v R GLn(R). { 2 2 }⇢ Here Aˆ denotes the matrix A interpreted as a linear map (see page 64). Hence, while as column matrices one has [Aˆ(u)] = A [v] (see page 65), as a row matrix Aˆ(u)is v AT . We find that · · T G = A GLn(R):A A = I = O(n). { 2 · } S4: By the general procedure, ”the adapted frames” of (V,g) are those frames φ Fr(V ) with the property that the induced linear isomorphism φˆ : Rn V 2 n ! is an isomorphism between (R ,gcan) and (V,g). It is now easy to see that this happens if and only if φ is orthonormal with respect to g. Hence one ends up with the set of orthonormal frames of (V,g), denoted Fr(V ). Sg ⇢ The following Proposition makes precise the fact that (and explains how) the ”inner product g” is encoded by the associated set of frames . Sg Proposition 3.6. Given an n-dimensional vector space V , g ! S g defines a 1-1 correspondence between: 1. inner products on V . 2. linear O(n)-structures on V . Proof. The main point is that g determines g uniquely: using any φ g, and S i 2S decomposing arbitrary elements of V with respect to φ as u = i u φi, it follows that · P g(u, v)= ui vi. · Xi This shows how to reconstruct g out of any linear O(n)-structure ; the axioms for imply the resulting g does not depend on the choice of φ and thatS = . S Sg S 3.1.3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:1704.04175V1 [Math.DG] 13 Apr 2017 Umnfls[ Submanifolds Mty[ Ometry Eerhr Ncmlxgoer.I at H Loihshe Algorithms to the Aim Fact, the in with Geometry
    SAGEMATH EXPERIMENTS IN DIFFERENTIAL AND COMPLEX GEOMETRY DANIELE ANGELLA Abstract. This note summarizes the talk by the author at the workshop “Geometry and Computer Science” held in Pescara in February 2017. We present how SageMath can help in research in Complex and Differential Geometry, with two simple applications, which are not intended to be original. We consider two "classification problems" on quotients of Lie groups, namely, "computing cohomological invariants" [AFR15, LUV14], and "classifying special geo- metric structures" [ABP17], and we set the problems to be solved with SageMath [S+09]. Introduction Complex Geometry is the study of manifolds locally modelled on the linear complex space Cn. A natural way to construct compact complex manifolds is to study the projective geometry n n+1 n of CP = C 0 /C×. In fact, analytic submanifolds of CP are equivalent to algebraic submanifolds [GAGA\ { }]. On the one side, this means that both algebraic and analytic techniques are available for their study. On the other side, this means also that this class of manifolds is quite restrictive. In particular, they do not suffice to describe some Theoretical Physics models e.g. [Str86]. Since [Thu76], new examples of complex non-projective, even non-Kähler manifolds have been investigated, and many different constructions have been proposed. One would study classes of manifolds whose geometry is, in some sense, combinatorically or alge- braically described, in order to perform explicit computations. In this sense, great interest has been deserved to homogeneous spaces of nilpotent Lie groups, say nilmanifolds, whose ge- ometry [Bel00, FG04] and cohomology [Nom54] is encoded in the Lie algebra.
    [Show full text]
  • Symplectic Geometry
    Vorlesung aus dem Sommersemester 2013 Symplectic Geometry Prof. Dr. Fabian Ziltener TEXed by Viktor Kleen & Florian Stecker Contents 1 From Classical Mechanics to Symplectic Topology2 1.1 Introducing Symplectic Forms.........................2 1.2 Hamiltonian mechanics.............................2 1.3 Overview over some topics of this course...................3 1.4 Overview over some current questions....................4 2 Linear (pre-)symplectic geometry6 2.1 (Pre-)symplectic vector spaces and linear (pre-)symplectic maps......6 2.2 (Co-)isotropic and Lagrangian subspaces and the linear Weinstein Theorem 13 2.3 Linear symplectic reduction.......................... 16 2.4 Linear complex structures and the symplectic linear group......... 17 3 Symplectic Manifolds 26 3.1 Definition, Examples, Contangent bundle.................. 26 3.2 Classical Mechanics............................... 28 3.3 Symplectomorphisms, Hamiltonian diffeomorphisms and Poisson brackets 35 3.4 Darboux’ Theorem and Moser isotopy.................... 40 3.5 Symplectic, (co-)isotropic and Lagrangian submanifolds.......... 44 3.6 Symplectic and Hamiltonian Lie group actions, momentum maps, Marsden– Weinstein quotients............................... 48 3.7 Physical motivation: Symmetries of mechanical systems and Noether’s principle..................................... 52 3.8 Symplectic Quotients.............................. 53 1 From Classical Mechanics to Symplectic Topology 1.1 Introducing Symplectic Forms Definition 1.1. A symplectic form is a non–degenerate and closed 2–form on a manifold. Non–degeneracy means that if ωx(v, w) = 0 for all w ∈ TxM, then v = 0. Closed means that dω = 0. Reminder. A differential k–form on a manifold M is a family of skew–symmetric k– linear maps ×k (ωx : TxM → R)x∈M , which depends smoothly on x. 2n Definition 1.2. We define the standard symplectic form ω0 on R as follows: We 2n 2n 2n 2n identify the tangent space TxR with the vector space R .
    [Show full text]
  • Complex Cobordism and Almost Complex Fillings of Contact Manifolds
    MSci Project in Mathematics COMPLEX COBORDISM AND ALMOST COMPLEX FILLINGS OF CONTACT MANIFOLDS November 2, 2016 Naomi L. Kraushar supervised by Dr C Wendl University College London Abstract An important problem in contact and symplectic topology is the question of which contact manifolds are symplectically fillable, in other words, which contact manifolds are the boundaries of symplectic manifolds, such that the symplectic structure is consistent, in some sense, with the given contact struc- ture on the boundary. The homotopy data on the tangent bundles involved in this question is finding an almost complex filling of almost contact manifolds. It is known that such fillings exist, so that there are no obstructions on the tangent bundles to the existence of symplectic fillings of contact manifolds; however, so far a formal proof of this fact has not been written down. In this paper, we prove this statement. We use cobordism theory to deal with the stable part of the homotopy obstruction, and then use obstruction theory, and a variant on surgery theory known as contact surgery, to deal with the unstable part of the obstruction. Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Vector spaces and vector bundles 4 2.1 Complex vector spaces . .4 2.2 Symplectic vector spaces . .7 2.3 Vector bundles . 13 3 Contact manifolds 19 3.1 Contact manifolds . 19 3.2 Submanifolds of contact manifolds . 23 3.3 Complex, almost complex, and stably complex manifolds . 25 4 Universal bundles and classifying spaces 30 4.1 Universal bundles . 30 4.2 Universal bundles for O(n) and U(n).............. 33 4.3 Stable vector bundles .
    [Show full text]
  • Almost Complex Structures and Obstruction Theory
    ALMOST COMPLEX STRUCTURES AND OBSTRUCTION THEORY MICHAEL ALBANESE Abstract. These are notes for a lecture I gave in John Morgan's Homotopy Theory course at Stony Brook in Fall 2018. Let X be a CW complex and Y a simply connected space. Last time we discussed the obstruction to extending a map f : X(n) ! Y to a map X(n+1) ! Y ; recall that X(k) denotes the k-skeleton of X. n+1 There is an obstruction o(f) 2 C (X; πn(Y )) which vanishes if and only if f can be extended to (n+1) n+1 X . Moreover, o(f) is a cocycle and [o(f)] 2 H (X; πn(Y )) vanishes if and only if fjX(n−1) can be extended to X(n+1); that is, f may need to be redefined on the n-cells. Obstructions to lifting a map p Given a fibration F ! E −! B and a map f : X ! B, when can f be lifted to a map g : X ! E? If X = B and f = idB, then we are asking when p has a section. For convenience, we will only consider the case where F and B are simply connected, from which it follows that E is simply connected. For a more general statement, see Theorem 7.37 of [2]. Suppose g has been defined on X(n). Let en+1 be an n-cell and α : Sn ! X(n) its attaching map, then p ◦ g ◦ α : Sn ! B is equal to f ◦ α and is nullhomotopic (as f extends over the (n + 1)-cell).
    [Show full text]
  • Complex Structures and 2 X 2 Matrices
    COMPLEX STRUCTURES AND 2 2 MATRICES × Simon Salamon University of Warwick, 14 May 2004 Part I Complex structures on R4 Part II SKT structures on a 6-manifold Part I The standard complex structure A (linear) complex structure on R4 is simply a linear map J: R4 R4 satisfying J 2 = 1. For example, ! − 0 1 0 1 0 J0 = 0 − 1 0 0 1 B 1 0 C B − C @ A In terms of a basis (dx1; dx2; dx3; dx4) of R4 , Jdx1 = dx2; Jdx3 = dx4 − − The choices of sign ensure that, setting z1 = x1 + ix2; z2 = x3 + ix4; the elements dz1; dz2 C4 satisfy 2 Jdz1 = J(dx1 + idx2) = i(dx1 + idx2) = idz1 Jdz2 = idz2: 2 Spaces of complex structures Any complex structure J is conjugate to J0 , so the set of complex structures is 1 = A− J0A : A GL(4; R) C f 2 g GL(4; R) = ; ∼ GL(2; C) a manifold of real dim 8, the same dim as GL(2; C). + Taking account of orientation, = − . C C t C Theorem + S2 . C ' Proof. Any J + has a polar decomposition 2 C 1 1 T 1 1 J = SO = O− S− = (O S− O)( O− ): − − 1 1 Thus, O = O− = P − J P defines an element − 0 SO(4) U(2)P = S2: 2 U(2) ∼ 3 Deformations and 2 2 matrices × A complex structure J is determined by its i-eigenspace 1;0 4 E = Λ = v C : Jv = iv ; f 2 g i on E since E E = C4 and J = ⊕ i on E: − For example, E = dz1; dz2 and E = dz1; dz2 .
    [Show full text]
  • Generalized Geometry, an Introduction Assignment 1
    Generalized Geometry, an introduction Assignment 1 Universitat Aut`onomade Barcelona Summer course, 8-19 July 2019 Problem 1. Consider the vector space R4 with the symplectic form 2 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 !((x1; y1; x2; y2); (x1; y1; x2; y2)) = (xiyi − yixi): i=1 • Find a subspace U such that U = U !. • Find a plane U, i.e., a subspace isomorphic to R2, such that U +U ! = R4. Problem 2. A subspace U of a symplectic vector space (V; !) such that U ! ⊆ U is called a coisotropic subspace. Prove that the quotient U=U ! naturally inherits a symplectic structure. This is called the coisotropic reduction. Problem 3. Given a symplectic form, we have an isomorphism V ! V ∗. We invert this isomorphism to get a map V ∗ ! V , which we can see as a map π : V ∗ × V ∗ ! k: Prove that the map π is bilinear, non-degenerate and skew-symmetric. Problem 4. Consider a real vector space with a linear complex structure (V; J) and its complexification VC. Prove that iJ = Ji. When does the map ai + bJ; for a; b 2 R, define a linear complex structure on VC, seen as a real vector space? Problem 5. Consider a real vector space with a linear complex structure (V; J). Prove that the map J ∗ : V ∗ ! V ∗; given by J ∗α(v) = α(Jv); for α 2 V ∗ and v 2 V , defines a linear complex structure on V ∗. Given a basis i (vi) with dual basis (v ), prove that ∗ i ∗ J v = −(Jvi) : Problem 6. The invertible linear transformations of Rn are called the general linear group and denoted by GL(n; R).
    [Show full text]
  • Special Homogeneous Almost Complex Structures on Symplectic
    Special homogeneous almost complex structures on symplectic manifolds Alberto Della Vedova∗ October 17, 2018 Abstract Homogeneous compatible almost complex structures on symplec- tic manifolds are studied, focusing on those which are special, mean- ing that their Chern-Ricci form is a multiple of the symplectic form. Non Chern-Ricci flat ones are proven to be covered by co-adjoint or- bits. Conversely, compact isotropy co-adjoint orbits of semi-simple Lie groups are shown to admit special compatible almost complex struc- tures whenever they satisfy a necessary topological condition. Some classes of examples including twistor spaces of hyperbolic manifolds and discrete quotients of Griffiths period domains of weight two are discussed. 1 Introduction The aim of the present paper is provide some new examples of symplec- tic manifolds endowed with compatible almost complex structures having special curvature properties. More specifically, on a symplectic manifold (M,ω) we will call special a compatible almost complex structure J whose Chern-Ricci form ρ is a multiple of the symplectic form ω (cfr. definition 7). This condition has been previously considered by Apostolov and Dr˘aghici [1, Section 7], and should be thought of as a natural extension of the K¨ahler- Einstein condition to non-integrable compatible almost complex structures. arXiv:1706.06401v2 [math.SG] 19 Oct 2017 As in the integrable case, the existence of a special J forces the first Chern class c1 of (M,ω) to be a multiple of [ω]. Since ρ represents 4πc1, the ex- istence of a special J satisfying ρ = λω makes (M,ω) a symplectic Fano, symplectic Calabi-Yau or symplectic general type depending on λ is posi- tive, zero or negative respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • LECTURE 1: LINEAR SYMPLECTIC GEOMETRY Contents 1. Linear
    LECTURE 1: LINEAR SYMPLECTIC GEOMETRY Contents 1. Linear symplectic structure 3 2. Distinguished subspaces 5 3. Linear complex structure 7 4. The symplectic group 10 ********************************************************************************* Information: Course Name: Symplectic Geometry Instructor: Zuoqin Wang Time/Room: Wed. 2:00pm-6:00pm @ 1318 Reference books: • Lectures on Symplectic Geometry by A. Canas de Silver • Symplectic Techniques in Physics by V. Guillemin and S. Sternberg • Lectures on Symplectic Manifolds by A. Weinstein • Introduction to Symplectic Topology by D. McDuff and D. Salamon • Foundations of Mechanics by R. Abraham and J. Marsden • Geometric Quantization by Woodhouse Course webpage: http://staff.ustc.edu.cn/˜ wangzuoq/Symp15/SympGeom.html ********************************************************************************* Introduction: The word symplectic was invented by Hermann Weyl in 1939: he replaced the Latin roots in the word complex, com-plexus, by the corresponding Greek roots, sym-plektikos. What is symplectic geometry? • Geometry = background space (smooth manifold) + extra structure (tensor). { Riemannian geometry = smooth manifold + metric structure. ∗ metric structure = positive-definite symmetric 2-tensor { Complex geometry = smooth manifold + complex structure. ∗ complex structure = involutive endomorphism ((1,1)-tensor) { Symplectic geometry = smooth manifold + symplectic structure 1 2 LECTURE 1: LINEAR SYMPLECTIC GEOMETRY ∗ Symplectic structure = closed non-degenerate 2-form · 2-form = anti-symmetric
    [Show full text]
  • ALMOST COMPLEX STRUCTURES and OBSTRUCTION THEORY Let
    ALMOST COMPLEX STRUCTURES AND OBSTRUCTION THEORY MICHAEL ALBANESE Abstract. These are notes for a lecture I gave in John Morgan's Homotopy Theory course at Stony Brook in Fall 2018. Let X be a CW complex and Y a simply connected space. Last time we discussed the obstruction to extending a map f : X(n) ! Y to a map X(n+1) ! Y ; recall that X(k) denotes the k-skeleton n+1 of X. There is an obstruction o(f) 2 C (X; πn(Y )) which vanishes if and only if f can be (n+1) n+1 extended to X . Moreover, o(f) is a cocycle and [o(f)] 2 H (X; πn(Y )) vanishes if and only (n+1) if fjX(n−1) can be extended to X ; that is, f may need to be redefined on the n-cells. Obstructions to lifting a map p Given a fibration F ! E −! B and a map f : X ! B, when can f be lifted to a map g : X ! E? If X = B and f = idB, then we are asking when p has a section. For convenience, we will only consider the case where F and B are simply connected, from which it follows that E is simply connected. For a more general statement, see Theorem 7.37 of [2]. Suppose g has been defined on X(n). Let en+1 be an n-cell and α : Sn ! X(n) its attaching map, then p ◦ g ◦ α : Sn ! B is equal to f ◦ α and is nullhomotopic (as f extends over the (n + 1)-cell).
    [Show full text]
  • Almost Complex Projective Structures and Their Morphisms
    Archivum Mathematicum Jaroslav Hrdina Almost complex projective structures and their morphisms Archivum Mathematicum, Vol. 45 (2009), No. 4, 255--264 Persistent URL: http://dml.cz/dmlcz/137458 Terms of use: © Masaryk University, 2009 Institute of Mathematics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic provides access to digitized documents strictly for personal use. Each copy of any part of this document must contain these Terms of use. This paper has been digitized, optimized for electronic delivery and stamped with digital signature within the project DML-CZ: The Czech Digital Mathematics Library http://project.dml.cz ARCHIVUM MATHEMATICUM (BRNO) Tomus 45 (2009), 255–264 ALMOST COMPLEX PROJECTIVE STRUCTURES AND THEIR MORPHISMS Jaroslav Hrdina Abstract. We discuss almost complex projective geometry and the relations to a distinguished class of curves. We present the geometry from the viewpoint of the theory of parabolic geometries and we shall specify the classical genera- lizations of the concept of the planarity of curves to this case. In particular, we show that the natural class of J-planar curves coincides with the class of all geodesics of the so called Weyl connections and preserving of this class turns out to be the necessary and sufficient condition on diffeomorphisms to become homomorphisms or anti-homomorphisms of almost complex projective geometries. 1. Almost complex projective structures An almost complex structure [8] is a smooth manifold equipped with a smooth linear complex structure on each tangent space. The existence of this structure is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for a manifold to be a complex manifold. That is, every complex manifold is an almost complex manifold, but not vice-versa.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Classification of the Real Vector Subspaces of a Quaternionic Vector
    ON THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE REAL VECTOR SUBSPACES OF A QUATERNIONIC VECTOR SPACE RADU PANTILIE Abstract We prove the classification of the real vector subspaces of a quaternionic vector space by using a covariant functor which, to any pair formed of a quaternionic vector space and a real subspace, associates a coherent sheaf over the sphere. Introduction Let XE be the space of (real) vector subspaces of a vector space E. Then XE is a disjoint union of Grassmannians and GL(E) acts transitively on each of its components. If E is endowed with a linear geometric structure, corresponding to the Lie subgroup G ⊆ GL(E) , then it is natural to ask whether or not the action in- duced by G on XE is still transitive on each component and, if not, to find explicit representatives for each orbit. For example, if E is an Euclidean vector space and, accordingly, G is the orthogonal group then the orthonormalization process shows that G acts transi- tively on each component of XE . Suppose, instead, that E is endowed with a linear complex structure J ; equiv- alently, E = Ck and G = GL(k, C ) . Then for any vector subspace U of E we have a decomposition U = F × V , where F is a complex vector subspace of E and V is totally real (that is, V ∩ JV = 0); obviously, the filtration 0 ⊆ F ⊆ U Cm Rl arXiv:1109.6467v3 [math.DG] 3 Oct 2011 is canonical. Consequently, the subspaces × , where 2m + l ≤ 2k , are representatives for each of the orbits of GL(k, C ) on XCk .
    [Show full text]
  • Generalized Complex Geometry and Blow-Ups
    Utrecht University Master Thesis Generalized complex Geometry and Blow-ups Author: Supervisor: Kirsten Wang Dr. G.R. Cavalcanti Second examiner: Dr. F. Ziltener August 2014 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Preliminaries 4 2.1 Fibre bundles and structure groups . .4 2.2 Vector bundles and characteristic classes . .6 2.2.1 Euler class . .7 2.2.2 Chern class . .8 2.3 Constructions with fibre bundles and vector bundles . .9 2.4 Connections . .9 2.5 Morita equivalences . 10 3 Generalized complex Geometry 13 3.1 Linear algebra . 13 3.2 Brackets . 17 3.3 Dirac structures and integrability . 20 3.4 Generalized complex structures . 22 3.5 Examples . 25 3.6 Local normal forms . 27 3.7 Submanifolds and branes . 29 3.8 Generalized K¨ahler . 33 3.8.1 Deformations . 38 4 Blowing up 41 4.1 Complex . 41 4.2 Symplectic . 44 4.3 K¨ahler. 50 4.4 Poisson . 51 4.5 Generalized complex . 52 4.6 Generalized K¨ahler . 54 Appendices 61 A Determinant lemma 62 1 Chapter 1 Introduction The procedure of blowing up is best known in algebraic geometry to create new spaces and resolve singularities. The techniques however are not limited to algebraic geometry, they can be applied in differential geometry as well. For example, McDuff used it in her paper [23] to produce examples of non-K¨ahleriansymplectic manifolds by using a blow-up in the symplectic category. It becomes apparent from this paper that the symplectic blow-up is not canonically defined. This is a huge difference with the canonically defined blow-up in complex geometry.
    [Show full text]