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

Let $X^n$ be a complex manifold and $\sigma:\hat{X} \to X$ the blow-up at a point $x \in X$ and $E = \sigma^{-1}(x)$ the exceptional divisor.
It is known that the canonical bundle of $\hat{X}$ is given by $K_{\hat{X}} = \sigma^*K_X\otimes \mathcal{O}((n-1)E)$. I am trying to understand why $H^0(\hat{X},K_{\hat{X}}) \simeq H^0(X,K_X)$.

Because $\sigma$ is an isomorphism away from $E$, the pullback gives an isomorphism $H^0(\hat{X}\setminus E,K_{\hat{X}}) \simeq H^0(X \setminus \lbrace x \rbrace,\sigma^* K_X)$ and by Hartog's theorem it extends to $X$.

What I couldn't see is why we can extend this to $\hat{X}$ adding the term $\mathcal{O}((n-1)E)$. Using the fact that $\mathcal{O}(E)$ is trivial on $\hat{X} \setminus E$ we get $H^0(\hat{X}\setminus E,K_{\hat{X}}) \simeq H^0(\hat{X}\setminus E,K_{\hat{X}} \otimes \mathcal{O}((n-1)E)$, but I couldn't go further.

share|improve this question
5  
You get a map $H^0(X,K_X)\to H^0(\hat X,K_{\hat X})$ by pulling back forms. A map in the other direction is by restriction $H^0(\hat X,K_{\hat X})\to H^0(\hat X\setminus E,K_{\hat X\setminus E})$, the isomorphism $H^0(\hat X\setminus E,K_{\hat X\setminus E})=H^0(X\setminus\{x\},K_{X\setminus\{x\}}$ and then the fact that (if $n\ge 2$, $n=1$ is trivial) $H^0(X\setminus\{x\},K_{X\setminus\{x\}}=H^0(X,K_X)$. –  Torsten Ekedahl May 2 '11 at 14:37
add comment

4 Answers

Use exact sequences $$ 0 \to \sigma^*K_X \to \sigma^*K_X(E) \to \sigma^*K_X(E)_{|E} \to 0, $$ $$ 0 \to \sigma^*K_X(E) \to \sigma^*K_X(2E) \to \sigma^*K_X(2E)_{|E} \to 0, $$ $\dots$ $$ 0 \to \sigma^*K_X((n-2)E) \to \sigma^*K_X((n-1)E) \to \sigma^*K_X((n-1)E)_{|E} \to 0, $$ and the fact that all line bundles $$ O(E)_{|E} = O_E(-1), O(2E)_{|E} = O_E(-2), \dots, O((n-1)E)_{|E} = O_E(1-n) $$ on $E = P^{n-1}$ are acyclic.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Since the computation is essentially the same, let's do it in the $2$-dimensional case. So let us assume first $X=\mathbb{A}^2$ with coordinates $x, y$. We have

$\tilde{X}=\{\lambda x+ \mu y=0\} \subset \mathbb{A}^2 \times \mathbb{P}^1$.

In the affine chart $\mu=1$ the equation is therefore $y=\lambda x$, and the exceptional divisor $E$ is given by $x=0$.

Now let $\omega$ be a meromorphic $2$-form on $X$, that we can write as

$\omega=\frac{f(x,y)}{g(x,y)}dx \wedge dy$.

Therefore

$\sigma^* \omega=\frac{f(x, \lambda x)}{g(x, \lambda x)} dx \wedge d(\lambda x)= x \frac{f(x, \lambda x)}{g(x, \lambda x)} dx \wedge d \lambda$.

Therefore in a neighborhood of $E$ we have

$\textrm{div} \ (\sigma^* \omega)= \sigma^* (\textrm{div} \ \omega) + E$.

Since clearly $\textrm{div} \ (\sigma^* \omega)= \sigma^* (\textrm{div} \ \omega)$ outside $E$, it follows in particular that the divisor of every holomorphic form on $\tilde{X}$ contains the component $x=0$, i.e. the exceptional divisor.

Now take $X$ projective. The previous local computation shows that the
exceptional divisor is contained in the fixed part of the canonical system of $\tilde{X}$, namely

$|K_{\tilde{X}}|= E + |K_X|$

(if you prefer, this also follows from $K_{\tilde{X}} E=-1$).

This implies

$H^0(\tilde{X}, K_{\tilde{X}})=H^0(\sigma^* K_X)=H^0(K_X)$,

the second equality following from the fact that $\sigma$ has degree $1$.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Here's how I tend to think about this: you want to show that $$\sigma_* \mathcal{O}_{\hat{X}}( (n-1) E + \sigma^* K_X) = \mathcal{O}_{X}(K_X).$$ This is actually more than you need.

So, by the projection formula and as you mentioned, that $K_{\hat{X}} = \sigma^*K_X\otimes \mathcal{O}((n-1)E)$, we only have to show that $$\sigma_* O_{\hat{X}}( (n-1) E ) = {O}_{X}.$$ The left side is rational functions which are regular on $X \setminus \{ x \}$, where $\sigma$ is an isomorphism, and which have poles of order at most $n-1$ at $E$.

Certainly we have the containment $\supseteq$ (functions that are regular on $X$ are regular on $\hat{X}$ also).

On the other hand set $U$ to be $X$ with the point $x$ removed. If $i : U \to X$ is the inclusion, then $i_* \mathcal{O}_{U}$ is all rational functions on $X$ that are regular except at $x \in X$. Certainly then $$O_X \subseteq \sigma_* O_{\hat{X}}( (n-1) E ) \subseteq i_* \mathcal{O}_U.$$

As you pointed out, by Hartog's theorem this composition is an isomorphism. Thus you get the statement you wanted as well.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Lemma Let $\phi:Y\to X$ be a proper birational morphism of complex manifolds of dimension at least $2$. Let $E\subset Y$ be the exceptional locus of $\phi$. Note that $E$ is a Cartier divisor. Then for any $a>0$, $$\phi_*\mathscr O_E(aE)=0.$$

Remark Actually the statement is true for more general $\phi$, but this will do for now.

Proof (Sketch) We prove this by induction. If $\dim X=2$, then $E^2<0$, so $\mathscr O_E(aE)$ has no global sections and the statement follows. If $\dim X>2$, then we first take hyperplane sections on $X$ until $\phi(E)$ is zero-dimensional and then take hyperplane sections on $Y$. In both cases it is relatively easy to prove that the induction hypothesis implies the desired statement (I will try to add this later when I will have more time). Q.E.D.

Corollary Under the same assumptions as above, $$\mathscr O_X\simeq \phi_*\mathscr O_Y(aE).$$

Proof Apply $\phi_*$ to the short exact sequence $$0\to \mathscr O_Y((a-1)E) \to \mathscr O_Y(aE) \to \mathscr O_E(aE) \to 0.$$ Q.E.D.

Now as $X$ is smooth, we have $$K_Y\sim \phi^*K_X + aE$$ for some $a> 0$. Then by the projection formula $$\phi_*\mathscr O_Y(K_Y)\simeq \mathscr O_K(K_X)\otimes \phi_*\mathscr O_Y(aE)\simeq \mathscr O_X(K_X).$$ By the definition of $\phi_*$ the statement follows.

Remark this is actually true under more general circumstances.


I've just noticed that I have not addressed your last question about why you need $(n-1)E$ added. One way to see this is by explicit calculation. Write down a differential form and the blow up in local coordinates and you see that when you pull it back the differential form picks up some poles, in fact, $(n-1)$ times $E$ poles.

Another way to compute this is to use adjunction: $$\mathscr O_Y(K_Y+E)|_E=\mathscr O_E(K_E)= \mathscr O_E(-n)$$ (since $E\simeq \mathbb P^{n-1}.$) At the same time, you know that the normal bundle of $E$ is $\mathscr O_E(-1)$ which is equivalent to saying that $\mathscr O_E(E)\simeq \mathscr O_E(-1)$. Combining these and the fact that the pull back of a line bundle restricted to a fiber is always trivial gives you what you want.

share|improve this answer
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.