DOCSLIB.ORG

Minicourse: Topological Aspects of Diffeomorphism Groups. Abstract

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Minicourse: Topological Aspects of Diffeomorphism Groups. Abstract Minicourse: Topological aspects of diffeomorphism groups. Abstract. The cohomology of the diffeomorphism group Diff(M) of a manifold M and its classifying space BDiff(M) are important to the study of fiber bundles with fiber M. In particular, we can learn a lot about M bundles by (1) finding nonzero elements of H∗(BDiff(M)) and (2) relating these classes to the topology/geometry of individual bundles. A good start to (1) is to understand the topology of Diff(M), and this has been done in low dimensions (by Smale, Hatcher, Earle-Eells, Gabai, and others). An example of (2) is the study of fiber bundles admitting a flat connection (as pioneered by Milnor and Morita). This course will discuss (1) and (2) through a few rich examples and in connection to major areas of current research. Our discussion will include (a) the homotopy type of Diff(M) when dim(M) < 4; (b) circle bundles, the Euler class, and the Milnor-Wood inequality; and (c) surface bundles, the Miller- Morita-Mumford classes, and Nielsen realization problems. Disclaimer: These are notes are from lectures given at a graduate student workshop on diffeomorphism groups at UC Berkeley in June 2015. They are not meant as a source for details or as a primary reference. Unless otherwise noted, all objects considered below are oriented (manifolds, diffeomorphisms, bundles, etc). Usually this is omitted from the notation. For example, Diff(M) always means orientation-preserving + diffeomorphisms, and I write GLn(R) when sometimes I mean GLn (R). 1 Lecture 1. The Euler class I. Introduction. Fiber bundles M ! E ! B where M; B smooth manifolds. S Locally trivial, globally interesting, E = Uα × M= ∼ φαβ : Uα \ Uβ ! Homeo(M): Scanned by CamScanner Examples Covering spaces, vector bundles, circle bundles, surface bundles Problem Distinguish bundles. Characteristic classes (measure global nontriviality) • M manifold • G ⊂ Homeo(M), e.g. Diff(M), Symp(M; !), Cont(M; α), Lie group Definition A characteristic class c is an assignment M ! E ! B 7! c(E) 2 Hi(B) that is natural, i.e. for a pullback bundle f ∗E / E f B0 / B f ∗(c(E)) = c(f ∗E). Theorem There exists a classifying space BG and a bijection 8 Fiber bundles 9 < = continuous maps M ! E ! B ! B ! BG : with structure group G ; =htpy =iso For nice B. Corollary Characteristic classes are elements of H∗(BG). Problem0 Compute H∗(BG)? 2 II. One rich example A. Nonvanishing sections and the Euler class. 2 + Setup M = R , G = GL2 (R), B = Sg closed, oriented surface genus g. 2 π Definition A section of R ! E −! Sg is a map σ : Sg ! E such that π ◦ σ = 1. σ is nonvanishing if σ(S) \ 0-section = ?. Informally write jσj > 0. Remark. A section of tangent bundle TS ! S is a vector field. 2 Question Does R ! E ! S admit jσj > 0? Obstruction to jσj > 0 Definition The Euler class is defined as h X i 2 e(E) = PD π∗ index(xi)[xi] 2 H (S); where π∗ : H0(TS) ! H0(S). Scanned by CamScanner • e(E) invariant under isotopy • e(E) = 0 if and only if 9 jσj > 0. P Theorem (Poincare-Hopf) For E = TS, index(xi) = χ(S). B. Circular reasoning 2 1 0 • fiberwise metric on R ! E ! S induces S ! E ! S E ! S has nonvanishing section ! E0 ! S has a section ! E ' S × S1 (Exercise) Examples 3 1 (1) Unit tangent bundle T Sg ! Sg 3 2 3 2 2 3 (2) Hopf bundle S ! S . U(1) acts on S ⊂ C and S = S =U(1). 1 2 (3) Heisenberg bundle S ! E ! T 0 1 a c 1 0 1 a c 1 H3(R) = f@ 0 1 b A : a; b; c 2 Rg G = f@ 0 1 b A : a; b 2 Z; c 2 Rg 0 0 1 0 0 1 Note that H3(Z) ⊂ G ⊂ H3(R). Define bundle G=H3(Z) ! H3(R)=H3(Z) ! H3(R)=G: This can be obtained from 1 0 by identifying the top/bottom and left/right as usual and the front/back by . 1 1 1 Definition The Euler class of S ! E ! Sg Scanned by CamScanner • Triangulate Sg. • Choose σ on 0-skeleton • Interpolate on 1-skeleton • For 2-cell c Scanned by CamScanner1 σ @c : @c ! S Define φ : C2(S) ! Z by c 7! deg(σ @c) This is a cocycle independent of choice of σ on 1-skeleton. e(E) := [φ] 2 H2(S). 2 Exercise Compute e(E) for H3(R)=H3(Z) ! T . III. Central extensions 1 Observe If g ≥ 1 then S ! E ! Sg induces central extension 0 ! Z ! π1(E) ! π1(S) ! 1 4 Definition A section of π1(E) ! π1(S) is a homomorphism s : π1(S) ! π1(E) such that p ◦ s = 1. • E ! Sg has a section if and only if π1(E) ! π1(S) has a section if and only if π1(E) ' π1(S) × Z. 2 Exercise 0 ! Z ! H3(Z) ! Z ! 0 does not split. An invariant of 0 ! Z ! Γ ! G ! 1 central extension. • pick set-theoretic section s : G ! Γ (normalize s(e) = e) −1 •8 g; h 2 G define φ : G × G ! Z by φ(g; h) = s(g)s(h)s(gh) 2 Z ≤ Γ Facts (1) φ satisfies 8g; h; k 2 G 0 = φ(h; k) − φ(gh; k) + φ(g; hk) − φ(g; h) = δφ So φ is a 2-cocycle. 0 0 (2) s : G ! Γ induces φ : G × G ! Z and 9 β : G ! Z and 8g; h φ(g; h) = φ0(g; h) + β(g) + β(h) − β(gh) So [φ] well-defined. 2 Definition The Euler class e(Γ) = [φ] 2 H (G; Z). (3) Any 2-cocycle ξ : G × G ! Z induced by a group Γ = G × Z with multiplication (g; a)(h; b) = (gh; a + b + ξ(g; h)) Multiplication is associative because ξ cocycle. Theorem Fix G. central extensions elements of ! 2 1 ! Z ! Γ ! G ! 1 H (G; Z) 2 2 Exercise Determine the element of H (Z ; Z) corresponding to 2 0 ! Z ! H3(Z) ! Z ! 0: IV. Examples (i) Topology. S closed, genus(S) ≥ 2 1 1 ! Z ! π1(T S) ! π1(S) ! 1 2 Euler class 0 6= e 2 H (π1(S); Z) ' Z. 5 + 2 1 2 (ii) Geometry / Lie groups. G = PSL2(R) = SL2(R)={±1g = Isom (H ) ' T H Since π1(G) = Z, 1 ! Z ! Ge ! G ! 1: 2 Gives e 2 H (PSL2(R); Z) (group cohomology) Remark A hyperbolic metric on S determines 2 π1(S) ! Γ ⊂ PSL2(R) discrete, faithful and S ' H =Γ: e = ρ∗(e). (iii) Dynamics / Topology. G = Homeo(S1) 1 Homeo(^ S ) ' ff : R ! R j f(x + 1) = f(x) + 1g ⊂ Homeo(R) Have SES 1 1 1 ! Z ! Homeo(^ S ) ! Homeo(S ) ! 1 2 1 gives e 2 H (Homeo(S ); Z). Remarks 1 ∗ (a) α : PSL2(R) ! Homeo(S ). e = α (e). 1 1 (b) Given ρ : π1(M) ! Homeo(S ) get an S bundle. Eρ ! M where Mf × S1 Mf × S1 Eρ = = : π1(M) (x; t) ∼ (g:x; ρ(g)(t)) ∗ Euler class e(Eρ) := ρ (e). (iv) Mapping class groups. Mod(S; ∗) := π0Homeo(S; ∗) • (Nielsen) Mod(S; ∗) ,! Homeo(S1) Homeo(S1) ? _? ?? ?? ?? ? PSL2(R) Mod(S; ∗) _? ? ?? ?? ?? ? Push π1(S) { e 2 H2(Mod(S; ∗)) leads to characteristic classes of surface bundles: MMM classes (more tomorrow) 6 { e 2 PSL2(R) comes from elementary arithmetic: PSL2(R) ⊃ SO(2) ⊃ Z=10 corresponding sequence 0 ! Z ! Z ! Z=10 ! 0 1 a + b > 9 The restriction of the Euler class is the carrying cocycle. φ(a; b) = 0 else 7 Diffeomorphism Groups Workshop Minicourse: Topology of Diff(M) Problem Set 1: The Euler class. 1 2 1. (a) Use the cellular cocycle definition to compute the Euler class of S ! H3(R)=H3(Z) ! T . 2 (b) Use the group extension definition to compute the Euler class for 0 ! Z ! H3(Z) ! Z ! 0. 2 2 2 2. (a) Give a group extension 0 ! Z ! Γ ! Z ! 1 with Euler class n 2 Z ' H (Z ; Z). 1 (b) Show that for every n 2 Z and every g ≥ 0 there exists S ! E ! Sg with e(E) = n. (Use bundle pullbacks.) 2 3. (a) Show that a vector bundle R ! E ! B is trivial if and only if it has a section. 3 (b) Give an example of a bundle R ! E ! B that has a section but is not trivial. 4. Use the Euler class to show that every hyperbolic representation ρ : π1(S) ! PSL2(R) lifts to SL2(R) ! PSL2(R). 4 1 1 (Challenge) Show that e [ e = 0 in H (PSL2(R); Z). Determine if e [ e = 0 in Diff(S ) or Homeo(S ). If e [ e 6= 0 find a bundle that exhibits this. Further reading. • Differential forms in algebraic topology, Bott-Tu. Pages 122 {129 discuss the Euler class using a section with isolated zeros. • The topology of fibre bundles, Steenrod. The beginning of Part III describes the obstruction theory version of the Euler class presented in the lecture. If you can find it, Scorpan's The wild world of 4-manifolds also has a nice explanation pg. 197. • A primer on mapping class groups, Farb-Margalit. Section 5.5 has some discussion of central extensions and the Euler class. 8 Lecture 2. Surface bundles and characteristic classes I. Characteristic classes of surface bundles • S connected, oriented surface, genus ≥ 2 • S ! E ! B surface bundle Examples M×[0;1] 1) Given f 2 Diff(S).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:1006.1489V2 [Math.GT] 8 Aug 2010 Ril.Ias Rfie Rmraigtesre Rils[14 Articles Survey the Reading from Profited Also I Article
    Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly Volume 8, Number 1 (Special Issue: In honor of F. Thomas Farrell and Lowell E. Jones, Part 1 of 2 ) 1—14, 2012 The Work of Tom Farrell and Lowell Jones in Topology and Geometry James F. Davis∗ Tom Farrell and Lowell Jones caused a paradigm shift in high-dimensional topology, away from the view that high-dimensional topology was, at its core, an algebraic subject, to the current view that geometry, dynamics, and analysis, as well as algebra, are key for classifying manifolds whose fundamental group is infinite. Their collaboration produced about fifty papers over a twenty-five year period. In this tribute for the special issue of Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly in their honor, I will survey some of the impact of their joint work and mention briefly their individual contributions – they have written about one hundred non-joint papers. 1 Setting the stage arXiv:1006.1489v2 [math.GT] 8 Aug 2010 In order to indicate the Farrell–Jones shift, it is necessary to describe the situation before the onset of their collaboration. This is intimidating – during the period of twenty-five years starting in the early fifties, manifold theory was perhaps the most active and dynamic area of mathematics. Any narrative will have omissions and be non-linear. Manifold theory deals with the classification of ∗I thank Shmuel Weinberger and Tom Farrell for their helpful comments on a draft of this article. I also profited from reading the survey articles [14] and [4]. 2 James F. Davis manifolds. There is an existence question – when is there a closed manifold within a particular homotopy type, and a uniqueness question, what is the classification of manifolds within a homotopy type? The fifties were the foundational decade of manifold theory.
    [Show full text]
  • Persistent Obstruction Theory for a Model Category of Measures with Applications to Data Merging
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY, SERIES B Volume 8, Pages 1–38 (February 2, 2021) https://doi.org/10.1090/btran/56 PERSISTENT OBSTRUCTION THEORY FOR A MODEL CATEGORY OF MEASURES WITH APPLICATIONS TO DATA MERGING ABRAHAM D. SMITH, PAUL BENDICH, AND JOHN HARER Abstract. Collections of measures on compact metric spaces form a model category (“data complexes”), whose morphisms are marginalization integrals. The fibrant objects in this category represent collections of measures in which there is a measure on a product space that marginalizes to any measures on pairs of its factors. The homotopy and homology for this category allow measurement of obstructions to finding measures on larger and larger product spaces. The obstruction theory is compatible with a fibrant filtration built from the Wasserstein distance on measures. Despite the abstract tools, this is motivated by a widespread problem in data science. Data complexes provide a mathematical foundation for semi- automated data-alignment tools that are common in commercial database software. Practically speaking, the theory shows that database JOIN oper- ations are subject to genuine topological obstructions. Those obstructions can be detected by an obstruction cocycle and can be resolved by moving through a filtration. Thus, any collection of databases has a persistence level, which measures the difficulty of JOINing those databases. Because of its general formulation, this persistent obstruction theory also encompasses multi-modal data fusion problems, some forms of Bayesian inference, and probability cou- plings. 1. Introduction We begin this paper with an abstraction of a problem familiar to any large enterprise. Imagine that the branch offices within the enterprise have access to many data sources.
    [Show full text]
  • The General Linear Group
    18.704 Gabe Cunningham 2/18/05 [email protected] The General Linear Group Definition: Let F be a field. Then the general linear group GLn(F ) is the group of invert- ible n × n matrices with entries in F under matrix multiplication. It is easy to see that GLn(F ) is, in fact, a group: matrix multiplication is associative; the identity element is In, the n × n matrix with 1’s along the main diagonal and 0’s everywhere else; and the matrices are invertible by choice. It’s not immediately clear whether GLn(F ) has infinitely many elements when F does. However, such is the case. Let a ∈ F , a 6= 0. −1 Then a · In is an invertible n × n matrix with inverse a · In. In fact, the set of all such × matrices forms a subgroup of GLn(F ) that is isomorphic to F = F \{0}. It is clear that if F is a finite field, then GLn(F ) has only finitely many elements. An interesting question to ask is how many elements it has. Before addressing that question fully, let’s look at some examples. ∼ × Example 1: Let n = 1. Then GLn(Fq) = Fq , which has q − 1 elements. a b Example 2: Let n = 2; let M = ( c d ). Then for M to be invertible, it is necessary and sufficient that ad 6= bc. If a, b, c, and d are all nonzero, then we can fix a, b, and c arbitrarily, and d can be anything but a−1bc. This gives us (q − 1)3(q − 2) matrices.
    [Show full text]
  • Unitary Group - Wikipedia
    Unitary group - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_group Unitary group In mathematics, the unitary group of degree n, denoted U( n), is the group of n × n unitary matrices, with the group operation of matrix multiplication. The unitary group is a subgroup of the general linear group GL( n, C). Hyperorthogonal group is an archaic name for the unitary group, especially over finite fields. For the group of unitary matrices with determinant 1, see Special unitary group. In the simple case n = 1, the group U(1) corresponds to the circle group, consisting of all complex numbers with absolute value 1 under multiplication. All the unitary groups contain copies of this group. The unitary group U( n) is a real Lie group of dimension n2. The Lie algebra of U( n) consists of n × n skew-Hermitian matrices, with the Lie bracket given by the commutator. The general unitary group (also called the group of unitary similitudes ) consists of all matrices A such that A∗A is a nonzero multiple of the identity matrix, and is just the product of the unitary group with the group of all positive multiples of the identity matrix. Contents Properties Topology Related groups 2-out-of-3 property Special unitary and projective unitary groups G-structure: almost Hermitian Generalizations Indefinite forms Finite fields Degree-2 separable algebras Algebraic groups Unitary group of a quadratic module Polynomial invariants Classifying space See also Notes References Properties Since the determinant of a unitary matrix is a complex number with norm 1, the determinant gives a group 1 of 7 2/23/2018, 10:13 AM Unitary group - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_group homomorphism The kernel of this homomorphism is the set of unitary matrices with determinant 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Group Extensions Problem and Its Resolution in Cohomology for the Case of an Elementary Abelian Normal Sub-Group
    THESIS THE GROUP EXTENSIONS PROBLEM AND ITS RESOLUTION IN COHOMOLOGY FOR THE CASE OF AN ELEMENTARY ABELIAN NORMAL SUB-GROUP Submitted by Zachary W. Adams Department of Mathematics In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Master of Science Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Summer 2018 Master’s Committee: Advisor: Alexander Hulpke Amit Patel Wim Bohm Copyright by Zachary W. Adams 2018 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT THE GROUP EXTENSIONS PROBLEM AND ITS RESOLUTION IN COHOMOLOGY FOR THE CASE OF AN ELEMENTARY ABELIAN NORMAL SUB-GROUP The Jordan-Hölder theorem gives a way to deconstruct a group into smaller groups, The con- verse problem is the construction of group extensions, that is to construct a group G from two groups Q and K where K ≤ G and G=K ∼= Q. Extension theory allows us to construct groups from smaller order groups. The extension problem then is to construct all extensions G, up to suit- able equivalence, for given groups K and Q. This talk will explore the extension problem by first constructing extensions as cartesian products and examining the connections to group cohomology. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my loving wife for her patience and support, my family for never giving up on me no matter how much dumb stuff I did, and my friends for anchoring me to reality during the rigors of graduate school. Finally I thank my advisor, for his saintly patience in the face of my at times profound hardheadedness. iii DEDICATION I would like to dedicate my masters thesis to the memory of my grandfather Wilfred Adams whose dazzling intelligence was matched only by the love he had for his family, and to the memory of my friend and brother Luke Monsma whose lust for life is an example I will carry with me to the end of my days.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Topological Groups: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow
    axioms Editorial An Overview of Topological Groups: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow Sidney A. Morris 1,2 1 Faculty of Science and Technology, Federation University Australia, Victoria 3353, Australia; [email protected]; Tel.: +61-41-7771178 2 Department of Mathematics and Statistics, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria 3086, Australia Academic Editor: Humberto Bustince Received: 18 April 2016; Accepted: 20 April 2016; Published: 5 May 2016 It was in 1969 that I began my graduate studies on topological group theory and I often dived into one of the following five books. My favourite book “Abstract Harmonic Analysis” [1] by Ed Hewitt and Ken Ross contains both a proof of the Pontryagin-van Kampen Duality Theorem for locally compact abelian groups and the structure theory of locally compact abelian groups. Walter Rudin’s book “Fourier Analysis on Groups” [2] includes an elegant proof of the Pontryagin-van Kampen Duality Theorem. Much gentler than these is “Introduction to Topological Groups” [3] by Taqdir Husain which has an introduction to topological group theory, Haar measure, the Peter-Weyl Theorem and Duality Theory. Of course the book “Topological Groups” [4] by Lev Semyonovich Pontryagin himself was a tour de force for its time. P. S. Aleksandrov, V.G. Boltyanskii, R.V. Gamkrelidze and E.F. Mishchenko described this book in glowing terms: “This book belongs to that rare category of mathematical works that can truly be called classical - books which retain their significance for decades and exert a formative influence on the scientific outlook of whole generations of mathematicians”. The final book I mention from my graduate studies days is “Topological Transformation Groups” [5] by Deane Montgomery and Leo Zippin which contains a solution of Hilbert’s fifth problem as well as a structure theory for locally compact non-abelian groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Obstructions, Extensions and Reductions. Some Applications Of
    Obstructions, Extensions and Reductions. Some applications of Cohomology ∗ Luis J. Boya Departamento de F´ısica Te´orica, Universidad de Zaragoza. E-50009 Zaragoza, Spain [email protected] October 22, 2018 Abstract After introducing some cohomology classes as obstructions to ori- entation and spin structures etc., we explain some applications of co- homology to physical problems, in especial to reduced holonomy in M- and F -theories. 1 Orientation For a topological space X, the important objects are the homology groups, H∗(X, A), with coefficients A generally in Z, the integers. A bundle ξ : E(M, F ) is an extension E with fiber F (acted upon by a group G) over an space M, noted ξ : F → E → M and it is itself a Cech˘ cohomology element, arXiv:math-ph/0310010v1 8 Oct 2003 ξ ∈ Hˆ 1(M,G). The important objects here the characteristic cohomology classes c(ξ) ∈ H∗(M, A). Let M be a manifold of dimension n. Consider a frame e in a patch U ⊂ M, i.e. n independent vector fields at any point in U. Two frames e, e′ in U define a unique element g of the general linear group GL(n, R) by e′ = g · e, as GL acts freely in {e}. An orientation in M is a global class of frames, two frames e (in U) and e′ (in U ′) being in the same class if det g > 0 where e′ = g · e in the overlap of two patches. A manifold is orientable if it is ∗To be published in the Proceedings of: SYMMETRIES AND GRAVITY IN FIELD THEORY.
    [Show full text]
  • PIECEWISE LINEAR TOPOLOGY Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Basic
    PIECEWISE LINEAR TOPOLOGY J. L. BRYANT Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Basic Definitions and Terminology. 2 3. Regular Neighborhoods 9 4. General Position 16 5. Embeddings, Engulfing 19 6. Handle Theory 24 7. Isotopies, Unknotting 30 8. Approximations, Controlled Isotopies 31 9. Triangulations of Manifolds 33 References 35 1 2 J. L. BRYANT 1. Introduction The piecewise linear category offers a rich structural setting in which to study many of the problems that arise in geometric topology. The first systematic ac- counts of the subject may be found in [2] and [63]. Whitehead’s important paper [63] contains the foundation of the geometric and algebraic theory of simplicial com- plexes that we use today. More recent sources, such as [30], [50], and [66], together with [17] and [37], provide a fairly complete development of PL theory up through the early 1970’s. This chapter will present an overview of the subject, drawing heavily upon these sources as well as others with the goal of unifying various topics found there as well as in other parts of the literature. We shall try to give enough in the way of proofs to provide the reader with a flavor of some of the techniques of the subject, while deferring the more intricate details to the literature. Our discussion will generally avoid problems associated with embedding and isotopy in codimension 2. The reader is referred to [12] for a survey of results in this very important area. 2. Basic Definitions and Terminology. Simplexes. A simplex of dimension p (a p-simplex) σ is the convex closure of a n set of (p+1) geometrically independent points {v0, .
    [Show full text]
  • LECTURE 12: LIE GROUPS and THEIR LIE ALGEBRAS 1. Lie
    LECTURE 12: LIE GROUPS AND THEIR LIE ALGEBRAS 1. Lie groups Definition 1.1. A Lie group G is a smooth manifold equipped with a group structure so that the group multiplication µ : G × G ! G; (g1; g2) 7! g1 · g2 is a smooth map. Example. Here are some basic examples: • Rn, considered as a group under addition. • R∗ = R − f0g, considered as a group under multiplication. • S1, Considered as a group under multiplication. • Linear Lie groups GL(n; R), SL(n; R), O(n) etc. • If M and N are Lie groups, so is their product M × N. Remarks. (1) (Hilbert's 5th problem, [Gleason and Montgomery-Zippin, 1950's]) Any topological group whose underlying space is a topological manifold is a Lie group. (2) Not every smooth manifold admits a Lie group structure. For example, the only spheres that admit a Lie group structure are S0, S1 and S3; among all the compact 2 dimensional surfaces the only one that admits a Lie group structure is T 2 = S1 × S1. (3) Here are two simple topological constraints for a manifold to be a Lie group: • If G is a Lie group, then TG is a trivial bundle. n { Proof: We identify TeG = R . The vector bundle isomorphism is given by φ : G × TeG ! T G; φ(x; ξ) = (x; dLx(ξ)) • If G is a Lie group, then π1(G) is an abelian group. { Proof: Suppose α1, α2 2 π1(G). Define α : [0; 1] × [0; 1] ! G by α(t1; t2) = α1(t1) · α2(t2). Then along the bottom edge followed by the right edge we have the composition α1 ◦ α2, where ◦ is the product of loops in the fundamental group, while along the left edge followed by the top edge we get α2 ◦ α1.
    [Show full text]
  • Lie Group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R)
    INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR Lie group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R) PROJECT REPORT – SEMESTER IV MOUSUMI MALICK 2-YEARS MSc(2011-2012) Guided by –Prof.DEBAPRIYA BISWAS Lie group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R) CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the project entitled “Lie group and Geometry on the Lie group SL2(R)” being submitted by Mousumi Malick Roll no.-10MA40017, Department of Mathematics is a survey of some beautiful results in Lie groups and its geometry and this has been carried out under my supervision. Dr. Debapriya Biswas Department of Mathematics Date- Indian Institute of Technology Khargpur 1 Lie group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. Debapriya Biswas for her help and guidance in preparing this project. Thanks are also due to the other professor of this department for their constant encouragement. Date- place-IIT Kharagpur Mousumi Malick 2 Lie group and Geometry on the Lie Group SL2(R) CONTENTS 1.Introduction ................................................................................................... 4 2.Definition of general linear group: ............................................................... 5 3.Definition of a general Lie group:................................................................... 5 4.Definition of group action: ............................................................................. 5 5. Definition of orbit under a group action: ...................................................... 5 6.1.The general linear
    [Show full text]
  • Bott Periodicity for the Unitary Group
    Bott Periodicity for the Unitary Group Carlos Salinas March 7, 2018 Abstract We will present a condensed proof of the Bott Periodicity Theorem for the unitary group U following John Milnor’s classic Morse Theory. There are many documents on the internet which already purport to do this (and do so very well in my estimation), but I nevertheless will attempt to give a summary of the result. Contents 1 The Basics 2 2 Fiber Bundles 3 2.1 First fiber bundle . .4 2.2 Second Fiber Bundle . .5 2.3 Third Fiber Bundle . .5 2.4 Fourth Fiber Bundle . .5 3 Proof of the Periodicity Theorem 6 3.1 The first equivalence . .7 3.2 The second equality . .8 4 The Homotopy Groups of U 8 1 The Basics The original proof of the Periodicity Theorem relies on a deep result of Marston Morse’s calculus of variations, the (Morse) Index Theorem. The proof of this theorem, however, goes beyond the scope of this document, the reader is welcome to read the relevant section from Milnor or indeed Morse’s own paper titled The Index Theorem in the Calculus of Variations. Perhaps the first thing we should set about doing is introducing the main character of our story; this will be the unitary group. The unitary group of degree n (here denoted U(n)) is the set of all unitary matrices; that is, the set of all A ∈ GL(n, C) such that AA∗ = I where A∗ is the conjugate of the transpose of A (conjugate transpose for short).
    [Show full text]
  • Mixed States from Diffeomorphism Anomalies Arxiv:1109.5290V1
    SU-4252-919 IMSc/2011/9/10 Quantum Gravity: Mixed States from Diffeomorphism Anomalies A. P. Balachandran∗ Department of Physics, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244-1130, USA and International Institute of Physics (IIP-UFRN) Av. Odilon Gomes de Lima 1722, 59078-400 Natal, Brazil Amilcar R. de Queirozy Instituto de Fisica, Universidade de Brasilia, Caixa Postal 04455, 70919-970, Brasilia, DF, Brazil October 30, 2018 Abstract In a previous paper, we discussed simple examples like particle on a circle and molecules to argue that mixed states can arise from anoma- lous symmetries. This idea was applied to the breakdown (anomaly) of color SU(3) in the presence of non-abelian monopoles. Such mixed states create entropy as well. arXiv:1109.5290v1 [hep-th] 24 Sep 2011 In this article, we extend these ideas to the topological geons of Friedman and Sorkin in quantum gravity. The \large diffeos” or map- ping class groups can become anomalous in their quantum theory as we show. One way to eliminate these anomalies is to use mixed states, thereby creating entropy. These ideas may have something to do with black hole entropy as we speculate. ∗[email protected] [email protected] 1 1 Introduction Diffeomorphisms of space-time play the role of gauge transformations in grav- itational theories. Just as gauge invariance is basic in gauge theories, so too is diffeomorphism (diffeo) invariance in gravity theories. Diffeos can become anomalous on quantization of gravity models. If that happens, these models cannot serve as descriptions of quantum gravitating systems. There have been several investigations of diffeo anomalies in models of quantum gravity with matter in the past.
    [Show full text]