MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

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

Everyone seems to use the slope definition of stability for vector bundles without making any mention to the fact that this should be the correct definition describing that a stable equivalence class of vector bundles is then equivalent to a stable orbit under the action of the gauge group on say, the space of all connections.

Edit:

To be more precise, The notion of a stable orbit of a group action requires that, say, the stabilizer of an element be discrete. Now, viewing vector bundles as isomorphism classes under the action of the gauge group, one says that a vector bundle is stable if it satisfies the slope condition (all sub-bundles have strictly less slope). The question is, how is this slope inequality equivalent to the definition of stable orbit for group actions.

share|cite|improve this question
    
"this should be the correct definition": what is here "this"? Could you edit the language of your question? I have difficoulties understanding it. It is fine if you use more than one sentence... – András Bátkai Aug 6 '13 at 18:50
    
Okie, I have edited the question. Please let me know if it is now up to snuff. – BenSmith Aug 7 '13 at 15:01

Your Answer

 
discard

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.