Processing math: 10%

Thursday, March 31, 2016

The Hodge decomposition, diamond, and Euler characteristics

 Seminar topic

Recall the sheaf of r-differential forms ΩrX on X (with ΩrX(U)={fdxi1dxir : f is well-defined on U} and such sums) and the structure sheaf OX on X (with OX(U)={f/g : f,gk[U], g0 on U}). Then we may consider the sheaf cohomology of X, with values in ΩrX or OX.

Definition: Let X be a smooth manifold of dimension n. The (p,q)th Hodge number is hp,q=dim(Hp,q), where Hp,q=Hq(X,ΩpX). These numbers are arranged in a Hodge diamond as below.



The Hodge diamond has a lot of repetition - by complex conjugation, we get that hp,q=hq,p, so it is symmetric about its vertical axis. By the Hard Lefschetz theorem (or the Hodge star operator, or Poincare duality), we get that hp,q=hnq,np, so it is symmetric about its horizontal axis.

Proposition: Let X be a Kähler manifold (note that all smooth projective varieties are Kähler) of dimension n. Then the cohomology groups of X decompose as
Hk(X,C)=p+q=kHp,q(X),
for all 0. This is called the Hodge decomposition of X.

This decomposition immediately gives all the Hodge numbers for \P^n, knowing its cohomology. For a manifold of complex dimension n, there are several numbers and polynomials that may be defined. These are:
\begin{align*} \chi_{top}(X) & = \sum_{i=1}^{2n}(-1)^i \dim(H^i(X,\C)) & \text{the (topological) Euler characteristic} \\ \chi^p(X) & = \sum_{q=0}^{n-1}(-1)^qh^{p,q} & \text{the chi-$p$ characteristic} \\ \chi_y(X) & = \sum_{p=0}^{n-1}\chi^py^p & \text{the chi-$y$ characteristic} \end{align*}
Note the Euler characteristic is the alternating sum of the rows of the Hodge diamond, and the chi-p characteristic is the alternating sum of the left-right diagonals of the diamond.

Example: In the case X is a hypersurface in projective n-space \P^n defined by a degree d polynomial,
\chi_y = [z^n]\frac{1}{(1+zy)(1-z)^2}\cdot\frac{(1+zy)^d-(1-z)^d}{(1+zy)^d+y(1-z)^d}.
Since every row except the middle row of the Hodge diamond of a hypersurface is known (as it comes from the Hodge diamond of \P^n by the Lefschetz hyperplane theorem), this expression gives all the unknown numbers. This particular formula is a simplification  of Theorem 22.1.1 in Hirzebruch, which itself comes from the Riemann--Roch theorem.

References: Huybrechts (Complex Geometry: An Introduction, Chapters 3.2, 3.3), Hirzebruch (Topological Methods in Algebraic Geometry, Appendix 1, Section 22)

Sunday, March 20, 2016

Exactness and derived functors

 Lecture topic

Let 0\to X\to Y\to Z\to 0 be a short exact sequence of objects in a category A. Let \mathcal F:A\to B be a covariant functor.

Definition:
The functor \mathcal F is right-exact if \mathcal F(X)\to\mathcal F(Y)\to \mathcal F(Z)\to 0 is an exact sequence. It is left-exact if 0\to \mathcal F(X)\to\mathcal F(Y)\to \mathcal F(Z) is an exact sequence. It is exact if it is both left- and right-exact.

Example: These are some examples of left- and right-exact functors:
    \Hom_A(X,-) is covariant left-exact
    \Hom_A(-,X) is contravariant left-exact
    -\otimes_R X is covariant right-exact, for X a left R-module

Recall that X\otimes_R Y is naturally isomorphic to Y\otimes_RX.

Definition: An object X\in \Obj(A) is projective if \Hom_A(X,-) is an exact functor. Similarly, X is injective if \Hom_A(-,X) is an exact functor.

Recall that a projective resolution of an object X is a sequence of projective objects \cdots\to P_2\to P_1\to P_0 that may or may not terminate on the left. The homology of the sequence in degree 0 is X, and trivial in other degrees. Similarly, an injective resolution of X is a sequence of injective objects I_0\to I_1\to I_2\to\cdots that may or may not terminate on the right. The cohomology is also concentrated in degree 0, and is X there. A free resolution is a projective resolution where all the objects are free (whatever that means in the context).

These types of resolutions may not exist. A category "has enough injectives (projectives)" means we can always construct injective (projective) resolutions.

Definition: Let \mathcal F:A\to B be a covariant right-exact functor and \mathcal G:A\to B a covariant left-exact functor. Let X\in \Obj(A) with P_\bullet a projective resolution of X and I_\bullet an injective resolution of X. The ith left-derived functor of \mathcal F is L_i\mathcal F(X) = H_i(\mathcal F(P_\bullet)). The ith right-derived functor of \mathcal G is R^i\mathcal G(X) = H^i(\mathcal G(I_\bullet)).

These objects of B are well-defined up to natural isomorphism. Note that \mathcal F^{op}:A^{op}\to B^{op} is a contravariant right-exact functor. Moreover, if \mathcal F was contravariant right-exact and \mathcal G was contravariant left-exact, then L_i\mathcal F(X)=H_i(\mathcal F(I_\bullet)) and R^i\mathcal G(X)=H^i(\mathcal G(P_\bullet)).

Example:
Let R be a ring with X and Y both R-bimodules. Then
\begin{align*} \Tor_i^R(Y,X) & =  L_i(-\otimes_RX)(Y) & \Ext^i_R(X,Y) & = R^i(\Hom_R(X,-))(Y) \\ & = L_i(Y\otimes_R - )(X), && = R^i(\Hom_R(-,Y))(X). \end{align*}
Recall that \Tor_i^R(Y,X) is canonically isomorphic to \Tor_i^R(X,Y), but it is not true for \Ext. Also note that \Hom_R(X,-) is covariant and \Hom_R(-,Y) is contravariant, while -\otimes_R X and Y\otimes_R - are both covariant functors.
References: Weibel (An introduction to homological algebra, Chapter 2)

Friday, March 18, 2016

Examples of limits and colimits

 Lecture topic

Let C be a category and X,Y,Z\in \Obj(C). Choose I to be a category with \mathcal F:I\to C a functor as described below. Then we may consider the limit and colimit of \mathcal F, noting that they may not always exist, as there may be no suitable natural transformation i or \pi.
The limit and colimit of the category I with two points and two arrows going between the points in opposite directions, namely
are not interesting to consider. That is because as a category, it must satisfy compositions, so f\circ g=\id, which is a restrictive condition on f and g. We may define a new map h:X\to X with h=f\circ g, but then more maps, such as h\circ f and so on need to be defined, which complicate the situation.

References: Borceux (Handbook of Categorical Algebra I, Chapter 2)

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

Limits and colimits

 Lecture topic

Definition: Given categories A,B and functors \mathcal F,\mathcal G:A\to B, a natural transformation \eta:\mathcal F\to \mathcal G is a collection of elements \eta_X\in \Hom_B(\mathcal F(X),\mathcal G(X)) for all X\in \Obj(A) such that the diagram
commutes, whenever f\in \Hom_A(X,Y).

Definition: For X\in \Obj(A), define the constant category \underline X to be the category with \Obj(\underline X)=\{X\} and \Hom_{\underline X}(X,X)=\{\id_X\}. For any other category B, this may also be viewed as a natural transformation \underline X:B\to A with \underline X(Y)=X and \underline X(f)=\id_X for any object Y and any morphism f of B.

Definition:
Let A be a small category and \mathcal F:A\to B a functor. The colimit \text{colim}(\mathcal F) of \mathcal F is an object \text{colim}(\mathcal F)\in \Obj(B) and a natural transformation \iota:\mathcal F\to \underline{\text{colim}(\mathcal F)} that is initial among all such natural transformations. We write \iota_X:\mathcal F(X)\to \text{colim}(\mathcal F) and have \iota(f)=\id_{\text{colim}(\mathcal F)} for any morphism f of A.

In other words, whenever Z\in \Obj(B) and \eta:\mathcal F\to \underline{Z} is a natural transformation, there is a unique map \zeta:\text{colim}(\mathcal F)\to Z such that the following diagram commutes:
Definition: Let A be a small category and \mathcal F:A\to B a functor. The limit \lim(\mathcal F) of \mathcal F is an object \lim(\mathcal F)\in \Obj(B) and a natural transformation \pi:\underline{\lim(\mathcal F)}\to \mathcal F that is final among all such natural transformations. We write \pi_X:\lim(\mathcal F) \to \mathcal F(X) and have \pi(f)=\id_{\lim(\mathcal F)} for any morphism f of A.

In other words, whenever Z\in \Obj(B) and \epsilon:\underline{Z}\to \mathcal F is a natural transformation, there is a unique map \theta:Z\to \lim(\mathcal F) such that the following diagram commutes:
Examples of colimits are initial objects, coproducts, cokernels, pushouts, direct limits. Examples of limits are final objects, products, kernels, pullbacks, inverse limits.

 Remark: \Hom commutes with limits and tensor commutes with colimits. That is:
\Hom(A,\lim(B_i)) = \lim\left(\Hom(A,B_i)\right) \hspace{1cm} (\text{colim}(A_i))\otimes B = \text{colim}(A_i\otimes B)
References: May (A Concise course in Algebraic Topology, Chapter 2.6), Aluffi (Algebra: Chapter 0, Chapter VIII.1)



Tuesday, March 1, 2016

The canonical bundle of projective space and hypersurfaces

Let \P^n be projective n-space with coordinates [x_0:\cdots:x_n]. Cover \P^n with affine pieces U_i = \{x_i\neq 0\}, each of which are \A^n, in coordinates (y_1,\dots,y_n), where y_j = x_j/x_i. Recall that the canonical bundle of \P^n is the n-fold wedge of the cotangent bundle of \P^n, or \omega_{\P^n} = \bigwedge^nT^*_{\P^n}. The canonical bundle for an arbitrary variety is defined analogously.

Definition: Let X be a projective n-dimensional variety. The sheaf of regular functions on X is \mathcal O_X, with \mathcal O_X(U)=\{f/g\ :\ f,g\in k[x_1,\dots,x_n]/I(X), g\neq 0\}, and the restriction maps are function restriction.

There is a natural grading on \mathcal O_X, given by \deg(f)-\deg(g). A shift in the grading may be applied, called a {\it Serre twist}, to get a differently graded (but isomorphic) module: for \varphi\in \mathcal O_X with \deg(\varphi)=k, set \varphi\in\mathcal O_X(\ell) to have \deg(\varphi) = k-\ell.

Let \alpha = dy_1\wedge\cdots\wedge dy_n\in \omega_{\P^n}, which is well-defined on all of U_i. We claim this is well-defined on all of \P^n. We check this on the overlap U_0\cap U_n (for nicer notation), but the approach is analogous for U_i\cap U_j.
\begin{align*} U_0 & = \{(y_1,\dots,y_n)\ :\ y_i = x_i/x_0\} & y_i & = \frac{z_{i+1}}{z_i} & dy_i & = \frac{z_1dz_{i+1}-z_{i+1}dz_1}{z_1^2} \\ U_n & = \{(z_1,\dots,z_n)\ :\ z_i = x_{i-1}/x_n\} & y_n & = \frac1{z_1} & dy_n & = \frac{-dz_1}{z_1^2} \end{align*}
Therefore
\begin{align*} \alpha & = dy_1\wedge\cdots\wedge dy_n \\ & = \frac{z_1dz_2-z_2dz_1}{z_1^2}\wedge\cdots\wedge \frac{z_1dz_n-z_ndz_1}{z_1^2}\wedge \frac{-dz_1}{z_1^2} \\ & = \frac{dz_2}{z_1}\wedge\cdots\wedge \frac{dz_n}{z_1}\wedge \frac{-dz_1}{z_1^2} \\ & = \frac{(-1)^n}{z_1^{n+1}}dz_1\wedge\cdots \wedge dz_n. \end{align*}
Since the transition function has a pole of order n+1 when z_1 = 0, which happens when x_0=0, we have that \alpha has a pole of order n+1 at \infty. Therefore \omega_{\P^n} \cong \mathcal O_{\P^n}(-n-1).

Let X\subset \P^n be a smooth hypersurface defined by a degree d equation F(x_0,\dots,x_n)=0. On the affine piece U_0 this becomes f(y_1,\dots,y_n)=F(1,\frac{x_1}{x_0},\dots,\frac{x_n}{x_0}) with y_i = x_i/x_0. The total derivative is
\frac{\dy f}{\dy y_1} dy_1 + \cdots + \frac{\dy f}{\dy y_n} dy_n = \sum_{i=1}^n\frac{\dy f}{\dy y_i}dy_i = 0,
and since X is smooth, the terms never all vanish at the same time. Let V_i=\{\frac{\dy f}{\dy y_i} \neq 0\}, and set
\beta_i = \frac{(-1)^{i-1}}{\dy f/\dy y_i} dy_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge d y_n \in \omega_X,
which is well-defined on all of V_i\subset U_0. We claim that the choice of V_i does not matter, and indeed, assuming i<j,
\begin{align*} \beta_j & = \frac{(-1)^{j-1}}{\dy f/\dy y_j} dy_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_j}\wedge \cdots \wedge d y_n \\ & = \frac{(-1)^{j-1+i-1}dy_i}{\dy f/\dy y_j} \wedge dy_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_j}\wedge \cdots \wedge d y_n \\ & = \frac{(-1)^{j-1+i-1}\frac{-1}{\dy f/\dy y_i}\left(\frac{\dy f}{\dy y_1}dy_1+\cdots + \widehat{\frac{\dy f}{\dy y_i}dy_i} + \cdots + \frac{\dy f}{\dy y_n}dy_n\right)}{\dy f/\dy y_j} \wedge dy_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_j}\wedge \cdots \wedge d y_n \\ & = \frac{(-1)^{j-1+i-1+1}\frac{1}{\dy f/\dy y_i}\cdot \frac{\dy f}{\dy y_j}dy_j}{\dy f/\dy y_j} \wedge dy_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_j}\wedge \cdots \wedge d y_n \\ & = \frac{(-1)^{j-1+i-1+1+j-2}}{\dy f/\dy y_i} dy_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge d y_n \\ & = \frac{(-1)^{i-1}}{\dy f/\dy y_i} dy_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge d y_n \\ & = \beta_i. \end{align*}
Hence \beta_i is well-defined on all of U_0, and we call it simply \beta. Next we claim it is well-defined on all of X. Again we only check on the overlap of U_0\cap U_n. On the affine piece U_n this becomes g(z_1,\dots,z_n)=F(\frac{x_0}{x_n},\dots,\frac{x_{n-1}}{x_n},1)=f(\frac{z_2}{z_1},\dots,\frac{z_n}{z_1},\frac1{z_1}) with z_i = x_{i-1}/x_n. We employ the chain rule \frac{\dy f}{\dy y_i}=\frac{\dy f}{\dy z_j}\frac{\dy z_j}{\dy y_i} and the results above to find that
\begin{align*} \beta & = \frac{(-1)^{i-1}}{\dy f/\dy y_i} dy_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{d y_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge d y_n \\ & = \frac{(-1)^{i-1}}{\dy f/\dy z_j \cdot \dy z_j/\dy y_i} \frac{z_1dz_2-z_2dz_1}{z_1^2}\wedge \cdots \wedge \widehat{dy_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge \frac{z_1dz_n-z_ndz_1}{z_1^2}\wedge \frac{-dz_1}{z_1^2} \\ & = \frac{(-1)^{i-1}}{\dy f/\dy z_j \cdot \dy z_j/\dy y_i} \frac{(-1)^{n-1}}{z_1^n}dz_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{dz_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge dz_n \\ & = \frac{(-1)^{i+n}}{\left(\frac{1}{z_1}\right)^{d-1}\left(c+\cdots\right) z_1^n}dz_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{dz_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge dz_n \\ & = \frac{(-1)^{i+n}}{z_1^{n-d+1} \left(c+\cdots \right)}dz_1\wedge\cdots \wedge \widehat{dz_i}\wedge \cdots \wedge dz_n, \end{align*}
for some constant c. This comes from expressing f in terms of the z_is and factoring. Since the transition function has a pole of order n-d+1 when z_1 = 0, which happens when x_0=0, we have that \beta has a pole of order n-d+1 at \infty. Therefore \omega_{X} \cong \mathcal O_{X}(-n+d-1).

References: Griffiths and Harris (Principles of Algebraic Geometry, Chapter 1.2)