Holomorphic Gerbes (Part 2)
Posted by John Baez
Thanks to some help from Francis, I’ve converted some of my conjectures on the classification of holomorphic -gerbes into theorems!
Remember the stars of the show:
Definition. Given a complex manifold , its th Picard group is , the th Čech cohomology group of the sheaf of nonzero holomorphic functions on .
Definition. The th Néron–Severi group of a complex manifold is the subgroup of that’s the image of the natural map
Definition. The th Jacobian is the kernel of the natural map
We can think of these groups in terms of -gerbes — or even better for the numbering scheme, complex line -bundles. A line 1-bundle is just a line bundle, a line 2-bundle corresponds to a gerbe, and so on. If we take all line -bundles as complex by default, here is the significance of these groups:
is the group of equivalence classes of holomorphic line -bundles on .
is the group of equivalence classes of smooth line -bundles on .
is the group of equivalence classes of smooth line -bundles on that admit a holomorphic structure.
is the group of equivalence classes of holomorphic structures on the trivial line -bundle.
I tried to rapidly give some intuition for these ideas last time.
Smooth line -bundles are classified up to equivalence by their Chern class, which is an element of . Above I’m just identifying an equivalence class of line -bundles with its Chern class, to avoid a digression into the theory of line -bundles. There’s a map
sending each holomorphic line -bundle to its Chern class, and this map arises as follows. The exponential sequence is a short exact sequence of sheaves on :
and it gives a long exact sequence
where the connecting homomorphism is the Chern class .
You may wonder why holomorphic line -bundles are classified by while smooth ones are classified by something that looks so different, namely . In fact smooth line -bundles work a lot like holomorphic ones: they’re classified by elements of the th Čech cohomology of the sheaf of nonzero smooth complex functions on ! But in the smooth case this Čech cohomology group is isomorphic to , thanks to the smooth version of the long exact sequence above. The reason is that of the sheaf of smooth complex functions vanishes for , because it’s a fine sheaf.
Now let’s prove three theorems describing the th Picard group, Jacobian and Néron–Severi group:
Theorem 1. For any complex manifold there is a short exact sequence
Theorem 2. For any complex manifold we have
Theorem 3. When is a compact Kähler manifold,
Here is the torsion subgroup of , while are the Doulbeault cohomology groups of .
The first theorem is so easy that it doesn’t deserve to be called a theorem! But I’m short on theorems today, so:
Theorem 1. For any complex manifold there is a short exact sequence
Proof. Use the map to form a short exact sequence:
Then note that
all by definition. ⬛
The second result follows easily from the long exact version of the exponential sequence:
Theorem 2. For any complex manifold we have
Proof. Let’s give the maps in the exponential long exact sequence some names:
By definition is the kernel of , so it’s also the image of , so it’s also isomorphic to
which is the same as
This is what we wanted to show. ⬛
The third result is a bit more substantial: it uses Hodge theory to describe the Néron–Severi group for line -bundles on a compact Kähler manifold. This result is well-known for and shown by Ben–Bassat for .
Theorem 3. When is a compact Kähler manifold,
Proof. Remember the exponential long exact sequence:
By definition , so it’s also . But
factors as
where comes from change of coefficients. Since is a finitely generated abelian group, it splits as a sum of its torsion subgroup and a finitely generated free abelian group. The kernel of above is the torsion subgroup, so
But by Hodge theory we have the decomposition
and we can identify with . Using the Dolbeault resolution we can see that
is projection onto this summand, so
Putting this all together we get
But consists of real cohomology classes, and complex conjugation on complex de Rham cohomology switches and , and nothing in the intersection above can lie in , so nothing can lie in either. So we can refine our description to
which is what we were trying to prove! ⬛
The simplicity of these results and their proofs — in particular, the way they fall straight out of famous ideas like the exponential sequence and Hodge theory — shows that holomorphic line -bundles, or holomorphic -gerbes, are just a geometrical way of thinking about a classic topic: the th cohomology of the sheaf , which I have discussed using Čech cohomology.
Indeed since I’ve deliberately withheld any way of thinking about line -bundles except for Čech cohomology, you can easily get the impression that they are just a fancy way of talking about Čech cohomology. I suppose there’s some truth to that. But in fact, just as holomorphic line bundles really do clarify the meaning of and let us do interesting things with it, holomorphic line -bundles do the same for the higher cohomology groups of .
But exploring that was not my goal here! All I wanted to do is figure out how some classic results for line bundles generalize to line -bundles, or -gerbes.
Re: Holomorphic Gerbes (Part 2)
I think the nLab doesn’t have all this.
There’s a stub Néron-Severi group (but no th group) and plenty of ‘Pickard’ entries (group, 2-group, 3-group, -group, stack, scheme).
Then there’s the intermediate Jacobian for each , a quotient of cohomology in odd dimension, but that’s not your .
Maybe some things to add when editing returns to the nLab.