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

I am studying complex structures $I$ on [real] 4-manifolds $M$, and in particular uniqueness properties. Through one example, it seems that this property (written below) guarantees the existence (and uniqueness) of a particular $I$:

There exists $\omega$ (closed 2-form) satisfying $\omega\cdot\omega =0$ and $\omega\cdot\overline{\omega}$ nonzero everywhere.

Is this sufficient to say that there exists a [unique] $I$ such that $\omega$ is a holomorphic 2-form?

share|cite|improve this question
I've been meaning to work out the details of this for some time. It seems to be linked to K3 surfaces - there are semi-vague references to this fact in Buchdahl [] and Huybrechts []. Sorry I can't do better than that. – Gunnar Þór Magnússon May 26 '11 at 9:47
This is how it's supposed to work: take a 4-manifold $M$ with the topology of a K3 surface, and a 2-form $\omega$ on $M$. Let $T = \Ker \omega \subset T_M$ be a subspace of the tangent bundle. Then $\omega \wedge \omega = 0$ and $\omega \wedge \overline \omega$ ensure that $T$ defines an almost complex structure on $M$ (i.e. $T$ is the space of $(0,1)$ or $(1,0)$ vectors). Then $d \omega = 0$ is supposed to be equivalent to integrability. -- Like I said, there are details to work out, and I haven't had time to do them yet. – Gunnar Þór Magnússon May 26 '11 at 9:53
Oh, yes, and under these conditions $\omega$ will be a holomorphic symplectic form on $(M,T)$ - i.e. a non-degenerate holomorphic 2-form, which then trivializes the canonical bundle of $M$. – Gunnar Þór Magnússon May 26 '11 at 9:55

This seems to be an old remark by Andreotti and appears as exercise 2.6.10 in the book Complex Geometry by D. Huybrechts. The tangent bundle of $M$ is complexified and $\omega$ is viewed as a complex $2$-form. An almost complex structure is equivalent to a decomposition $TM^{\mathbf C}=T^{1,0}M\oplus T^{0,1}M$, where $T^{0,1}M=\overline{T^{1,0}M}$. If $\omega$ is to be holomorphic, then it must vanish on $T^{0,1}M$. This will give uniqueness.

The conditions $\omega\wedge\omega=0$ and $\omega\wedge\bar\omega$ a volume form imply that the kernel of $\omega$ is $2$-dimensional, so can define $\ker\omega=T^{0,1}M$, and this will give existence. In fact, by skew-symmetry the rank of $\omega$ is even; the first condition implies that $\omega$ is not symplectic so the kernel is non-trivial; the second condition implies that it cannot be $4$-dimensional, hence the claim.

Next we let $T^{1,0}M$ be the complex conjugate of $T^{0,1}M$, that is, $\ker\bar\omega$. The condition $\omega\wedge\bar\omega$ never zero says that $T^{1,0}M\cap T^{0,1}M=0$, so we have the desired decomposition.

Finally, to check the integrability, it suffices to see that $T^{0,1}M$ is involutive. Let $X$, $Y$ be sections of $T^{0,1}M$ and $Z$ be an arbitrary section of $TM^{\mathbf C}$. Recall the formula $d\omega(X,Y,Z) = X\omega(Y,Z)-Y\omega(X,Z)+Z\omega(X,Y) - \omega([X,Y],Z)+\omega([X,Z],Y)-\omega([Y,Z],X) $.

We have $d\omega=0$ and all the terms on the RHS vanish by our choice of $X$, $Y\in\ker\omega$ except $d\omega([X,Y],Z)$. Hence this term also vanish and this means that $[X,Y]$ lies in $\ker\omega$.

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.