DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:1907.11121V2 [Math.AG]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:1907.11121V2 [Math.AG] CRITERIA FOR COMPLETE INTERSECTIONS MIHAI HALIC Abstract. We obtain criteria for detecting complete intersections in projective varieties. Motivated by a conjecture of Hartshorne concerning subvarieties of projective spaces, we investigate situations when two-codimensional smooth subvarieties of rational homogeneous varieties are complete intersections. Introduction Hartshorne [20] conjectured that smooth subvarieties of projective spaces of sufficiently low codimension are necessarily complete intersections. He also stated that this is indeed the case as soon as the degree of the subvariety is small compared to the dimension of the ambient projective space. The goal of this article is to investigate this problem in a more general setting. We ask whether a similar statement holds for smooth subvarieties X of other ambient varieties V as well. From the beginning, one distinguishes two cases: One assumes that the normal bundle of X decomposes into a direct sum of line bundles. ´ This condition is clearly satisfied for complete intersections. or There are no a priori hypotheses. ´ In the first case, the property of being a complete intersection is reduced to verifying the splitting of the normal bundle of the subvariety; this feature is, at least theoretically, much easier to verify. Faltings [13] showed that a smooth subvariety of the projective space Pn, of codimension at most n 2, is a complete intersection as soon as its normal bundle splits. By analysing his proof, one{ observes that at its base there is a Hauptlemma—main lemma—which is valid in great generality. However, its ‘implementation’ is strongly adapted to subvarieties of projective spaces. This may explain why, to our knowledge, the arguments have not been extended to a wider framework. In the first part of the article we attempt bridging this arXiv:1907.11121v2 [math.AG] 28 Nov 2020 difference. The following statement conveys the flavour of our results. Theorem (cf. 2.3, 2.6) Let G be a simple, linear algebraic group of rank ℓ 6 and P a maximal parabolic subgroup. ě Let X be a smooth subvariety of the rational homogeneous variety G P , of codimension 2 δ ℓ 1 3. Then X is a complete intersection as soon as either one{ of the following twoď conditionsď p ` q{ is satisfied: Its normal bundle N splits into a direct sum of line bundles. ´ X{V The ideal defining X is generated by at most ℓ 1 2 δ equations. ´ p ` q{ ´ (By equations, we mean sections in various OV d , d 0.) p q ą 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 14M10, 14C20, 14M17. Key words and phrases. complete intersection; splitting normal bundle; q-ample divisor. 1 2 MIHAI HALIC In down-to-earth terms, the splitting of the normal bundle of the subvariety or the generation of its defining ideal by few enough polynomials ensure the complete intersection property. Let us remark that we prove this kind result for a much wider class of situations (cf. Theorem 1.9); the formulation above is chosen to avoid additional terminology. The second part is devoted to the case where there are no assumptions on the splitting type of the normal bundle of the subvariety; we restrict ourselves to the two-codimensional case. For subvarieties of arbitrary codimension in projective spaces, positive results to- wards Hartshorne’s conjecture have been obtained by Barth-Van de Ven [6] and Bertram- Ein-Lazarsfeld [9]. In the two-codimensional case, Barth-Van de Ven [7], Ran [25], Holme- Schneider [23] determined effective upper bounds for the degree of the subvariety ensuring the complete intersection property. Also, the conjecture has been proved by Ionescu-Russo [24] for subvarieties cut out by quadratic equations. Theorem (cf. 3.10) Let G P be as before, with ℓ 6, and denote m : degL TV 3, where L is the 1-dimensional{ Schubert line. Suppose Xě is smooth, 2-codimensional,“ p suchq ´ that 2 X dX O 1 , det N OX nX . If either r s“ ¨ r G{P p qs p X{V q“ p q dX m nX m or dX nX 2 m, ď p ´ q a ď { ď the subvariety X G P is a complete intersection. Ă { The statement is weaker than before, when the splitting of the normal bundle was known in advance, but it faithfully parallels the results of Ran and Schneider for subvarieties of projective spaces. In fact, along the way, we show (cf. Theorem 3.4) that subvarieties with stable normal bundle have large degree. Our bound (of order four in ℓ) is better than that of Schneider (quadratic in ℓ), even for projective spaces. This fact, combined with the theorem above yields a positive answer to Hartshorne’s question for subvarieties of low degree. Theorem (cf. 3.11) Let G P be as before, ℓ 11, and m : degL TV 3. Let X be smooth, 2-codimensional, such that { ě “ p q´ 2 2 X dX O 1 , dX m . r s“ ¨ r G{P p qs ď 2 Then X is a complete intersection in V . For ℓ 7,..., 10, the same holds for dX 3m 10. “ ď { To the author’s knowledge, the only one reference which investigates the complete inter- section property for subvarieties of homogeneous varieties, other than projective spaces, is Barth-Van de Ven [8] dealing with 2-codimensional subvarieties of Grassmannians (of very low degree). We believe that the interest in our work (with or without assumptions on the normal bundle) consists in placing Hartshorne’s question in a much wider context. 1. Subvarieties with split normal bundle Notation 1.1 We work over an algebraically closed field k of characteristic zero. Throughout the article, X is a smooth subvariety of an ambient smooth projective variety V , of codimen- sion 2 δ dim V 2, which is defined by the sheaf of ideals IX OV ; its co-normal bundle _ ď ď 2 { Ă N : IX I is locally free, of rank δ. For a subvariety Y of V containing X, we denote X{V “ { X IX Y : IX IY . Ă “ { In this section, we consider the following issue: CRITERIAFORCOMPLETEINTERSECTIONS 3 N_ Assuming that X{V splits —it decomposes into a direct sum of line bundles—, can one deduce that X a complete intersection of δ hypersurfaces in V ? Faltings’ work [13] corresponds to the case where V is a projective space. Our investigations naturally involve partially ample subvarieties of projective varieties (in- vestigated by the author in [18]). For the reader’s comfort, we briefly recalled these notions in the Appendix A. We assume henceforth, throughout this section, that the following conditions are satisfied. Assumption 1.2 (i) The conormal bundle of X in V splits into a direct sum of line bundles δ 2 ´1 IX I L OX , Lj Pic V . (1.1) { X “ j b P p q jà“1 We denote by 2 xj Γ X, IX I Lj , 1 j δ, (1.2) P p { X qb ď ď ` ˘ the section corresponding to the direct summand OX . ´1 (ii) L Lj is semi-ample, for all j 1,...,δ,. (We agree that L0 : OV .) Note that, in this j´1 “ “ case, Lj is semi-ample too. For short, we say that L1,..., Lδ are ordered. (iii) The subvariety X V is qX -ample, qX dim V 2δ dim X δ (so dim V 4). Ă ď ´ “ ´ ě Together with the previous assumption, this implies that Lj OX is qX-positive, for all j. (See Proposition A.5 and Definition A.1.) b Remark 1.3 (i) We imposed that the line bundles appearing in the splitting of the conormal bundle (over X) actually come from V . This is not very far from the full generality, where they would be defined only over X: for δ 3 and arbitrary V , the partial amplitude of X implies that Pic V Q Pic X Qěis an isomorphism (cf. [18, Corollary 1.12]). Actually the isomorphismp qb holdsÑ withp qbZ-coefficients in many situations, especially for subvarieties of rational homogeneous varieties and for zero loci of sections in vector bundles (cf. Barth-Lefschetz-type theorems [29, 30]). (ii) For rational homogeneous varieties V G P , where P G is a maximal parabolic “ { Ă subgroup (so Pic V Z), the line bundles Lj are positive multiples of OV 1 , hence p q – p q qj 0 for all j. Consequently, our partial positivity assumption is a weakening of this situation.“ (iii) The semi-ampleness of the successive differences means that L1,..., Lδ are ordered ‘in- creasingly’; the condition is automatically satisfied whenever the Picard group is cyclic. (iv) The most important information given by the partial amplitude of X V is the upper bound on the cohomological dimension of its complement (see PropositionĂ A.5). It ensures that certain intersections are non-trivial, substituting the knowledge of the cohomology ring of V . Lemma 1.4 Let V, X be as above. Suppose Z V is an arbitrary closed, irreducible sub- scheme of codimension at most δ. Then Z intersectsĂ X non-trivially. Proof. The partial amplitude of X V yields: cd V X qX δ 1 dim X 1. Hence Z, which is complete with dim Z Ădim X, can’t bep containedz q ď in` the´ complementď ´ of X. l ě 4 MIHAI HALIC Lemma 1.5 Let V, X be as above. Let Y be an irreducible, normal, lci subvariety of V which (strictly) contains X, is smooth along it, and such that δ _ 2 ´1 N IX Y I L OX X{Y “ Ă { XĂY “ j b jà“d for some d δ. Then the following statements hold.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Extension Problem in Complex Analysis II; Embeddings with Positive Normal Bundle Author(S): Phillip A
    The Extension Problem in Complex Analysis II; Embeddings with Positive Normal Bundle Author(s): Phillip A. Griffiths Source: American Journal of Mathematics, Vol. 88, No. 2 (Apr., 1966), pp. 366-446 Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2373200 Accessed: 25/10/2010 12:00 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of Mathematics. http://www.jstor.org THE EXTENSION PROBLEM IN COMPLEX ANALYSIS II; EMBEDDINGS WITH POSITIVE NORMAL BUNDLE.
    [Show full text]
  • 1.10 Partitions of Unity and Whitney Embedding 1300Y Geometry and Topology
    1.10 Partitions of unity and Whitney embedding 1300Y Geometry and Topology Theorem 1.49 (noncompact Whitney embedding in R2n+1). Any smooth n-manifold may be embedded in R2n+1 (or immersed in R2n). Proof. We saw that any manifold may be written as a countable union of increasing compact sets M = [Ki, and that a regular covering f(Ui;k ⊃ Vi;k;'i;k)g of M can be chosen so that for fixed i, fVi;kgk is a finite ◦ ◦ cover of Ki+1nKi and each Ui;k is contained in Ki+2nKi−1. This means that we can express M as the union of 3 open sets W0;W1;W2, where [ Wj = ([kUi;k): i≡j(mod3) 2n+1 Each of the sets Ri = [kUi;k may be injectively immersed in R by the argument for compact manifolds, 2n+1 since they have a finite regular cover. Call these injective immersions Φi : Ri −! R . The image Φi(Ri) is bounded since all the charts are, by some radius ri. The open sets Ri; i ≡ j(mod3) for fixed j are disjoint, and by translating each Φi; i ≡ j(mod3) by an appropriate constant, we can ensure that their images in R2n+1 are disjoint as well. 0 −! 0 2n+1 Let Φi = Φi + (2(ri−1 + ri−2 + ··· ) + ri) e 1. Then Ψj = [i≡j(mod3)Φi : Wj −! R is an embedding. 2n+1 Now that we have injective immersions Ψ0; Ψ1; Ψ2 of W0;W1;W2 in R , we may use the original argument for compact manifolds: Take the partition of unity subordinate to Ui;k and resum it, obtaining a P P 3-element partition of unity ff1; f2; f3g, with fj = i≡j(mod3) k fi;k.
    [Show full text]
  • Characteristic Classes and K-Theory Oscar Randal-Williams
    Characteristic classes and K-theory Oscar Randal-Williams https://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/∼or257/teaching/notes/Kthy.pdf 1 Vector bundles 1 1.1 Vector bundles . 1 1.2 Inner products . 5 1.3 Embedding into trivial bundles . 6 1.4 Classification and concordance . 7 1.5 Clutching . 8 2 Characteristic classes 10 2.1 Recollections on Thom and Euler classes . 10 2.2 The projective bundle formula . 12 2.3 Chern classes . 14 2.4 Stiefel–Whitney classes . 16 2.5 Pontrjagin classes . 17 2.6 The splitting principle . 17 2.7 The Euler class revisited . 18 2.8 Examples . 18 2.9 Some tangent bundles . 20 2.10 Nonimmersions . 21 3 K-theory 23 3.1 The functor K ................................. 23 3.2 The fundamental product theorem . 26 3.3 Bott periodicity and the cohomological structure of K-theory . 28 3.4 The Mayer–Vietoris sequence . 36 3.5 The Fundamental Product Theorem for K−1 . 36 3.6 K-theory and degree . 38 4 Further structure of K-theory 39 4.1 The yoga of symmetric polynomials . 39 4.2 The Chern character . 41 n 4.3 K-theory of CP and the projective bundle formula . 44 4.4 K-theory Chern classes and exterior powers . 46 4.5 The K-theory Thom isomorphism, Euler class, and Gysin sequence . 47 n 4.6 K-theory of RP ................................ 49 4.7 Adams operations . 51 4.8 The Hopf invariant . 53 4.9 Correction classes . 55 4.10 Gysin maps and topological Grothendieck–Riemann–Roch . 58 Last updated May 22, 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Symplectic Topology Math 705 Notes by Patrick Lei, Spring 2020
    Symplectic Topology Math 705 Notes by Patrick Lei, Spring 2020 Lectures by R. Inanç˙ Baykur University of Massachusetts Amherst Disclaimer These notes were taken during lecture using the vimtex package of the editor neovim. Any errors are mine and not the instructor’s. In addition, my notes are picture-free (but will include commutative diagrams) and are a mix of my mathematical style (omit lengthy computations, use category theory) and that of the instructor. If you find any errors, please contact me at [email protected]. Contents Contents • 2 1 January 21 • 5 1.1 Course Description • 5 1.2 Organization • 5 1.2.1 Notational conventions•5 1.3 Basic Notions • 5 1.4 Symplectic Linear Algebra • 6 2 January 23 • 8 2.1 More Basic Linear Algebra • 8 2.2 Compatible Complex Structures and Inner Products • 9 3 January 28 • 10 3.1 A Big Theorem • 10 3.2 More Compatibility • 11 4 January 30 • 13 4.1 Homework Exercises • 13 4.2 Subspaces of Symplectic Vector Spaces • 14 5 February 4 • 16 5.1 Linear Algebra, Conclusion • 16 5.2 Symplectic Vector Bundles • 16 6 February 6 • 18 6.1 Proof of Theorem 5.11 • 18 6.2 Vector Bundles, Continued • 18 6.3 Compatible Triples on Manifolds • 19 7 February 11 • 21 7.1 Obtaining Compatible Triples • 21 7.2 Complex Structures • 21 8 February 13 • 23 2 3 8.1 Kähler Forms Continued • 23 8.2 Some Algebraic Geometry • 24 8.3 Stein Manifolds • 25 9 February 20 • 26 9.1 Stein Manifolds Continued • 26 9.2 Topological Properties of Kähler Manifolds • 26 9.3 Complex and Symplectic Structures on 4-Manifolds • 27 10 February 25
    [Show full text]
  • Topological K-Theory
    TOPOLOGICAL K-THEORY ZACHARY KIRSCHE Abstract. The goal of this paper is to introduce some of the basic ideas sur- rounding the theory of vector bundles and topological K-theory. To motivate this, we will use K-theoretic methods to prove Adams' theorem about the non- existence of maps of Hopf invariant one in dimensions other than n = 1; 2; 4; 8. We will begin by developing some of the basics of the theory of vector bundles in order to properly explain the Hopf invariant one problem and its implica- tions. We will then introduce the theory of characteristic classes and see how Stiefel-Whitney classes can be used as a sort of partial solution to the problem. We will then develop the methods of topological K-theory in order to provide a full solution by constructing the Adams operations. Contents 1. Introduction and background 1 1.1. Preliminaries 1 1.2. Vector bundles 2 1.3. Classifying Spaces 4 2. The Hopf invariant 6 2.1. H-spaces, division algebras, and tangent bundles of spheres 6 3. Characteristic classes 8 3.1. Definition and construction 9 3.2. Real projective space 10 4. K-theory 11 4.1. The ring K(X) 11 4.2. Clutching functions and Bott periodicity 14 4.3. Adams operations 17 Acknowledgments 19 References 19 1. Introduction and background 1.1. Preliminaries. This paper will presume a fair understanding of the basic ideas of algebraic topology, including homotopy theory and (co)homology. As with most writings on algebraic topology, all maps are assumed to be continuous unless otherwise stated.
    [Show full text]
  • Commentary on Thurston's Work on Foliations
    COMMENTARY ON FOLIATIONS* Quoting Thurston's definition of foliation [F11]. \Given a large supply of some sort of fabric, what kinds of manifolds can be made from it, in a way that the patterns match up along the seams? This is a very general question, which has been studied by diverse means in differential topology and differential geometry. ... A foliation is a manifold made out of striped fabric - with infintely thin stripes, having no space between them. The complete stripes, or leaves, of the foliation are submanifolds; if the leaves have codimension k, the foliation is called a codimension k foliation. In order that a manifold admit a codimension- k foliation, it must have a plane field of dimension (n − k)." Such a foliation is called an (n − k)-dimensional foliation. The first definitive result in the subject, the so called Frobenius integrability theorem [Fr], concerns a necessary and sufficient condition for a plane field to be the tangent field of a foliation. See [Spi] Chapter 6 for a modern treatment. As Frobenius himself notes [Sa], a first proof was given by Deahna [De]. While this work was published in 1840, it took another hundred years before a geometric/topological theory of foliations was introduced. This was pioneered by Ehresmann and Reeb in a series of Comptes Rendus papers starting with [ER] that was quickly followed by Reeb's foundational 1948 thesis [Re1]. See Haefliger [Ha4] for a detailed account of developments in this period. Reeb [Re1] himself notes that the 1-dimensional theory had already undergone considerable development through the work of Poincare [P], Bendixson [Be], Kaplan [Ka] and others.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Very Basic Deformation Theory
    Some very basic deformation theory Carlo Pagano W We warm ourselves up with some infinitesimal deformation tasks, to get a feeling of the type of question we are dealing with: 1 Infinitesimal Deformation of a sub-scheme of a scheme Take k a field, X a scheme defined over k, Y a closed subscheme of X. An 0 infinitesimal deformation of Y in X, for us, is any closed subscheme Y ⊆ X ×spec(k) 0 spec(k[]), flat over k[], such that Y ×Spec(k[]) Spec(k) = Y . We want to get a description of these deformations. Let's do it locally, working the affine case, and then we'll get the global one by patching. Translating the above conditions you get: classify ideals I0 ⊆ B0 := Bj], such that I0 reduces to I modulo and B0=I0 is flat over k[]. Flatness over k[] can be tested just looking at the sequence 0 ! () ! k[] ! k ! 0(observe that the first and the third are isomorphic as k[]-modules), being so equivalent to the exactness of the sequence 0 ! B=I ! B0=I0 ! B=I ! 0. So in this situation you see that if you have such an I0 then every element y 2 I lift uniquely to an element of B=I, giving 2 rise to a map of B − modules, 'I : I=I ! B=I, proceeding backwards from 0 0 ' 2 HomB(I; B=I), you gain an ideal I of the type wanted(to check this use again the particularly easy test of flatness over k[]). So we find that our set of 2 deformation is naturally parametrized by HomB(I=I ; B=I).
    [Show full text]
  • Summer School on Surgery and the Classification of Manifolds: Exercises
    Summer School on Surgery and the Classification of Manifolds: Exercises Monday 1. Let n > 5. Show that a smooth manifold homeomorphic to Dn is diffeomorphic to Dn. 2. For a topological space X, the homotopy automorphisms hAut(X) is the set of homotopy classes of self homotopy equivalences of X. Show that composition makes hAut(X) into a group. 3. Let M be a simply-connected manifold. Show S(M)= hAut(M) is in bijection with the set M(M) of homeomorphism classes of manifolds homotopy equivalent to M. 4. *Let M 7 be a smooth 7-manifold with trivial tangent bundle. Show that every smooth embedding S2 ,! M 7 extends to a smooth embedding S2 × D5 ,! M 7. Are any two such embeddings isotopic? 5. *Make sense of the slogan: \The Poincar´edual of an embedded sub- manifold is the image of the Thom class of its normal bundle." Then show that the geometric intersection number (defined by putting two submanifolds of complementary dimension in general position) equals the algebraic intersection number (defined by cup product of the Poincar´e duals). Illustrate with curves on a 2-torus. 6. Let M n and N n be closed, smooth, simply-connected manifolds of di- mension greater than 4. Then M and N are diffeomorphic if and only if M × S1 and N × S1 are diffeomorphic. 1 7. A degree one map between closed, oriented manifolds induces a split epimorphism on integral homology. (So there is no degree one map S2 ! T 2.) Tuesday 8. Suppose (W ; M; M 0) is a smooth h-cobordism with dim W > 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Morse Theory for Codimension-One Foliations
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 298. Number 1. November 1986 MORSE THEORY FOR CODIMENSION-ONE FOLIATIONS STEVEN C. FERRY AND ARTHUR G. WASSERMAN ABSTRACT. It is shown that a smooth codimension-one foliation on a compact simply-connected manifold has a compact leaf if and only if every smooth real- valued function on the manifold has a cusp singularity. Introduction. Morse theory is a method of obtaining information about a smooth manifold by analyzing the singularities of a generic real-valued function on the manifold. If the manifold has the additional structure of a foliation, one can then consider as well the singularities of the function restricted to each leaf. The resulting singular set becomes more complicated, higher dimensional, and less trivially placed. In exchange, one obtains information about the. foliation. In this paper we consider codimension-one smooth foliations and show that, in this case, the occurrence of one type of singularity, the cusp, is related to the existence of compact leaves. Specifically, we show that a smooth codimension-one foliation on a compact simply-connected manifold has a compact leaf if and only if every real-valued function on M has a cusp. The singularities of a function on a foliated manifold are very similar to the singularities of a map to the plane. See [F, H-W, L 1, T 1, Wa, W]. However, Levine [L 1] has shown that the only obstruction to finding a map of a compact manifold to the plane without a cusp singularity is the mod 2 Euler characteristic of the manifold.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Symplectic Vector Spaces
    Symplectic Manifolds Tam´asHausel 1 Symplectic Vector Spaces Let us first fix a field k. Definition 1.1 (Symplectic form, symplectic vector space). Given a finite dimensional k-vector space W , a symplectic form on W is a bilinear, alternating non degenerate form on W , i.e. an element ! 2 ^2W ∗ such that if !(v; w) = 0 for all w 2 W then v = 0. We call the pair (W; !) a symplectic vector space. Example 1.2 (Standard example). Consider a finite dimensional k-vector space V and define W = V ⊕ V ∗. We can introduce a symplectic form on W : ! : W × W ! k ((v1; α1); (v2; α2)) 7! α1(v2) − α2(v1) Definition 1.3 (Symplectomorphism). Given two symplectic vector spaces (W1;!1) and (W2;!2), we say that a linear map f : W1 ! W2 is a symplectomorphism if it is an isomorphism of vector ∗ spaces and, furthermore, f !2 = !1. We denote by Sp(W ) the group of symplectomorphism W ! W . Let us consider a symplectic vector space (W; !) with even dimension 2n (we will see soon that it is always the case). Then ! ^ · · · ^ ! 2 ^2nW ∗ is a volume form, i.e. a non-degenerate top form. For f 2 Sp(W ) we must have !n = f ∗!n = det f · !n so that det f = 1 and, in particular, Sp(W ) ≤ SL(W ). We also note that, for n = 1, we have Sp(W ) =∼ SL(W ). Definition 1.4. Let U be a linear subspace of a symplectic vector space W . Then we define U ? = fv 2 W j !(v; w) = 0 8u 2 Ug: We say that U is isotropic if U ⊆ U ?, coisotropic if U ? ⊆ U and Lagrangian if U ? = U.
    [Show full text]
  • SYMPLECTIC GEOMETRY Lecture Notes, University of Toronto
    SYMPLECTIC GEOMETRY Eckhard Meinrenken Lecture Notes, University of Toronto These are lecture notes for two courses, taught at the University of Toronto in Spring 1998 and in Fall 2000. Our main sources have been the books “Symplectic Techniques” by Guillemin-Sternberg and “Introduction to Symplectic Topology” by McDuff-Salamon, and the paper “Stratified symplectic spaces and reduction”, Ann. of Math. 134 (1991) by Sjamaar-Lerman. Contents Chapter 1. Linear symplectic algebra 5 1. Symplectic vector spaces 5 2. Subspaces of a symplectic vector space 6 3. Symplectic bases 7 4. Compatible complex structures 7 5. The group Sp(E) of linear symplectomorphisms 9 6. Polar decomposition of symplectomorphisms 11 7. Maslov indices and the Lagrangian Grassmannian 12 8. The index of a Lagrangian triple 14 9. Linear Reduction 18 Chapter 2. Review of Differential Geometry 21 1. Vector fields 21 2. Differential forms 23 Chapter 3. Foundations of symplectic geometry 27 1. Definition of symplectic manifolds 27 2. Examples 27 3. Basic properties of symplectic manifolds 34 Chapter 4. Normal Form Theorems 43 1. Moser’s trick 43 2. Homotopy operators 44 3. Darboux-Weinstein theorems 45 Chapter 5. Lagrangian fibrations and action-angle variables 49 1. Lagrangian fibrations 49 2. Action-angle coordinates 53 3. Integrable systems 55 4. The spherical pendulum 56 Chapter 6. Symplectic group actions and moment maps 59 1. Background on Lie groups 59 2. Generating vector fields for group actions 60 3. Hamiltonian group actions 61 4. Examples of Hamiltonian G-spaces 63 3 4 CONTENTS 5. Symplectic Reduction 72 6. Normal forms and the Duistermaat-Heckman theorem 78 7.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Overview Over the Basic Notions in Symplectic Geometry Definition 1.1
    AN INTRODUCTION TO SYMPLECTIC GEOMETRY MAIK PICKL 1. Overview over the basic notions in symplectic geometry Definition 1.1. Let V be a m-dimensional R vector space and let Ω : V × V ! R be a bilinear map. We say Ω is skew-symmetric if Ω(u; v) = −Ω(v; u), for all u; v 2 V . Theorem 1.1. Let Ω be a skew-symmetric bilinear map on V . Then there is a basis u1; : : : ; uk; e1 : : : ; en; f1; : : : ; fn of V s.t. Ω(ui; v) = 0; 8i and 8v 2 V Ω(ei; ej) = 0 = Ω(fi; fj); 8i; j Ω(ei; fj) = δij; 8i; j: In matrix notation with respect to this basis we have 00 0 0 1 T Ω(u; v) = u @0 0 idA v: 0 −id 0 In particular we have dim(V ) = m = k + 2n. Proof. The proof is a skew-symmetric version of the Gram-Schmidt process. First let U := fu 2 V jΩ(u; v) = 0 for all v 2 V g; and choose a basis u1; : : : ; uk for U. Now choose a complementary space W s.t. V = U ⊕ W . Let e1 2 W , then there is a f1 2 W s.t. Ω(e1; f1) 6= 0 and we can assume that Ω(e1; f1) = 1. Let W1 = span(e1; f1) Ω W1 = fw 2 W jΩ(w; v) = 0 for all v 2 W1g: Ω Ω We claim that W = W1 ⊕ W1 : Suppose that v = ae1 + bf1 2 W1 \ W1 . We get that 0 = Ω(v; e1) = −b 0 = Ω(v; f1) = a and therefore v = 0.
    [Show full text]