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 $X$ be a compact Riemann surface with genus $2$ and $M^2$ the moduli space of stable principal $SL(2)$-bundles of rank $r$. We know that $M^2$ is a complex projective variety of dimention $r^2(g-1)+1=r^2+1$. I have to prove that if $p \in M^2$ is a smooth point then $T_pM^2 \simeq H^1(X,\mathfrak{sl}(2))$. With $\mathfrak{sl}(2)$ we mean the adjoint bundle. I suppose that $H^1(X,\mathfrak{sl}(2))$ is the sheaf cohomology with coefficients the holomorphic sections of $\mathfrak{sl}(2)$ and they can be regarded as an infinite dimentional Lie algebra. How can I prove the isomorphism $T_pM^2 \simeq H^1(X,\mathfrak{sl}(2))$? If I have $M$ the moduli space of stable principal $G$-bundles ($G$ is a simple Lie group) over a compact Riemann surface $X$, how can I prove, in general setting, that $T_pM \simeq H^1(X,\mathfrak{g})$?

share|cite|improve this question
why do you happen to have to prove that? – Fernando Muro Oct 22 '13 at 9:02
@FernandoMuro Because I read it but I don't know how can I do it... – Ste Oct 22 '13 at 9:29
The cohomology should be on $X$, not on $M^2$. Also the cohomology group is finite dimensional. Finally, the cohomology group does not (obviously) have any nontrivial structure of Lie algebra. It might have a structure of module over the Lie algebra $H^0(X,\mathfrak{sl}_{2,E})$, where $E$ is the original bundle and where $\mathfrak{sl}_{2,E}$ is the associated adjoint bundle. But the stability condition means this Lie algebra will just be $\mathbb{C}$, so the module structure is pretty useless. – Jason Starr Oct 22 '13 at 12:44
@JasonStarr I'm sorry... So I have some questions: 1) How can I prove that $T_pM \simeq H^1(X,\mathfrak{g})$? Why the stability condition means that $H^0(X,\mathfrak{sl}_{2,E}) \simeq \mathbb{C}$? – Ste Oct 22 '13 at 13:06
This question is clearly stated as if it were an exercise. I think it's not, but the person who asked chose to offer no motivation after being asked about it. I think this is against the phylosophy of this forum. – Fernando Muro Oct 22 '13 at 13:22

This is the general method of deformation theory. The two immediate papers that will give you sufficient detail are:

Holomorphic Vector Bundles on a Compact Riemann Surface (by Narasimhan-Seshadri)
Stable Principal Bundles on a Compact Riemann Surface (by Ramanathan)

I am more familiar with the specific scenario of the moduli space of flat or anti-self-dual connections on a principal bundle, where everything is translated into an elliptic chain complex, and the Zariski tangent space is the kernel of the linearization of some operator modulo the infinitesimal action.

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.