PMATH 950 (Riemann Surfaces) Notes
|
|
- Kristin Morris
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 PMATH 950 (Riemann Surfaces) Notes Patrick Naylor February 28, 2018 These are notes for PMATH 950, taught by Ruxandra Moraru in the Winter 2018 term at the University of Waterloo. These notes are not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, or even correct, so use at your own risk. Course Description (taken from the course syllabus): Riemann surfaces can be defined in several different, equivalent ways, for example as onedimensional complex manifolds, or as oriented two dimensional real manifolds. In addition, any compact Riemann surface can be embedded in projective space, thus giving it the structure of an algebraic curve. Riemann surfaces therefore appear in many areas of mathematics, from complex analysis, algebraic and differential geometry, to algebraic topology and number theory. This course will cover fundamentals of the theory of compact Riemann surfaces from an analytic and topological perspective. Sources include: Lectures by Dr. Ruxandra Moraru; Lectures by Dr. Benoit Charbonneau (Feb. 26 & 28); Notes by Ragini Singhal; O. Forster, Lectures on Riemann Surfaces. [Required text] 1
2 Contents 1 Preliminaries Defining a Riemann Surface Maps on Riemann Surfaces Branched and Unbranched Covers Sheaves and Things About Sheaves Analytic Continuation 19 3 Calculus on Riemann Surfaces and Differential Forms 24 2
3 1 Preliminaries 1.1 Defining a Riemann Surface We begin with some preliminary notions that give rise to our definitions of a Riemann surface. Recall that a topological space X is Hausdorff if its topology separates points. Examples R n with the metric topology is Hausdorff. 2. R n with the cofinite topology is not Hausdorff. Definition 1. A topological surface is a Hausdorff topological space that is locally homeomorphic to R 2 (or C with the usual identification). Equivalently, a topological surface is a real 2-manifold, or a complex 1-manifold. Examples C = R 2 ; 2. The upper half plane H = {z C : im z > 0}; 3. The graph of any continous map f : U C C with u open; 4. The Riemann sphere S 2 = C { } = P 1, equipped with stereographic projections at the poles. If we define S 2 := {(x, y, z) R 3 : x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 1} then the projections φ 1 : S 2 \ N = R 2, φ 2 : S 2 \ S = R 2 are given by φ 1 (x, y, z) = (x/1 z, y/1 z) and φ 2 (x, y, z) = (x/1+z, y/1+z). That these are homeomorphisms is clear. In case it ever comes up, it s nice to have the descriptions of the maps on hand. Note that we re defining P 1 = C { } to be the one point compactification of C. The topology is defined by the condition that U P 1 is open if U C is open or U = (C\K) where K is some compact set. It s a fact that this topology is Hausdorff. The local charts describing P 1 as a surface are given by C P 1 by z z and C P 1 by z 1/z, with obvious conventions. In fact, another useful fact that might come up is the following: 3
4 Fact 1. Let X be a locally compact Hausdorff topological space and suppose f : X X is a homeomorphism. Then f extends to a homeomorphism of the one point compactification of X. In particular, homeomorphisms of R n always extend to homeomorphisms of S n. Definition 2. A homeomorphism φ : U X V C is called a complex chart. Two charts φ i : U i V i are called holomorphically compatible if the composition φ 2 φ 1 1 : φ 1 (U 1 U 2 ) φ 2 (U 1 U 2 ) is a biholomorphism. Definition 3. An atlas on X is a collection U = {(U α, φ α )} α of charts covering X. By a complex atlas we mean an atlas of charts which are pairwise holomorphically compatible. Definition 4. A Riemann surface is a pair (X, U) where X is a connected topological surface and U is a complex atlas for X. Examples Note that C, H (open subsets of C in general), and graphs of continuous functions all admit atlases with only one chart. They are thus trivally complex atlases. 2. The atlas for P 1 consists of the two charts given above. The appropriate compositions are easily checked to be biholomorphisms. Remarks In most cases we ll deal with atlases with only finitely many charts. 2. If the surface is compact, there are necessarily at least two charts. Definition 5. Two complex atlases U, U are called analytically equivalent if every chart in U is holomorphically equivalent with every chart in U. Note that this is an equivalence relation amongst complex atlases. Definition 6. By a complex structure Σ on a topological surface X, we mean an equivalence class of analytically equivalent complex atlases on X. Note that every complex structure Σ on X contains a representative U which is a maximal atlas. We can now (finally) give a formal definition of our objects of study! Not everyone assumes connectedness but we will. Definition 7. A Riemann surface is a pair (X, Σ) where X is a connected topological 4
5 surface and Σ is a complex structure on X. Examples The examples of open subsets of C and graphs of complex functions are all examples of Riemann surfaces. 2. The torus X := C/Γ where Γ is the lattice generated by integer combinations of two R-linearly independent vectors in C. We give X the quotient topology by the quotient map π : C X sends z [z], which by default makes π continuous. Thus X is connected, compact (the image of it s fundamental parallelogram) and Hausdorff (since π is an open quotient map). To show that X admits a complex structure, for each point p choose a small enough disk D p on which π gives a chart from C to D p. These are obviously compatible since the charts will compose to be the identity plus an integer if their domains intersect. Algebraic curves are another example of Riemann surfaces. Let p(z, w) be a non-constant polynomial in 2 complex variables. Then the the subset C = {(z, w) C : p(z, w) = 0} C 2 is called the algebraic curve determined by p. Definition 8. The algebraic curve C is called smooth at (z 0, w 0 ) if: ( p p = z, p ) 0 at (z 0, w 0 ) w Otherwise we call C singular at (z 0, w 0 ). Examples Let p(z, w) = w 2 z. Then p = ( 1, 2w) doesn t vanish, so p is smooth everywhere. 2. Let p(z, w) = w 2 z 3 (a cubic with a cusp). Then p = ( 3z 2, 2w) vanishes at (0, 0), where p has a cusp. Thus p is smooth everywhere except the origin. Proposition 1. Let C be an algebraic curve and let S = C \ {singular points of C}. Then S admits a natural complex structure that makes it into a Riemann surface. Recall the Implicit Function Theorem (complex version): Theorem (Implicit Function Theorem). Let C be an algebraic curve determined by p. Suppose that (z 0, w 0 ) is a point on C where p/ w(z 0, w 0 ) 0. Then there is a disk D 1 centered around z 0 and D 2 centered around w 0 and a holomorphic map φ : D 1 C D 2 C with φ(z 0 ) = w 0 such that 5
6 C (D 1 D 2 ) = {(z, φ(z)) : z D 1 } Basically, this lets us take a relation on two complex variables and convert it to the graph of an honest to goodness function. I ll include a proof when I have time to write it up. It s currently available as a handout. Proof of Proposition. Since points of S are smooth, at least one partial deriviative doesn t vanish, so p is locally the graph of a holomorphic function. By our remarks earlier, such objects are Riemann surfaces. Proof of the Implicit Function Theorem. [When I have time.] 1.2 Maps on Riemann Surfaces Having defined the objects of study, we ll now talk about functions on them. Definition 9. Let X be a Riemann surface and Y X an open subset. A function f : Y C is called holomorphic if its composition with any chart is a holomorphic map C C, i.e. for any chart ψ : U X C, the map f ψ 1 : ψ(u Y ) C is holomorphic. The set of all holomorphic functions on Y is denoted O(Y ). Remark 2. Since constant functions, sums and scalar multiples of holomorphic functions are again holomorphic, this makes O(Y ) into a C-algebra. Example 6. We find all the holomorphic functions on P 1. Let X = P 1 = C { }, and recall the stereographic projections given as φ 1 : U = C C by z z and φ 2 : V = C { } by z 1/z. Suppose that f : P 1 C is holomorhpic. Then the maps below are holomorphic maps on C: f φ 1 1 : φ 1 (C) C f φ 1 2 : φ 2 (C { }) C Moreover, f φ 1 (z) = f(z) and f φ 1 2 (z) = f(1/z). These have to agree on the intersection C. If we write out a Laurent series expansion for f and use uniqueness, we find that the only possible such expansion is a constant function. Hence O(P 1 ) = C. This isn t surprising because P 1 is compact, but more on that later. 6
7 Recall the following: Theorem (Riemann s Removable Singularity Theorem). Let U be an open subset of a Riemann surface X and let a U. Suppose that f O(U \ {a}) is bounded in some neighbourhood of a. Then f can be extended uniquely to some f O(U). We won t prove this, but it follows directly from the corresponding result over C. Definition 10. Suppose that X and Y are Riemann surfaces and f : X Y is continuous. Then f is called holomorphic if its composition with any pair of charts is a homolomorphic map from C C, i.e., for any charts ψ 1 : U 1 X V 1 C ψ 2 : U 2 Y V 2 C such that f(u 1 ) U 2, we have that the composition is holomorphic. ψ 2 f ψ 1 1 : V 1 V 2 If f and its inverse are holomorphic, we call f a biholomorphism. If f : X Y is a biholomorphism, we call X and Y isomorphic as Riemann surfaces. Examples Any holomorphic map f : X C is really a map between the Riemann surfaces X and C, so this definition subsumes the previous one. 2. This definition of holomorphic is obviously preserved by composition of maps (when it makes sense). 3. Linear fractional transformations (mobius transformations) are autormorphisms of P 1 in the precise sense given above [this might be an exercise at some point]. Recall that holomorphic functions are determined by their values on open sets, or more generally on sets with a limit point. We ll prove the analogous result for Riemann surfaces. Theorem 1 (Identity Theorem). Suppose that X and Y are Riemann surfaces and that f 1, f 2 : X Y are holomorphic. Suppose that there is a set A with a limit point in X. Then f = g on X 7
8 Corollary 1. If f and g agree on a nonempty open subset U X then f and g agree on X. We won t prove the identity theorem in its fullest generality, since it more or less follows in the same way that the version over C does, and with some fiddling with charts. We will prove the basic versions properly. Definition 11. Let X, Y be topological spaces. Let S X and x S. We say that x is an isolated point of S if there is an open neighbourhood U of x such that (U \ {x}) S =. Otherwise, x is called an limit point for S (some authors use accumulation point). Facts 2. Here are some facts about limit points. 1. S is closed if and only if it contains all of its limit points. 2. If x is a limit point of S and U is an open neighbourhood of x such that U S then x is a limit point of U S. 3. Let φ : X Y be injective and continuous. If x is a limit point of S then φ(x) is a limit point of φ(s). Theorem 2. Let D C be a domain and suppose that f, g are holomorphic on D. Suppose that f and g agree on a set A that has a limit point c in D. Then f and g agree on D. Proof. Here s a nice proof that s a little different from the one given in class. Wikipedia! Thanks Since D is open and connected, if we can show that f and g coincide on a set that is nonempty, open, and closed, we will be done. Write h = f g, so without loss of generality we suppose that h is zero on A, and we try to show that h is zero on D. Consider the set: S = {z D : h (k) (z) = 0 for all k} Note that S is closed because it s the intersection of the closed sets (h (k) ) 1 (0) (h is continuous). To see that S is open, let w S. Then h has a Taylor series expansion at w which is identically zero. By Taylor s theorem, h vanishes in a neighbourhood of w, and in so particular this neighbourhood is in S. Thus S is open. We now show that S is nonempty. Consider the Taylor expansion of h about c. Let m be the smallest integer for which h (m) (c) 0, so that we can write 8
9 h(z) = (z c) m h(z) where h is another holomorphic function that doesn t vanish at c. By continuity, we conclude that h(z) is nonzero in a neighbourhood B \ {c} of c. On the other hand, this contradicts the assumption that c is a limit point of A, since B \ {c} is an open set that isolates c. Thus c S, so S is nonempty. This completes the proof. Corollary 2. Suppose f, g are holomorphic on a domain D C. If f = g on a nonempty open subset W D then f = g on D. Proof. Again, let h = f g, and try to show h = 0 on D. Note that Z = h 1 (0) is closed by continuity, and so W Z. Hence h = 0 on W. In the previous theorem, set A = W, which is closed and hence contains a limit point. The conclusion follows. Corollary 3. Let f : X Y be holomorphic. If f is nonconstant, then f 1 (pt) is an isolated set of points. Proof. Suppose that f 1 (a) contains a point that isn t isolated, so that a is a limit point of A = f 1 (a). Then f(x) = a for all a A and A has a limit point, so by the identity theorem for Riemann surfaces we conclude that f(x) = a on X. Definition 12. Let X be a Riemann surface and let Y X. A meromorphic function on Y is a function f : Y Y C such that Y is open and f is holomorphic on Y, and: (i) Y \ Y contains only isolated points; (ii) for all points p Y \ Y we have lim x p f(x) =. We call the points of Y Y the poles of f. The set of all meromorphic functions on Y is denoted M(Y ). Examples Linear fractional transformations f(z) = (az + b)/(cz + d) are meromorphic functions on P 1. They have poles at d/c but are otherwise holomorphic. 2. Polynomials can be extended to a map P 1 P 1 by. Note that lim z p(z) = and is isolated. 3. The function f(z) = e 1/z is not meromorphic. It does have a singularity at z = 0 which is isolated, but is an essential singularity, in the sense that the limit condition above isn t met. 9
10 Remarks Condition (ii) above ensures we re getting poles in the usual sense. 2. Not every holomorphic function f : C C extends to a meromorphic function f : P 1 P 1. For instance, e z doesn t extend, since it s limit at infinity isn t really sensible. Theorem 3. Suppose X is a Riemann surface and f M(X). For each pole of f define f(p) =. Then the map f : X P 1 is holomorphic. Conversely, if f : X P 1 is holomorphic then either f is constant or else takes the value at an isolated set of points. Moreover, f X\f 1 ( ) is meromorphic. Remark 4. In other words, there is a one to one correspondence between holomorphic functions X P 1 and meromorphic functions X C. Proof. Suppose f M(X) and let P denote the set of poles of f. Define the extended function f : X P 1 by sending elements of P to. Note that by the limit condition, f is actually continuous. To check that the resulting map f : X P 1 is holomorphic, choose charts φ : U X V C ψ : U P 1 V C with f(u) U. Denote the composition g = ψ f φ 1 : V V. Away from the poles, g is holomorphic because f was. Note furthermore that for any p P, g(φ(p)) = ψ(f(p)) C which means we can find a neighbourhood W of φ(p) on which g is bounded. Then g is bounded and holomorphic on W \ φ(p), so by Riemann s removable singularity theorem, g can be extended to all of W while preserving holomorphy. Since this is a local construction and the poles are isolated, this completes this part of the proof. The converse statement follows from the identity theorem (we ve proved this already). The limit condition on the pole set follows from the continuity of f. Remark 5. The identity theorem also holds for meromorphic functions, since we ve proved it for any map between Riemann surfaces, and we just characterized meromorphic maps on X as holomorphic maps X P 1. 10
11 Theorem 4 (The Open Mapping Theorem). Let X and Y be Riemann surfaces and f : X Y be a non constant holomorphic map. Then f is an open mapping. This follows immediately from the corresponding result in C because being open can be checked locally. We won t prove this one. Theorem 5. Let D be a domain and f : D C be holomorphic. Then f is an open mapping. Theorem 6. Let X, Y be Riemann surfaces and X be compact. Suppose that f : X Y is holomorphic and non constant. Then f is surjective. In particular, Y is compact. Proof. Suppose that f is holomorphic and nonconstant. Then by the open mapping theorem, f is open, so f(x) is open. On the other hand, f is also a compact subset of Y so is closed. Since Y is connected, f(x) = Y. Corollary 4. Every holomorphic function on a compact Riemann surface is constant. In fact, this is true in general for complex manifolds: O(M) = C if M is complex. We ve recovered the results we proved earlier: O(P 1 ) = C, O(C 2 /Γ) = C. Note that on the torus, this says that the only holomorphic doubly periodic functions are constant. Moreover, if f : C C is a non constant doubly periodic meromorphic function, we can interpret this as a function f : T P 1. By the corollary, f takes every value in C, which is also an interesting fact. We can prove a bunch of things with the open mapping theorem. Theorem 7 (Louiville s Theorem). Every bounded holomorphic function f : C C is constant. Proof. Consider f : P 1 \ { } C which is bounded in a neighbourhood of. By Riemann s removable singularity theorem, f can be extended to P 1, but by the above corollary this means f is constant. In particular f C is constant. Theorem 8 (The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra). Every nonconstant complex polynomial has a root. Proof. View a polynomial p as a meromorphic function on P 1. Thus p is a holomorphic map p : P 1 P 1. Since P 1 is compact, p is surjective, so p 1 (0), so p has a root. [This has got to be one of the shortest proofs I ve every seen.] 11
12 Theorem 9 (Local Behavior of Holomorphic Mappings). Let X, Y be Riemann surfaces and f : X Y be holomorphic and non constant. Then there are local coordinate charts in which f looks like z z k for some k, and this k does not depend on the charts chosen. More precisely, let a X and write b = f(a). Then there is some k 1 and charts and f(u) U so that the following all hold: (i) a U, φ(a) = 0, b U, ψ(b) = 0; φ : U X V C ψ : U Y V C (ii) The composition f = ψ f φ 1 : V V is given by f(z) = z k. Proof. Pick coordinate charts around a and b. Then by translation we can certainly arrange for (i) to hold. To get (ii), write f locally as f(z) = z k h(z) where h(0) 0. Choose an analytic branch of the k th root function to locally write f(z) = (zh(z) 1/k ) k where the piece inside is holomorphic. Now just adjust the charts by setting φ = α φ, where α(z) = zh(z) 1/k. In terms of new local parameters, f has the required form. Remark 6. Note that for all points in a neighbourhood of b (except b), there are exactly k preimages. Locally, this means that f : X Y is a branched covering, with branch locus at b. There is a picture for this: x. We ll investigate this more in the next section. 1.3 Branched and Unbranched Covers We develop the minimum of covering space theory required to discuss its application to Riemann surfaces. Definition 13. Let p : X Y be a continuous map. For y Y, we call the set p 1 (y) the fiber over y and say that points in the fiber lie over y. If every fiber is discrete (finite), then we call p discrete (finite). Remark 7. Discrete maps of compact spaces are automatically finite, since the fiber is a discrete subset of a compact space. 12
13 Remark 8. Let f : X Y be a map of Riemann surfaces, and suppose X is compact. Then we ve seen that Y is compact, and so if f is discrete then it s automatically finite. Our motivating question for a bit will be the following: if X is not compact, then when can we ensure that f : X Y is still finite? Definition 14. A map f : X Y (usually of locally compact spaces) is called proper if f 1 (K) is compact for all K Y compact. Examples Any continuous map with X compact is necessarily proper. 2. Constant maps C C are not proper. Theorem 10. Let f : X Y be a non constant holomorphic proper map of Riemann surfaces. Then f is finite. Proof. Let y Y. Then f 1 (y) is discrete. By properness, f 1 (y) is compact and discrete, hence finite. We re going to work towards the statement that non constant, holomorphic, proper maps of Riemann surfaces are branched coverings. In particular, when we count with multiplicity, every point has the same number of preimages, which is a pretty remarkable fact. Definition 15. Let f : X Y be a non constant holomorphic map of Riemann surfaces. A point x X is called a branch point if f fails to be injective in any neighbourhood of x. The map f is called unbranched if f has no branch points. [This is equivalent to an etale cover in some sense.] Examples The map f : C C defined by z z k is branched at z = 0, but is unbranched on C. 2. The exponential map exp : C C is unbranched since its derivative never vanishes. 3. If f : X Y is holomorphic and non constant, then f is unbranched at points where the index in the local description can be taken as k = The quotient map π : C C/Γ is unbranched (exercise). Definition 16. Let f : X Y be continuous. We call f a local homeomorphism if for all x X, there is an open neighborhood U x of x such that f Ux : U x f(u x ) is a 13
14 homeomorphsm. We call f a covering map if for all y Y, there is a neighbourhood V y of y such that: p 1 (V y ) = j J U j where U j are open, disjoint, and f Uj is a homeomorphism. The typical picture of this definition looks like: ftp.ius a y Remark 9. Note that covering spaces are local homeomorphisms, but the converse is not true. Let X be the real line with two origins, and Y = R. Then the map X Y that identifies the origins in X is a local homeomorphism, but not a covering map. Any inclusion will also trivially provide an example if it isn t surjective. If both of these examples feel a bit like cheating, consider the partial covering map (0, 2) S 1 by x e 2πix. Then any neighbourhood around 1 S 1 C will fail the covering space requirement. In general, if we add (Hausdorff), properness, and locally compactness hypotheses then the converse does hold; i.e., proper maps between manifolds. Theorem 11. Suppose that p : X Y is a covering map and that Y is connected. Then all fibers of p have the same cardinality. In particular, p is necessarily surjective. Proof. Let y 0 Y and let y V Y such that: p 1 (V ) = j J U j where U j are all disjoint and p : U j V is a homeomorphism. Thus p 1 = J. We note that for any other y V, we must also have p 1 (y) = J since the same neighbourhoods work for y V and p Uj is a homeomorphism for each j. 14
15 Now let A = {y Y : p 1 (y) = J }. We ve just proved it s open, and note that it must be closed by the exact same claim above. Moreover, A is nonempty since y 0 A. Since Y is connected we conclude A = Y, and this completes the proof. We require two more facts: Lemma If X, Y are locally compact and f : X Y is proper then f is closed. In particular, proper maps of Riemann surfaces are both open (Open Mapping Theorem) and closed. 2. If f : X Y is closed then for all y Y and any open neighbourhood U X of f 1 (y), there is an open neighbourhood V of y such that f 1 (V ) U Proof of 1. There is a characterization of closed sets in locally compact spaces: A is closed if and only if A K is compact for all compact subsets K. It should follow from this, but I don t want to write it down. Proof of 2. Note that X \ U is closed, so that A := f(x \ U) is closed and y / A. Thus define V := Y \ A is an open neighbourhood of y such that f 1 (V ) U. After this digression into point set topology, we return to our study of maps between Riemann surfaces. Theorem 12. Let f : X Y be a non constant holomorphic map of Riemann surface. Then: 1. If f is unbranched then f is a local homeomorphism. The converse is also true but less useful. 2. If f is unbranched and proper then f is a covering map. Proof of 1. Suppose that f is unbranched. If x X, there is some neighbourhood U of x where f is injective. Since f is holomorphic and non constant, f is continuous and open; thus f U is a homeomorphism. The converse also holds since local homeomorphisms are locally injective. Proof of 2. By the first part, f is a local homeomorphism. Let y Y and let p 1 (y) = {x 1,..., x m } (it s finite by a previous lemma about proper maps of Riemann surfaces). Since p is a local homeomorphism, there are neighbourhoods W j of x j and V j of Y such that p : W j V j is a homeomorphism. Without generality, the W j are disjoint. Since W j is a neighbourhood of p 1 (y) by the previous lemma there is a neighbourhood U V 1 V m 15
16 such that p 1 (U) W 1 W m. Set U j = W j p 1 (U). Then the covering space requirement is met, and so p is a covering map. Remark 10. Note now that if we start with a non constant proper holomorphic map f : X Y of Riemann surfaces which is unbranced, then we get that f is automatically surjective (as a covering map), and so there is a well defined degree of f, given by the number of preimages in a fiber. This can be generalized to the branched case in an obvious way. Theorem 13. Suppose that f : X Y is a non constant holomorphic map of Riemann surfaces. Let A X be the set of branched points, and set B = f(a). Then: 1. A is closed and discrete in X; 2. If f is proper and D is any closed discrete subset then f(d) is also closed and discrete. In particular, if f is proper, then B is closed and discrete. Proof of 1. Set W = X \ A; then f is unbranched on W. Then W is open, and so A is closed. By the local description of holomorphic maps, A is also discrete. Proof of 2. Suppose D X is closed and discrete and that f is proper. Then f is closed, so f(d) is closed. To check that its discrete, supposed not. Then f(d) has a limit point, say some y 0. Then by definition, there is no open neighbourhood V of y 0 which separates y 0 from f(d). We now remark that if K Y is compact, we have f(d) K = f(d f 1 (K)). In particular, if K is finite, we see that f(d) K is finite. But now if V is any open neighbourhood of y 0 with compact closure, V f(d) is finite, which means we can easily separate y 0 from f(d). This is a contradiction so we conclude that f(d) is discrete. The message here is that proper maps are finite and so look like polynomials. Examples The exponential map is not proper since its not finite. 2. Polynomial maps p : C C are proper. The number of preimages in a generic fiber is the degree of the polynomial; this isn t really a coincidence. We now give the real definition of the degree of a map. Definition 17. Let X, Y be Riemann surfaces and let f : X Y be a non constant, proper, holomorphic map. Set A X to be the branch points of f, and let B = f(a). Set 16
17 X = X \ f 1 (B) X \ A (all points that map to a critical value), and Y = Y \ B. Then f : X Y is unbranched and has a well defined degree, say n. For any x X, set v(f, x) = k, where z z k is the unique local description of f at x. If y Y, set m := Note that m = n at the unbranched points. x f 1 (y) v(f, x) This is always a well defined integer by the below theorem: Theorem 14. Let X, Y be Riemann surfaces and f : X Y a non constant, proper, holomorphic map. Then there is an n N such that counting multiplicity, f takes every value n times. Proof. I will prove this eventually. It s posted online. This statement is actually quite strong. As a consequence, we ll see that the existence of maps between Riemann surfaces places strict requirements on the genus, degree etc. (Riemann-Roch). Corollary 5. Let X be a compact Riemann surface. Suppose there exists f M(X) with only one pole and that this pole has order one. Then X is isomorphic to P 1. Proof. We think of f as a holomorphic map f : X P 1, where poles of f are mapped to. Moreover, we have f 1 ( ) = 1. Since X is compact, f is proper, and so by the above theorem must take every value exactly once. Thus f is a degree one cover: X and P 1 are biholomorphic. 1.4 Sheaves and Things About Sheaves Definition 18. Let X, τ be a topological space. A presheaf (F, ρ) on X (of abelian groups) consists of: (i) A family F = {F(U)} U τ of abelian groups; (ii) A family ρ{p U V = res UV : F(U) F(V )} of group homomorphisms such that p U U = id F(U), and for which composition of restrictions satisfies res V W res UV = res UW. 17
18 Remarks We usually just write F and not (F, ρ). 2. Sheaves can take values in different categories; there are obvious definitions. 3. We call elements in F(U) sections over U: sections of a fiber bundle form a sheaf this may be the origin of this terminology. Elements of F(X) are called global sections. 4. The section over should be the zero object in the category. Examples Sheaves of functions (of specified type) are a natural example of a sheaf on a space. 2. The skyscraper sheaf (at p X) is defined by setting F(U) = G if p U, and F(U) = 0 otherwise. If we want F to be a sheaf, we ask for two additional properties: 1. [The locality/identity axiom] Suppose U is open and U = U i for some open sets U i. If f, g F(U) are such that f Ui = g Ui for all i, then f = g. 2. [The gluability axiom] Suppose U is open and U = U i for some open sets U i. If f i F(U i ) are such that f i Ui U j = f j Ui U j for all i, j, then there is some f F(U) such that f Ui = f i for all i. These are natural for sheaves of functions but not guaranteed in general. Note that the glued function in (2) is unique by (1) if F is a sheaf. Examples The skyscraper sheaf is a sheaf, hence the name. 2. [Non-example] Not every presheaf is a sheaf. (i) Consider X = {x, y} with the discrete topology. Define the section over x, y to be G, and the section over X to be G 3. Let restriction maps to x and y be proj 1 and proj 2, respectively. Then this presheaf clearly fails the identity axiom (but not gluability!). (ii) The presheaf of bounded functions on R fails the gluability axiom, but not the identity axiom. Another example of the above flavor is also possible. Sheaves also give us a way to talk about local behavior at points, through something called a stalk. 18
19 Definition 19. Let F be a presheaf on (X, τ) and let a X. The stalk at a is defined to be the quotient F(U)/ a U a where a is the equivalence relation that identifies f F(U) and g F(V ) if there is an open set W U V on which f and g are equal. This captures the notion of the germ of a function. Another way to describe this is as the direct limit of the diagram of F(U) where a U. When X is a Riemann surface and O is the sheaf of holomorphic functions, we recover O a as the germs of holomorphic functions there: this has a natural description as the analytic power series at a. In the example of the skyscraper sheaf, note that we get F a = G if a = p, and 0 otherwise. Remark 12. One thing that we can do is sheafify a presheaf: this fixes any problems that with gluing and restriction that we might have. We don t use it much since the sheaf of holomorphic is indeed a sheaf, but I ll add the material if it s needed later. The relevant proposition is below. Proposition 2. Let F be a presheaf on X. There is a sheaf F + on X called the sheafification of F whose stalks agree with F, and which is isomorphic to F if F is already a sheaf. Proof. Exercise (A2). 2 Analytic Continuation The motivation for this section is the following: given a holomorphic function f on a domain D C, what are the largest open set(s) on which we can extend f (it s unique by the identity theorem). The solution to this problem, roughly, will be to attach a topological space O to the sheaf of holomorphic functions, and consider its connected components. Somewhat miraculously, this turns out to be a covering of the original space X, and questions about holorphic functions on X can be answered in O. The problem in general is that extensions are multivalued: consider the complex square root function. This once we specify a branch, it s well defined on the complex plane minus a ray. It turns out that the largest domain will be unique and isomorphic to a Riemann surface. We ll formalize all of this now. 19
20 Definition 20. Let f O(U). An analytic continuation F of f is a tuple (Y, p, F ) such that: (i) Y is a Riemann surface; (ii) p : Y C is an unbranched holomorphic map; (iii) F : Y C is a holomorphic function such that F p 1 (U) = f p. We think of F as covering f. Our candidate for Y above will be the space O associated to O. Definition 21. Let X be a Riemann surface and F be a presheaf on X. We define F = x X F x to be the disjoint union of all the stalks. p : F X. Note that there is a natural projection map Proposition 3. The space F has a natural topology with respect to which p is a local homeomorphism. Proof. Denote the map which sends a section to a stalk by p x : F(U) F x. Note that this is well defined because the stalk is a local construction. We give F by declaring the sets [U, f] = {p x (f) : x U} to be a basis. Note the following (obvious) facts. 1. p([u, f]) = U; 2. [V, g] [U, f] implies V U; 3. If φ [U, f] then φ = p x (f) with x = p(φ). Let B be the set of such open sets. Note that B covers X, so we only need to check the intersection property of a basis. Suppose that φ [U, f] [V, g]. Then φ = p x (f) where x = p(φ). Similarly, φ = p x (g) where x = p(φ). We conclude that p x (f) = p x (g), i.e., f and g have the same germ at x. By the definition of stalk equivalence, there is an open set W U V such that f W = g W, and so φ [W, f W = g W ] [U, f] [V, g] 20
21 Now we check that p is a local homeomorphism. To check that p is continuous, let U τ and consider p 1 (U). We have p 1 (U) = {φ F : p(φ) U} = To check that the element on the right hand side is open, let φ p 1 (U). Then φ F x for some x U. Let φ = p x (f) for some f F(V ). Then if we denote W = U V, we see that φ [W, f W ] p 1 (U) Thus p is continuous. To see that p is a local homeomorphism, let φ F. As before let φ F x where x = p(φ). We now claim that p [U,f] is a homeomorphism on U. This is certainly a bijection, and we know that p is continuous, so we only need to show that p 1 [U,f] is continuous. But this is clear: if [V, g] [U, f], then x U F x This completes the proof. p 1 [U,f]([V, g]) = V U We specialize a bit to the case we re interested in. The following holds for any presheaf satisfying a precise version of the identity theorem, but we don t really care. Proposition 4. Let X be a Riemann surface and O be the sheaf of holomorphic functions on X. Then O is Hausdorff. Proof. Suppose that φ 1, φ 2 O are distinct. If p(φ 1 ) p(φ 2 ), then we re done since X is Hausdorff. If we have p(φ 1 ) = p(φ 2 ), then let f i F(U i ) where φ i = p x (f i ). Then φ i [U i, f i ]. Now let U U 1 U 2 be the connected component of U 1 U 2 containing x. Note that we still have φ i [U, f i ]. We claim that these are actually disjoint open sets. Indeed, suppose not. Then the germ of f 1 agrees with the germ of f 2 at some point in the domain U. By the identity theorem, we would conclude that f 1 = f 2 on all of U and so φ 1 = φ 2 (that s why we needed U to be connected). This is a contradiction, so we conclude that O is Hausdorff. Theorem 15. Let X be a Riemann surface and Y a Hausdorff topological space. Suppose that p : Y X is a local homeomorphism. Then there is a unique complex structure on Y which makes p a holomorphic map. Sketch of Proof. I won t prove this: it s posted as notes and it s a standard exercise in charts. This theorem also holds more generally. If you replace X with your favorite kind of manifold and replace complex with your favorite kind of category, the result is still true. 21
22 Essentially, pull back the manifold structure on X to Y via the local homeomorphism, and check that this is unique. We ll now work towards defining an analytic continuation. The idea will be to do this along paths, and then have a monodromy result that says this is well defined. Definition 22. Let X be a Riemann surface and let u : I X be a curve with endpoints a = u(0), b = u(1). Pick φ O a and ψ O b. Then we say that ψ is an analytic continuatino of φ along u if the following holds: 1. There is a partition 0 = t 0 < t 1 < t 2 < < t n = 1 of I and connected open sets U i with u([t i 1, t i ]) U i. 2. There are holomorphic functions f i O(U i ) such that φ = p a (f 1 ), ψ = p b (f n ), and such that f i agree in a precise sense: f Vi = f i+1 Vi, where V i is the connected component of U i U i+1 containing u(t i ). Lemma 2. Let X be a Riemann surface and let u : I X be a curve in X with endpoints a = u(0), b = u(1). Then the germ ψ O b is the analytic continutation of φ O a if and only if there exists a curve û : I O such that û(0) = φ, û(1) = ψ, and p û = u. In this case, we call û a lifting of u. Proof. Suppose first that ψ is an analytic continuation of φ along u. Then set û(t) = p u(t) (f i ) O u(t) if t [t i 1, t i ]. Then we have p û = u (note that û is well defined by the continuation data: f i have the same germs where they agree). To check that û is continuous, we only need to check the basis elements. Suppose that [U, f] O is open and let t û 1 ([U, f]) [0, 1]. Then û(t) = p u(t) (f) = p u(t) (f i ), so f and f i have the same germ at t (for some i). By definition of stalk equivalence, there is an open set W such that u(t) W and W U U i and for which f i W = f W. In particular, the germs of f and f i are the same in W. Then u 1 (W ) is open, contains t, and is contained in û 1 ([U, f]). Thus û is continuous and is a lifting of u. To prove the other direction, suppose that û is a lift of u. For each t I we have û(t) O u(t), where û(t) = p u(t) (f t ) for some f t O(U t ) and where U t X is an open set containing u(t). Thus û(t) [U t, f t ]. The collection of these sets covers û(i), and so by compacts admits a finite refinement. Denote this refinement by {[U i, f i ]} where i = 0,..., n. This gives a partition of I (throw in points if necessary to make the continutation requirement). Moreover, by stalk equivalence, the second condition will be met. This completes the proof. 22
23 What this says is that analytic continuations along a curve are in bijections with lifts of curves to O. They are essentially well defined by the following theorem. Theorem 16 (The Monodromy Theorem). Let X be a Riemann surface and u 0, u 1 be homotopic curves. Denote the homotopy by A : I I X, and the intermediate curves by u s. Suppose that φ O a admits an analytic continuation along each u s. Then the continuation along each u s well defined. One of the main consequences of this is that we will be able to extend functions on simply connected domains. Proof. Suppose u 0 and u 1 start at a X and end at b X. We can lift each u s to some û s : I O. Moreover, the homotopoy lifts to a homotopy  : I I O. Note that û s (0) = φ for all s, and that û s (1) p 1 (b) for each s. Note that these all have to be in the connected component Y of O that contains φ O a, i.e., that û s (t) Y for all s, t. Thus p Y : Y X is a holomorphic map of Riemann surfaces, where Y has a complex structure induced from X. Hence p Y is a holomorphic non constant map, so the fibers are discrete. In particular, {û s (1)} s I is a connected subset of the discrete space p 1 (b), so we conclude that û s (1) = ψ for all s and some ψ. We ll now discuss the happy case when X is simply connected. Definition 23. A topological space X is simply connected if π 1 (X) = 0, i.e., if any two curves with the same start and end points are homotopic. Corollary 6. Let X be a simply connected Riemann surface. Let a X and φ O a. Suppose that φ admits an analytic continuation along any curve starting at a. Then there exists a globally defined holomorphic function f with f a = φ. Proof. Define a function by f(x) = ψ x (x) where ψ x is the analytic continuation of φ from a to x along any curve. This is well defined by the above theorem, and holomorphic since f is locally the germ of a holomorphic function. Note that if X is not simply connected then not all germs can be analytically extended to all points along curves in a well defined way. Example 14. Consider f(z) = z. Note that f isn t analytic at 0, so our best hope would be to define a function f on C, which isn t simply connected. One can check, however, that paths on different sides of the origin produce different continutations. This is why we need to choose a branch of z on a domain which looks like C \ ray. 23
24 [This section needs finishing, but I m leaving it for now.] 3 Calculus on Riemann Surfaces and Differential Forms We now study differential forms on Riemann surfaces and the complexified tangent bundle. As a motivating example, note that we can define a sheaf E on C = R 2 in the following way: E(U) = {f : U C : f is infinitely differentiable wrt x, y} where by differentiable we mean with respect to the partials / x, / y. Moreover, we can define: and z := 1 ( 2 x i ) y z := 1 ( 2 x + i ) y Note that by the Cauchy-Riemann equations, the holomorphic functions are exactly the kernel of / z. Define a new sheaf by O = ker z. This is the sheaf of holomorphic functions on C. In a similar way, we can extend this idea to any Riemann surface, but we have to be careful. Let X be a Riemann surface and let Y X be open. Definition 24. A function f : Y C is differentiable (infinitely differentiable) if for all charts, φ : U Y V C on X, the composition f φ 1 : V C is differentiable. Remarks We only need to check differentiability on a set of charts that cover X, as usual. 2. For our purposes, differentiable will be synonomous with smooth. 3. Holomorphic implies smooth, but the converse is of course false. Now we define E(Y ) = {f : Y C : f diff on Y } to be the sheaf of smooth functions on X, with the obvious restriction maps. If we pick a coordinate chart φ : U C X at a, 24
25 with φ = z = x + iy, then we can also make sense of the partial derivatives with respect to x, y, z, z. They are defined concretely by f x = ( ) x (f φ 1 ) φ = φ x (f φ 1 ) Note that there s a lot implicit in this notation, but it s justified in the sense that we get the usual rules for addition, multiplication etc. Now we ll work on defining a cotangent space. If a X, we set m a to be the ideal of E a consisting of those germs of functions that vanish at a. Moreover, we set m 2 a to be the subset of m a consisting of those germs which vanish to second order, i.e., Remarks 14. m a = {η E a : η = [f] and f(a) = 0} { m 2 a = η m a : η = [f] and f x = f } y = 0 1. This is well defined, in that these ideals don t depend on the choice of chart or representatives. If we have any other chart around a, say (U, φ = z ) then is also zero. f x = f x x x 2. Note that m 2 is a vector subspace of m, so we can define the quotient space T (1) a := m a /m 2 a We call this the cotangent space of X at a. Note that this is complex 2-dimensional, even though X is complex one dimensional. This doesn t quite mesh with the usual tangent space, but there is good reason for this. 3. If f E(U) and a U then the differential d a f T a (1) d a f := [f f(a)] mod m 2 a. of f at a is the element Theorem 17. The space T a (1) has basis given by {d a x, d a y} or {d a z, d a z}. Moreover, if f E(U) for some open set U then and d a f = f x (a)d ax + f y (a)d ay d a f = f z (a)d az + f z (a)d a z 25
26 Proof. To see that these elements space T a (1), suppose that we have t = φ mod m 2 a, and φ = [f] for some f E(U) and f(a) = 0. Then using a Taylor expansion we can write but modulo m 2 a this is just φ = [f] = [c 1 (x x(a)) + c 2 (y y(a)) + higher order terms] c 1 [(x x(a))] + c 2 [y y(a)] and so we have t = c 1 d a x + c 2 d a y. To show that d a x and d a y are linearly independent, suppose that we have c 1, c 2 C such that c a d a x + c 2 d a y = 0 in T a (1). Then consider the function f = c 1 (x x(a)) + c 2 (y y(a)) E(U) We have [f] = c 1 d a x + c 2 d a y, but on the other hand we ve seen that c 1 = f/ x(a) = 0, and c 2 = f/ y(a) = 0. Thus these elements are linearly independent. A similar proof shows that {d a z, d a z} form a basis. We see that there are two natural vector subspaces of T (1) a. Definition 25. We define cotangent vectors of type (1, 0) and (0, 1). If (U, φ = z) is a coordinate chart with a U, then by above T a (1) = span C {d a z, d a z}. We set T 1,0 a T 0,1 a = Cd a z = Cd a z It turns out that span R {d a x, d a y} is exactly T a, but we want to keep information about the complex structure on X. That s why this is a bit bigger, even if it seems a bit morally wrong. Remark 15. This definition is independent of the coordinate chart chosen. another chart (U, z ) then note that d a z = z z (a)d az + z z (a)d a z The second term vanishes since φ and φ are holomorphic charts. Note: If we pick z ( ) z = φ z (φ φ 1 ) = 0 Hence while changing coordinate charts may scale the vector spaces Ta 1,0 and Ta 0,1, but the subspaces remain invariant. We thus have T (1) a = T 1,0 a T 0,1 a. 26
Introduction to. Riemann Surfaces. Lecture Notes. Armin Rainer. dim H 0 (X, L D ) dim H 0 (X, L 1 D ) = 1 g deg D
Introduction to Riemann Surfaces Lecture Notes Armin Rainer dim H 0 (X, L D ) dim H 0 (X, L 1 D ) = 1 g deg D June 17, 2018 PREFACE i Preface These are lecture notes for the course Riemann surfaces held
More informationPart II. Riemann Surfaces. Year
Part II Year 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2018 96 Paper 2, Section II 23F State the uniformisation theorem. List without proof the Riemann surfaces which are uniformised
More informationis holomorphic. In other words, a holomorphic function is a collection of compatible holomorphic functions on all charts.
RIEMANN SURFACES 2. Week 2. Basic definitions 2.1. Smooth manifolds. Complex manifolds. Let X be a topological space. A (real) chart of X is a pair (U, f : U R n ) where U is an open subset of X and f
More information3. The Sheaf of Regular Functions
24 Andreas Gathmann 3. The Sheaf of Regular Functions After having defined affine varieties, our next goal must be to say what kind of maps between them we want to consider as morphisms, i. e. as nice
More informationRIEMANN SURFACES. LECTURE NOTES. WINTER SEMESTER 2015/2016.
RIEMANN SURFACES. LECTURE NOTES. WINTER SEMESTER 2015/2016. A PRELIMINARY AND PROBABLY VERY RAW VERSION. OLEKSANDR IENA Contents Some prerequisites for the whole lecture course. 5 1. Lecture 1 5 1.1. Definition
More informationGeometry 2: Manifolds and sheaves
Rules:Exam problems would be similar to ones marked with! sign. It is recommended to solve all unmarked and!-problems or to find the solution online. It s better to do it in order starting from the beginning,
More informationPICARD S THEOREM STEFAN FRIEDL
PICARD S THEOREM STEFAN FRIEDL Abstract. We give a summary for the proof of Picard s Theorem. The proof is for the most part an excerpt of [F]. 1. Introduction Definition. Let U C be an open subset. A
More informationLet X be a topological space. We want it to look locally like C. So we make the following definition.
February 17, 2010 1 Riemann surfaces 1.1 Definitions and examples Let X be a topological space. We want it to look locally like C. So we make the following definition. Definition 1. A complex chart on
More informationDefinition We say that a topological manifold X is C p if there is an atlas such that the transition functions are C p.
13. Riemann surfaces Definition 13.1. Let X be a topological space. We say that X is a topological manifold, if (1) X is Hausdorff, (2) X is 2nd countable (that is, there is a base for the topology which
More informationABSTRACT DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY VIA SHEAF THEORY
ABSTRACT DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY VIA SHEAF THEORY ARDA H. DEMIRHAN Abstract. We examine the conditions for uniqueness of differentials in the abstract setting of differential geometry. Then we ll come up
More informationCOMPLEX ALGEBRAIC SURFACES CLASS 9
COMPLEX ALGEBRAIC SURFACES CLASS 9 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Construction of Castelnuovo s contraction map 1 2. Ruled surfaces 3 (At the end of last lecture I discussed the Weak Factorization Theorem, Resolution
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 5
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 5 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. The inverse image sheaf 1 2. Recovering sheaves from a sheaf on a base 3 3. Toward schemes 5 4. The underlying set of affine schemes 6 Last
More informationX G X by the rule x x g
18. Maps between Riemann surfaces: II Note that there is one further way we can reverse all of this. Suppose that X instead of Y is a Riemann surface. Can we put a Riemann surface structure on Y such that
More information1 Structures 2. 2 Framework of Riemann surfaces Basic configuration Holomorphic functions... 3
Compact course notes Riemann surfaces Fall 2011 Professor: S. Lvovski transcribed by: J. Lazovskis Independent University of Moscow December 23, 2011 Contents 1 Structures 2 2 Framework of Riemann surfaces
More informationElementary (ha-ha) Aspects of Topos Theory
Elementary (ha-ha) Aspects of Topos Theory Matt Booth June 3, 2016 Contents 1 Sheaves on topological spaces 1 1.1 Presheaves on spaces......................... 1 1.2 Digression on pointless topology..................
More information7.2 Conformal mappings
7.2 Conformal mappings Let f be an analytic function. At points where f (z) 0 such a map has the remarkable property that it is conformal. This means that angle is preserved (in the sense that any 2 smooth
More informationwhich is a group homomorphism, such that if W V U, then
4. Sheaves Definition 4.1. Let X be a topological space. A presheaf of groups F on X is a a function which assigns to every open set U X a group F(U) and to every inclusion V U a restriction map, ρ UV
More informationMath 396. Bijectivity vs. isomorphism
Math 396. Bijectivity vs. isomorphism 1. Motivation Let f : X Y be a C p map between two C p -premanifolds with corners, with 1 p. Assuming f is bijective, we would like a criterion to tell us that f 1
More informationHARTSHORNE EXERCISES
HARTSHORNE EXERCISES J. WARNER Hartshorne, Exercise I.5.6. Blowing Up Curve Singularities (a) Let Y be the cusp x 3 = y 2 + x 4 + y 4 or the node xy = x 6 + y 6. Show that the curve Ỹ obtained by blowing
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 43
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 43 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Facts we ll soon know about curves 1 1. FACTS WE LL SOON KNOW ABOUT CURVES We almost know enough to say a lot of interesting things about
More informationInverse Galois Problem for C(t)
Inverse Galois Problem for C(t) Padmavathi Srinivasan PuMaGraSS March 2, 2012 Outline 1 The problem 2 Compact Riemann Surfaces 3 Covering Spaces 4 Connection to field theory 5 Proof of the Main theorem
More informationLECTURE 1: SOME GENERALITIES; 1 DIMENSIONAL EXAMPLES
LECTURE 1: SOME GENERALITIES; 1 DIMENSIONAL EAMPLES VIVEK SHENDE Historically, sheaves come from topology and analysis; subsequently they have played a fundamental role in algebraic geometry and certain
More informationNONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN
NONSINGULAR CURVES BRIAN OSSERMAN The primary goal of this note is to prove that every abstract nonsingular curve can be realized as an open subset of a (unique) nonsingular projective curve. Note that
More informationThe Canonical Sheaf. Stefano Filipazzi. September 14, 2015
The Canonical Sheaf Stefano Filipazzi September 14, 015 These notes are supposed to be a handout for the student seminar in algebraic geometry at the University of Utah. In this seminar, we will go over
More informationAlgebraic Geometry Spring 2009
MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry
More information14 Lecture 14: Basic generallities on adic spaces
14 Lecture 14: Basic generallities on adic spaces 14.1 Introduction The aim of this lecture and the next two is to address general adic spaces and their connection to rigid geometry. 14.2 Two open questions
More informationElliptic Curves as Complex Tori
Elliptic Curves as Complex Tori Theo Coyne June 20, 207 Misc. Prerequisites For an elliptic curve E given by Y 2 Z = X 2 + axz 2 + bz 3, we define its j- invariant to be j(e = 728(4a3 4a 3 +27b. Two elliptic
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 24 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Vector bundles and locally free sheaves 1 2. Toward quasicoherent sheaves: the distinguished affine base 5 Quasicoherent and coherent sheaves
More informationConnectedness. Proposition 2.2. The following are equivalent for a topological space (X, T ).
Connectedness 1 Motivation Connectedness is the sort of topological property that students love. Its definition is intuitive and easy to understand, and it is a powerful tool in proofs of well-known results.
More informationAlgebraic v.s. Analytic Point of View
Algebraic v.s. Analytic Point of View Ziwen Zhu September 19, 2015 In this talk, we will compare 3 different yet similar objects of interest in algebraic and complex geometry, namely algebraic variety,
More informationRIEMANN S INEQUALITY AND RIEMANN-ROCH
RIEMANN S INEQUALITY AND RIEMANN-ROCH DONU ARAPURA Fix a compact connected Riemann surface X of genus g. Riemann s inequality gives a sufficient condition to construct meromorphic functions with prescribed
More informationB 1 = {B(x, r) x = (x 1, x 2 ) H, 0 < r < x 2 }. (a) Show that B = B 1 B 2 is a basis for a topology on X.
Math 6342/7350: Topology and Geometry Sample Preliminary Exam Questions 1. For each of the following topological spaces X i, determine whether X i and X i X i are homeomorphic. (a) X 1 = [0, 1] (b) X 2
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 48
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 48 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. A little more about cubic plane curves 1 2. Line bundles of degree 4, and Poncelet s Porism 1 3. Fun counterexamples using elliptic curves
More informationCW-complexes. Stephen A. Mitchell. November 1997
CW-complexes Stephen A. Mitchell November 1997 A CW-complex is first of all a Hausdorff space X equipped with a collection of characteristic maps φ n α : D n X. Here n ranges over the nonnegative integers,
More informationLocally G-ringed spaces and rigid spaces
18.727, Topics in Algebraic Geometry (rigid analytic geometry) Kiran S. Kedlaya, fall 2004 Rigid analytic spaces (at last!) We are now ready to talk about rigid analytic spaces in earnest. I ll give the
More information10. Smooth Varieties. 82 Andreas Gathmann
82 Andreas Gathmann 10. Smooth Varieties Let a be a point on a variety X. In the last chapter we have introduced the tangent cone C a X as a way to study X locally around a (see Construction 9.20). It
More informationALGEBRAIC GROUPS. Disclaimer: There are millions of errors in these notes!
ALGEBRAIC GROUPS Disclaimer: There are millions of errors in these notes! 1. Some algebraic geometry The subject of algebraic groups depends on the interaction between algebraic geometry and group theory.
More informationMath 248B. Applications of base change for coherent cohomology
Math 248B. Applications of base change for coherent cohomology 1. Motivation Recall the following fundamental general theorem, the so-called cohomology and base change theorem: Theorem 1.1 (Grothendieck).
More informationwhere m is the maximal ideal of O X,p. Note that m/m 2 is a vector space. Suppose that we are given a morphism
8. Smoothness and the Zariski tangent space We want to give an algebraic notion of the tangent space. In differential geometry, tangent vectors are equivalence classes of maps of intervals in R into the
More information2. Prime and Maximal Ideals
18 Andreas Gathmann 2. Prime and Maximal Ideals There are two special kinds of ideals that are of particular importance, both algebraically and geometrically: the so-called prime and maximal ideals. Let
More informationfy (X(g)) Y (f)x(g) gy (X(f)) Y (g)x(f)) = fx(y (g)) + gx(y (f)) fy (X(g)) gy (X(f))
1. Basic algebra of vector fields Let V be a finite dimensional vector space over R. Recall that V = {L : V R} is defined to be the set of all linear maps to R. V is isomorphic to V, but there is no canonical
More informationNOTES ON DIVISORS AND RIEMANN-ROCH
NOTES ON DIVISORS AND RIEMANN-ROCH NILAY KUMAR Recall that due to the maximum principle, there are no nonconstant holomorphic functions on a compact complex manifold. The next best objects to study, as
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Some constructions using universal properties, old and new 1 2. Adjoint functors 3 3. Sheaves 6 Last day: What is algebraic geometry? Crash
More informationHodge Theory of Maps
Hodge Theory of Maps Migliorini and de Cataldo June 24, 2010 1 Migliorini 1 - Hodge Theory of Maps The existence of a Kähler form give strong topological constraints via Hodge theory. Can we get similar
More informationNOTES IN COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA: PART 2
NOTES IN COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA: PART 2 KELLER VANDEBOGERT 1. Completion of a Ring/Module Here we shall consider two seemingly different constructions for the completion of a module and show that indeed they
More informationAfter taking the square and expanding, we get x + y 2 = (x + y) (x + y) = x 2 + 2x y + y 2, inequality in analysis, we obtain.
Lecture 1: August 25 Introduction. Topology grew out of certain questions in geometry and analysis about 100 years ago. As Wikipedia puts it, the motivating insight behind topology is that some geometric
More informationMath 213br HW 3 solutions
Math 13br HW 3 solutions February 6, 014 Problem 1 Show that for each d 1, there exists a complex torus X = C/Λ and an analytic map f : X X of degree d. Let Λ be the lattice Z Z d. It is stable under multiplication
More informationTopological properties
CHAPTER 4 Topological properties 1. Connectedness Definitions and examples Basic properties Connected components Connected versus path connected, again 2. Compactness Definition and first examples Topological
More informationAlgebraic Geometry. Andreas Gathmann. Class Notes TU Kaiserslautern 2014
Algebraic Geometry Andreas Gathmann Class Notes TU Kaiserslautern 2014 Contents 0. Introduction......................... 3 1. Affine Varieties........................ 9 2. The Zariski Topology......................
More informationSolutions to some of the exercises from Tennison s Sheaf Theory
Solutions to some of the exercises from Tennison s Sheaf Theory Pieter Belmans June 19, 2011 Contents 1 Exercises at the end of Chapter 1 1 2 Exercises in Chapter 2 6 3 Exercises at the end of Chapter
More informationLECTURE 6: J-HOLOMORPHIC CURVES AND APPLICATIONS
LECTURE 6: J-HOLOMORPHIC CURVES AND APPLICATIONS WEIMIN CHEN, UMASS, SPRING 07 1. Basic elements of J-holomorphic curve theory Let (M, ω) be a symplectic manifold of dimension 2n, and let J J (M, ω) be
More informationTheorem 5.3. Let E/F, E = F (u), be a simple field extension. Then u is algebraic if and only if E/F is finite. In this case, [E : F ] = deg f u.
5. Fields 5.1. Field extensions. Let F E be a subfield of the field E. We also describe this situation by saying that E is an extension field of F, and we write E/F to express this fact. If E/F is a field
More informationMATH 566 LECTURE NOTES 4: ISOLATED SINGULARITIES AND THE RESIDUE THEOREM
MATH 566 LECTURE NOTES 4: ISOLATED SINGULARITIES AND THE RESIDUE THEOREM TSOGTGEREL GANTUMUR 1. Functions holomorphic on an annulus Let A = D R \D r be an annulus centered at 0 with 0 < r < R
More information9. Birational Maps and Blowing Up
72 Andreas Gathmann 9. Birational Maps and Blowing Up In the course of this class we have already seen many examples of varieties that are almost the same in the sense that they contain isomorphic dense
More informationMath 210B. Artin Rees and completions
Math 210B. Artin Rees and completions 1. Definitions and an example Let A be a ring, I an ideal, and M an A-module. In class we defined the I-adic completion of M to be M = lim M/I n M. We will soon show
More informationA First Lecture on Sheaf Cohomology
A First Lecture on Sheaf Cohomology Elizabeth Gasparim Departamento de Matemática, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco Cidade Universitária, Recife, PE, BRASIL, 50670-901 gasparim@dmat.ufpe.br I. THE DEFINITION
More informationHolomorphic line bundles
Chapter 2 Holomorphic line bundles In the absence of non-constant holomorphic functions X! C on a compact complex manifold, we turn to the next best thing, holomorphic sections of line bundles (i.e., rank
More informationMath 541 Fall 2008 Connectivity Transition from Math 453/503 to Math 541 Ross E. Staffeldt-August 2008
Math 541 Fall 2008 Connectivity Transition from Math 453/503 to Math 541 Ross E. Staffeldt-August 2008 Closed sets We have been operating at a fundamental level at which a topological space is a set together
More informationFrom the definition of a surface, each point has a neighbourhood U and a homeomorphism. U : ϕ U(U U ) ϕ U (U U )
3 Riemann surfaces 3.1 Definitions and examples From the definition of a surface, each point has a neighbourhood U and a homeomorphism ϕ U from U to an open set V in R 2. If two such neighbourhoods U,
More informationCALCULUS ON MANIFOLDS
CALCULUS ON MANIFOLDS 1. Manifolds Morally, manifolds are topological spaces which locally look like open balls of the Euclidean space R n. One can construct them by piecing together such balls ( cells
More informationPart V. 17 Introduction: What are measures and why measurable sets. Lebesgue Integration Theory
Part V 7 Introduction: What are measures and why measurable sets Lebesgue Integration Theory Definition 7. (Preliminary). A measure on a set is a function :2 [ ] such that. () = 2. If { } = is a finite
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 25
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 25 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Quasicoherent sheaves 1 2. Quasicoherent sheaves form an abelian category 5 We began by recalling the distinguished affine base. Definition.
More informationCOMPLEX ANALYSIS AND RIEMANN SURFACES
COMPLEX ANALYSIS AND RIEMANN SURFACES KEATON QUINN 1 A review of complex analysis Preliminaries The complex numbers C are a 1-dimensional vector space over themselves and so a 2-dimensional vector space
More informationRiemann surfaces. 3.1 Definitions
3 Riemann surfaces In this chapter we define and give the first properties of Riemann surfaces. These are the holomorphic counterpart of the (real) differential manifolds. We will see how the Fuchsian
More informationAlgebraic Curves and Riemann Surfaces
Algebraic Curves and Riemann Surfaces Rick Miranda Graduate Studies in Mathematics Volume 5 If American Mathematical Society Contents Preface xix Chapter I. Riemann Surfaces: Basic Definitions 1 1. Complex
More informationHomework in Topology, Spring 2009.
Homework in Topology, Spring 2009. Björn Gustafsson April 29, 2009 1 Generalities To pass the course you should hand in correct and well-written solutions of approximately 10-15 of the problems. For higher
More informationMath 205C - Topology Midterm
Math 205C - Topology Midterm Erin Pearse 1. a) State the definition of an n-dimensional topological (differentiable) manifold. An n-dimensional topological manifold is a topological space that is Hausdorff,
More informationAlgebraic Geometry Spring 2009
MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry
More informationExercises from Vakil
Exercises from Vakil Ian Coley February 6, 2015 2 Sheaves 2.1 Motivating example: The sheaf of differentiable functions Exercise 2.1.A. Show that the only maximal ideal of the germ of differentiable functions
More informationIntroduction to Topology
Introduction to Topology Randall R. Holmes Auburn University Typeset by AMS-TEX Chapter 1. Metric Spaces 1. Definition and Examples. As the course progresses we will need to review some basic notions about
More informationHomework 3 MTH 869 Algebraic Topology
Homework 3 MTH 869 Algebraic Topology Joshua Ruiter February 12, 2018 Proposition 0.1 (Exercise 1.1.10). Let (X, x 0 ) and (Y, y 0 ) be pointed, path-connected spaces. Let f : I X y 0 } and g : I x 0 }
More informationFOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 3
FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 3 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Kernels, cokernels, and exact sequences: A brief introduction to abelian categories 1 2. Sheaves 7 3. Motivating example: The sheaf of differentiable
More informationChapter 1. Smooth Manifolds
Chapter 1. Smooth Manifolds Theorem 1. [Exercise 1.18] Let M be a topological manifold. Then any two smooth atlases for M determine the same smooth structure if and only if their union is a smooth atlas.
More information(1) is an invertible sheaf on X, which is generated by the global sections
7. Linear systems First a word about the base scheme. We would lie to wor in enough generality to cover the general case. On the other hand, it taes some wor to state properly the general results if one
More informationRiemann Surfaces. Dr C. Teleman 1. Lent Term L A TEXed by James Lingard please send all comments and corrections to
Riemann Surfaces Dr C. Teleman 1 Lent Term 2001 1 L A TEXed by James Lingard please send all comments and corrections to james@lingard.com Lecture 1 What are Riemann surfaces and where do they come from?
More informationAn Outline of Homology Theory
An Outline of Homology Theory Stephen A. Mitchell June 1997, revised October 2001 Note: These notes contain few examples and even fewer proofs. They are intended only as an outline, to be supplemented
More informationElliptic Curves and Elliptic Functions
Elliptic Curves and Elliptic Functions ARASH ISLAMI Professor: Dr. Chung Pang Mok McMaster University - Math 790 June 7, 01 Abstract Elliptic curves are algebraic curves of genus 1 which can be embedded
More informationAxioms of separation
Axioms of separation These notes discuss the same topic as Sections 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, and also 7, 10 of Munkres book. Some notions (hereditarily normal, perfectly normal, collectionwise normal, monotonically
More informationMini-Course on Moduli Spaces
Mini-Course on Moduli Spaces Emily Clader June 2011 1 What is a Moduli Space? 1.1 What should a moduli space do? Suppose that we want to classify some kind of object, for example: Curves of genus g, One-dimensional
More informationEach is equal to CP 1 minus one point, which is the origin of the other: (C =) U 1 = CP 1 the line λ (1, 0) U 0
Algebraic Curves/Fall 2015 Aaron Bertram 1. Introduction. What is a complex curve? (Geometry) It s a Riemann surface, that is, a compact oriented twodimensional real manifold Σ with a complex structure.
More informationCOMPLEX VARIETIES AND THE ANALYTIC TOPOLOGY
COMPLEX VARIETIES AND THE ANALYTIC TOPOLOGY BRIAN OSSERMAN Classical algebraic geometers studied algebraic varieties over the complex numbers. In this setting, they didn t have to worry about the Zariski
More informationarxiv:math/ v1 [math.ag] 18 Oct 2003
Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. (Math. Sci.) Vol. 113, No. 2, May 2003, pp. 139 152. Printed in India The Jacobian of a nonorientable Klein surface arxiv:math/0310288v1 [math.ag] 18 Oct 2003 PABLO ARÉS-GASTESI
More informationManifolds and tangent bundles. Vector fields and flows. 1 Differential manifolds, smooth maps, submanifolds
MA 755 Fall 05. Notes #1. I. Kogan. Manifolds and tangent bundles. Vector fields and flows. 1 Differential manifolds, smooth maps, submanifolds Definition 1 An n-dimensional C k -differentiable manifold
More information(1) Let π Ui : U i R k U i be the natural projection. Then π π 1 (U i ) = π i τ i. In other words, we have the following commutative diagram: U i R k
1. Vector Bundles Convention: All manifolds here are Hausdorff and paracompact. To make our life easier, we will assume that all topological spaces are homeomorphic to CW complexes unless stated otherwise.
More informationDivision Algebras and Parallelizable Spheres, Part II
Division Algebras and Parallelizable Spheres, Part II Seminartalk by Jerome Wettstein April 5, 2018 1 A quick Recap of Part I We are working on proving the following Theorem: Theorem 1.1. The following
More informationMATRIX LIE GROUPS AND LIE GROUPS
MATRIX LIE GROUPS AND LIE GROUPS Steven Sy December 7, 2005 I MATRIX LIE GROUPS Definition: A matrix Lie group is a closed subgroup of Thus if is any sequence of matrices in, and for some, then either
More informationIntroduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 2013 Lecture #24 12/03/2013
18.78 Introduction to Arithmetic Geometry Fall 013 Lecture #4 1/03/013 4.1 Isogenies of elliptic curves Definition 4.1. Let E 1 /k and E /k be elliptic curves with distinguished rational points O 1 and
More information12. Linear systems Theorem Let X be a scheme over a ring A. (1) If φ: X P n A is an A-morphism then L = φ O P n
12. Linear systems Theorem 12.1. Let X be a scheme over a ring A. (1) If φ: X P n A is an A-morphism then L = φ O P n A (1) is an invertible sheaf on X, which is generated by the global sections s 0, s
More information8 Complete fields and valuation rings
18.785 Number theory I Fall 2017 Lecture #8 10/02/2017 8 Complete fields and valuation rings In order to make further progress in our investigation of finite extensions L/K of the fraction field K of a
More informationOr, more succinctly, lim
Lecture 7. Functions and Stuff PCMI Summer 2015 Undergraduate Lectures on Flag Varieties Lecture 7. Functions and differentiable and analytic manifolds. The implicit function theorem, cotangent spaces
More informationAN INTRODUCTION TO AFFINE SCHEMES
AN INTRODUCTION TO AFFINE SCHEMES BROOKE ULLERY Abstract. This paper gives a basic introduction to modern algebraic geometry. The goal of this paper is to present the basic concepts of algebraic geometry,
More informationAlgebraic Topology. Oscar Randal-Williams. or257/teaching/notes/at.pdf
Algebraic Topology Oscar Randal-Williams https://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/ or257/teaching/notes/at.pdf 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Some recollections and conventions...................... 2 1.2 Cell complexes.................................
More informationLemma 1.3. The element [X, X] is nonzero.
Math 210C. The remarkable SU(2) Let G be a non-commutative connected compact Lie group, and assume that its rank (i.e., dimension of maximal tori) is 1; equivalently, G is a compact connected Lie group
More information1. Simplify the following. Solution: = {0} Hint: glossary: there is for all : such that & and
Topology MT434P Problems/Homework Recommended Reading: Munkres, J.R. Topology Hatcher, A. Algebraic Topology, http://www.math.cornell.edu/ hatcher/at/atpage.html For those who have a lot of outstanding
More informationFormal power series rings, inverse limits, and I-adic completions of rings
Formal power series rings, inverse limits, and I-adic completions of rings Formal semigroup rings and formal power series rings We next want to explore the notion of a (formal) power series ring in finitely
More informationGeometry Qualifying Exam Notes
Geometry Qualifying Exam Notes F 1 F 1 x 1 x n Definition: The Jacobian matrix of a map f : N M is.. F m F m x 1 x n square matrix, its determinant is called the Jacobian determinant.. When this is a Definition:
More informationAlgebraic Topology M3P solutions 1
Algebraic Topology M3P21 2015 solutions 1 AC Imperial College London a.corti@imperial.ac.uk 9 th February 2015 (1) (a) Quotient maps are continuous, so preimages of closed sets are closed (preimages of
More informationRIEMANN SURFACES. max(0, deg x f)x.
RIEMANN SURFACES 10. Weeks 11 12: Riemann-Roch theorem and applications 10.1. Divisors. The notion of a divisor looks very simple. Let X be a compact Riemann surface. A divisor is an expression a x x x
More informationAlgebraic Varieties. Notes by Mateusz Micha lek for the lecture on April 17, 2018, in the IMPRS Ringvorlesung Introduction to Nonlinear Algebra
Algebraic Varieties Notes by Mateusz Micha lek for the lecture on April 17, 2018, in the IMPRS Ringvorlesung Introduction to Nonlinear Algebra Algebraic varieties represent solutions of a system of polynomial
More informationIV. Conformal Maps. 1. Geometric interpretation of differentiability. 2. Automorphisms of the Riemann sphere: Möbius transformations
MTH6111 Complex Analysis 2009-10 Lecture Notes c Shaun Bullett 2009 IV. Conformal Maps 1. Geometric interpretation of differentiability We saw from the definition of complex differentiability that if f
More information