2.2.1 Complex charts [029Y]
Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.
Complete original source context ยท Original author HTML
2.2.1 Complex charts
Start with a Delzant polytope . Let be the finite set of pairs of
- โข
a vertex of ;
- โข
an ordering of the faces containing .
For any two and in there is a unique element of which maps to and matches up the corresponding faces. Obviously we have
Now suppose we have any space on which acts and is a subset of a larger space .We take the product and define a relation
for . The properties above tell us that this is an equivalence relation, so we can take the quotient . In our case we take to be and . Then acts on . This is clear if we identify with and hence with . In terms of the original description, with co-ordinates on , we make a matrix act on by
which is well-defined since the are integers. There is a natural homomorphism from to so acts on via this. Then it is clear from the construction that the quotient is a complex manifold covered by charts labelled by elements of , each chart being a copy of . The charts for the different elements of belonging to the same vertex of have the same image so it suffices just to take one of them. There is an action of the complex torus with a dense orbit, which is the image of any . The construction behaves well with respect to restriction to faces, so for each -dimensional face of there is a submanifold which is an -dimensional complex submanifold with an action of induced from the action on . Indeed the orbits of the action on correspond to these faces. In particular the vertices of correspond to points of ; the fixed points under the action.
Example When is the -simplex, as above, the manifold we construct is .
So far we have not used the full strength of the data we began with. For example, we could simply have omitted some vertices of and run the same construction. We have also thrown away some of the data, through the homomomorphism from to . First, the fact that the vertices come from a bounded polytope yields the compactness of the space we have defined. We leave this as an exercise for the reader. For the second point, it is indeed the case that if we vary the constants slightly (so that we do not introduce or remove any vertices) we get the same complex manifold . The extra structure of the specific polytope corresponds to fixing a distinguished cohomology class in . This is easiest to see in the case when the polytope is integral. Then the lie in a smaller group which is an extension
We take the trivial complex line bundle over . Then acts on the restriction of to and the same construction gives a complex line bundle . Furthermore this is an equivariant line bundle for the action. The distinguished cohomology class is just the first Chern class of . In general, when the vertices are not integral we consider the sheaf of closed -forms over . We can use the to define a closed -form on and this yields a Cech cocycle with values in this sheaf. Then the short exact sequence of sheaves
gives a boundary map from to which defines the distinguished cohomology class. (In fact this cohomology class is not changed if we translate . A more precise statement is that the Delzant polytope can be recovered from the complex manifold with a suitable distinguished -equivariant cohomology class.)
Example. Consider a vertex of a Delzant polytope . There is no loss of generality in supposing that is the origin and that near the origin agrees with the standard model . Then, for , we define to be the subset of defined by the additional inequality . For small enough this is again a Delzant polytope and the complex manifold is the blow-up of at the fixed point corresponding to . The exceptional divisor is a copy of projective space, associated to the โnewโ -simplex in the boundary of . The manifold does not vary with but the evaluation of the distinguished cohomology class on the standard generator of is .
Now we go back to differential geometry. If we have a Kahler metric on , its restriction to the open orbit is described by a Kahler potential; a convex function on , as above. Conversely we can define am โadmissibleโ convex function to be one which defines a Kahler metric over the orbit which extends smoothly to the compact manifold. This is a condition on the asymptotic behaviour of at infinity in . The essence of the condition is that is asymptotic to the piecewise linear function
where runs over the vertices of the polytope. Thus if we let be the rescaling for then (in )as tends to infinity. In the model case when is a vertex and agrees locally with the local complex co-ordinates are and so . The admissible condition is that extends to a smooth function of the complex co-ordinates .
Example The round metric on the -sphere with area is given by the Kahler potential
In terms of a local complex co-ordinate this is .