MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $N$ be a symplectic submanifold of $M$. Symplectic blow up of $M$ along $N$ is an operation replacing a tubular neighborhood of $N$ with the projectivization of that neighborhood. So it decreases the volume. I have a question on the change of symplectic capacities.

A symplectic capacity $c$ is a function from the set of symplectic manifolds to $[0, \infty]$ satisfying

  1. $c(M_1) \leq c(M_2)$ if we can embed $M_1$ into $M_2$ symplectically,

  2. $c(M, k\omega) = |k| c(M, \omega)$ for $k \neq 0$, and

  3. $c(B^{2n}(r)) = c (B^2(r) \times \mathbb{R}^{2n-2}) = \pi r^2$, where $B^{2n}(r)$ is a $2n$-dimensional ball of radius $r$.

Symplectic capacities may not change after symplectic blow ups. But it seems to me that it is impossible that symplectic blow ups increase symplectic capacities. I couldn't prove this. Can symplectic blow up increase symplectic capacities?

share|cite|improve this question
Neat question. Seems plausible for Gromov width. What is your motivation? – Nathaniel Bottman Oct 27 '13 at 16:57
up vote 1 down vote accepted

The answer is yes.

Let $c$ be the Gromov width except we put $c(M)=\infty$ if $M$ admits an embedding of $B^{2n}(r)$ with $0$ blown up for some $r$.

Using that Gromov width is a capacity it is easy to check 1-3 above, and blowing up $B^{2n}(1)$ at 0 changes this capacity from 1 to $\infty$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.