Do representations of Fuchsian groups have unitary deformations? - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net2013-05-21T14:40:27Zhttp://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/74791http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdfhttp://mathoverflow.net/questions/74791/do-representations-of-fuchsian-groups-have-unitary-deformationsDo representations of Fuchsian groups have unitary deformations?anton2011-09-07T20:28:22Z2011-09-07T20:41:01Z
<p>Let $G$ be $SL_2({\mathbb C})$ and for $a,b\in G$ let $[a,b]=aba^{-1}b^{-1}$ be the commutator bracket. Let $n$ be a natural number $\ge 2$ and let
$X\subset G^{2n}$ be the set of all $g\in G^{2n}$ such that
$$
[g_1,g_2]\cdots[g_{2n-1},g_{2n}]=1.
$$
The first question is, whether $X$ is connected.
If not, can one give a list of the connected components?
Finally, does the subset $SU(2)^{2n}\cap X$ meet every connected component?</p>
<p>If the last question has an affirmative answer, every $G$-valued representation of the fundamental group $\Gamma$ of a compact Riemann surface of genus $n$ can be deformed to a unitary one, which explains the title of my question. </p>
http://mathoverflow.net/questions/74791/do-representations-of-fuchsian-groups-have-unitary-deformations/74793#74793Answer by Richard Kent for Do representations of Fuchsian groups have unitary deformations?Richard Kent2011-09-07T20:35:27Z2011-09-07T20:41:01Z<p>$X$ is the $SL_2(\mathbb{C})$--representation variety of the surface group, and, by Goldman's thesis, it is irreducible, and so connected.</p>
<p>See </p>
<p>Goldman, Topological components of spaces of representations.
Invent. Math. 93 (1988), no. 3, 557–607.</p>
<p>If you take $G$ to be $PSL_2(\mathbb{C})$, then there are two components (see also Goldman), one for each Stiefel-Whitney class.</p>
<p>Edit: I should say that I recall that this is perhaps not so easy to find in Goldman's paper as he doesn't state it explicitly, but at some point he proves that the smooth locus of $X$ is connected, which gives the result.</p>