Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

This is probably trivial but has been bothering me all day.

Suppose $f:\Sigma_g\to \mathbb{S}^2$ is a $g+1$ fold branched conformal map with $\Sigma_g$ a connected genus $g$ surface and $f$ having $4$ branch points (all of order $g+1$).

Is it true that $f:\Sigma_g^* \to (\mathbb{S}^2)^*$ (the cover obtained by removing the branch points) is a regular cover (i.e. so the deck group acts transitively on the fibers of $f$)?

I thought this was obvious but then realized I didn't know how to prove it (admittedly this is a bit outside my area of expertise). Part of the problem is that I don't have a good example of a branched map from a connected surface which is not a regular cover away from the branch points.

Edit

Based on some comments of Sebastian. It would be enough for my purposes to prove that the conformal structure of $\Sigma_g$ was uniquely determined by the cross-ratio of the branch points. However, its not clear to me whether this can be shown without knowing that the cover is regular...

share|improve this question
1  
There is also a visual proof of this fact: Topological (the Riemann surface structure of $\Sigma_g$ is determined by the cross-ratio of the four branch images, in the case of the Lawson surface it is 2), the map is the same as the quotient by the $g+1$ symmetry of the Lawson minimal surface $\xi_{g,1}.$ But this symmetry is given by rotation by $2\pi/(g+1)$ around a great circle, and one sees that $f$ is regular. –  Sebastian Mar 5 '13 at 7:45
    
@Sebastian That's an interesting point. My motivation is actually coming from minimal surfaces so it might make sense to think about things this way. –  Rbega Mar 5 '13 at 8:38
    
@Sebastian Can you expand on your comment? I'm having a hard time convincing myself that $\Sigma_g$ and $\xi_{g,1}$ are conformally equivalent when the cross-ratio of the branch points is $2$. Maybe I am misunderstanding... –  Rbega Mar 5 '13 at 9:34
    
This is just a consequence of Riemann-Hurwitz and the construction of the Lawson surface $\xi_{g,1}:$ the $(g+1)-$symmetry is isometric and orientation preserving (both on the surface and in 3 space), hence it gives a holomorphic symmetry of the Riemann surface. By construction, it has 4 fix points, and all are of order (g+1). The quotient (as a Riemann surface) $\xi_{g,1}/\mathbb Z_{g+1}$ is the projective line. –  Sebastian Mar 5 '13 at 10:11
    
@Sebastian I understand that $\xi_{g,1}$ has the claimed symmetry. I'm just not convinced that showing $\Sigma_{g}$ and $\xi_{g,1}$ are conformally equivalent does not depend on knowing that the cover is regular. As I said maybe I'm missing something... –  Rbega Mar 5 '13 at 10:20
show 1 more comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 6 down vote accepted

The answer is no:

The monodromy group of the cover, as a permutation group on the fiber $f^{-1}(b)$ of a non-branch point $b$, is generated by four elements $s_1,s_2,s_3,s_4$ with $s_1s_2s_3s_4=1$. By Riemann's existence theorem, the question is equivalent to the following, with $n=g+1$:

Let $s_1,s_2,s_3,s_4$ be $n$-cycles in the symmetric group on $n$ letters with $s_1s_2s_3s_4=1$. Does this imply that the group generated by $s_1, s_2,s_3, s_4$ has order $n$?

This does not hold for $n=4$: Take for example $s_1=(1, 2, 3, 4)$, $s_2=(1, 3, 4, 2)$, $s_3=s_2^{-1}$, $s_4=s_1^{-1}$. Then $s_1s_2s_3s_4=1$, but $s_1s_2=(2, 4, 3)$.

This works for any $n\ge4$: Simply take $s_1$ an $n$-cycle and $s_2$ another $n$-cycle which is not a power of $s_1$, and $s_3$, $s_4$ the inverses of $s_2$ and $s_1$ as above.

(Note: I use the right action of permutations, so in $s_1s_2$, one first applies $s_1$, and then $s_2$ afterwards.)

share|improve this answer
    
This seems pretty compelling to me, but I'm pretty confused about this stuff. –  Rbega Mar 5 '13 at 15:04
    
I agree that my answer was incorrect. I withdrew it. Sorry. –  Alexandre Eremenko Mar 5 '13 at 16:26
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.