Section 5.6 Moduli of linearized \(\CC\)-structures (RICKY)
¶Subsection 5.6.1 Motivation: Period morphisms
Recall for \(A\) a polarized AV we get a lattice \(H_1(A,\ZZ)\) with some structure. To keep track of the \(\CC\)-structure we record the Hodge structure induced on \(H_1(A,\RR)\) via the Hodge decomposition theorem. If we want to say construct a moduli space of Elliptic Curves we might try to create a moduli space of \(\CC\)-structures on a fixed torus \(T\text{.}\)
The linearized version of this is to fix \(H^1(T, \RR)\) and consider possible Hodge structures on it.
Example 5.6.1.
then we can identify
for nearby \(\lambda \in S\text{.}\) Then the Hodge structure looks like:
this induces a period map
sending \(s \mapsto F^1V_{s, \CC}\text{.}\)
Today generalise the role of \(\PP^1\) in this.
Subsection 5.6.2 Moduli of Hodge structures
Recall: a Hodge structure on a real vector space \(V\) is equivalent to a morphism \(h \colon \mathbf S \to \GL(V)\) where \(\mathbf S = \Res_\RR^\CC \mathbf G_m\) Given \(h\text{,}\) let
(the characters of \(\mathbf S\) are of the form \(\chi_{p,q} = z^{-p} \bar z ^{-q}\) for \((p,q)\in \ZZ^2\text{.}\) So a general Hodge structure on a Lie group \(G\) is defined to be a map \(\mathbf S \to G\text{.}\)
Lemma 5.6.2.
The combinatorial data of two Hodge structures are the same iff they are conjugate (i.e. the maps \(\mathbf S \to \GL(V)\) are conjugate).
Proof.
If \(h\) and \(h'\) are conjugate by \(g\) then conjugation by \(g\) takes \(V^{p,q}\) of one into the other (b/c it preserves the character spaces of \(\mathbf S\)). Conversely if \(\{V_1^{p,q}, V_2^{p,q}\}\) are two HS with the same combinatorial data then we can take \(g \colon V_{\CC} \to V_{\CC}\text{.}\) Taking \(V_1^{p,q} \cong V_2^{p,q}\) and satisfying \(g(\bar v) = \overline{g(v)}\) (using Hodge symmetry) since \(g\) commutes with \(\bar \cdot\text{,}\) it descends to a map on \(V\text{.}\)
Let \(X\) be a conjugacy class of morphisms \(h\colon \mathbf S \to G\text{.}\)
Impose the condition that:
(If the HS on \(V\) is of weight \(k\) then \(h(t) = t^k I\text{,}\) the converse is also true.)
\(G\) acts transitively on \(X\) (via conjugation). So
for \(K = \Stab(h) \) for some \(h\) in \(X\text{.}\) This gives \(X\) the structure of a \(C^\infty\)-manifold.
The \(\CC\)-structure on \(X\).
We give \(T_hX = \Lie G / \Lie K\) a \(\CC\)-v.s. structure let \(\psi_g (x) = g x g \inv\) gives
and its derivative is the adjoint map \(\ad\text{.}\) If we compose with \(h \colon \mathbf S\to G\) we get a hodge structure on \(L= \Lie G\text{.}\)
As \(h(\RR^\times)\) is in the center of \(G(\RR)\text{,}\) have \(\ad h(\RR^\times)\) is the identity on \(L\text{.}\) Hence the hodge structure on \(L\) is of weight 0. By above remark.
Let \(L^{0,0} = L_\CC^{0,0} \cap L\) be the real \((0,0)\) part of the HS on \(L\text{.}\)
Lemma 5.6.3.
Proof.
By the definition of \(K\text{,}\) \(\psi_h(k) = k\) for all \(k \in K\text{.}\) Differentiating gives
for all \(v \in \Lie K\) So \(\Lie K \subseteq L^{0,0}\text{.}\) Conversely if \(v \in L^{0,0}\) then \((\ad h) (v)=v\) implies
so \(\exp v \in K\) i.e. \(v \in \Lie K\text{.}\)
Lemma 5.6.4.
The inclusion \(L \hookrightarrow L_\CC\) induces an isomorphism of \(\RR\)-v.s.
Proof.
see notes.
These lemmas combined give \(T_h X\) a \(\CC\)-structure.
To get a \(\CC\)-manifold structure on \(X\) we embed \(X\) into a \(\CC\) manifold in a way that respects the \(\CC\)-structures on the tangent spaces.
Pick a faithful representation \(G \hookrightarrow \GL(V)\text{.}\) Then \(h \in X\) we get a Hodge structure on \(V\) via
all other \(h' \in X\) have the same combinatorial data.
Let \(\mathbf F\) be the flag variety parameterises filtrations of the type associated to \(h \in X\text{.}\)
To be safe assume \(V\) of weight \(k\text{.}\)
We have an injective map
this induces a complex structure on \(X\text{,}\) see notes for deets.
Subsection 5.6.3 Geometric conditions and chill (on VHS)
Recall that a VHS parameterised by a space \(S\) must satisfy “Griffiths transversality”, this translates to the condition
Theorem 5.6.5.
A VHS on \(V\) satisfies Griffiths transversality iff
Background on Cartan involutions.
Let \(G\) be a real algebraic group with involution \(\sigma\text{.}\) Then a real form of \(G\) associated to \(\sigma\) is
for all \(\RR\)-algebras \(A\text{.}\)
Example 5.6.6.
\(G = \GL_n\text{,}\) \(\sigma(g) = (g^\perp)\inv\) then
observe that this is compact!
Definition 5.6.7. Cartan involutions.
\(\sigma\) is called a Cartan involution if \(G^\sigma\) is compact, i.e. \(G^\sigma(\RR)\) is compact and meets every connected component of \(G^\sigma(\CC)\text{.}\)
Theorem 5.6.8.
Let \(G\) be connected, then \(G\) is reductive iff \(G\) admits a Cartan involution.
Lemma 5.6.9. for next time.
If \(K\) is a compact lie group then any \(\CC\)-representation \(V\) of it admits a \(K\)-invariant pos. def. Hermitian form
Conversely if \(K\) has a faithful representation admitting a \(K\)-inv pos. def. Herm. form. then \(K\) is compact.
Proof.
\(K\) compact, take any \(H_0(u,v)\) a pos. def. herm. form on \(V\text{.}\) Then
is \(K\)-invariant with some properties. For the converse statement the conditions imply \(K \hookrightarrow U(K)\) hence \(K\) is compact.
Remark 5.6.10.
One source of involutions on \(G\) come from \(C\in G\smallsetminus Z\) s.t. \(C^2 \in Z\) then
is such an involution. e.g. \(J\text{!!}\)