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

This question is related to another question of mine. Let $X$ be a kahler manifold with $\dim_{\mathbb{C}}(X)=n$, let $\pi:E\rightarrow M$ be a holomorphic vector bundle of $rank_{\mathbb{C}}(E)=n-k$ over a kahler manifold $M$ with $\dim(M)=k$. Suppose there is a holomorphic embedding $\Phi$ of a neighborhood $N$ of the zero section of $E$ in $X$ that is $$\Phi:N\rightarrow X$$

What can be said about $X$? If $M$ is a point nothing, but what if $M$ is a higher dimensional manifold?

share|improve this question
    
Dear Italo, it would be nice if you can give a hint on the "type" of statement that you would like to have, i.e. give a slightly more specific question. At least, do you encounter such situations naturally? –  Dmitri Sep 26 '11 at 15:26
    
I know that the question is rather vague, i imagined a situation like this thinking about my last question and your answer, in particular van de ven theorem. I was wondering if situations like the one described above are "natural" or conditions above are quite restrictive (as i suspect). And as consequence of the rigidity there is a statement like this: if you have a kahler manifold $X$ a vector bundle $E$ as above necessarily X is isomorphic $\mathbb{P}(E\osum \mathcal{L})$ with $\mathcal{L}$ a line bundle. –  Italo Sep 26 '11 at 16:02
add comment

2 Answers 2

If your $X$ is projective and $E$ is an ample vector bundle over $M$ then the field of meromorphic functions of $X$ is a finite extension of the field of meromorphic functions of $\mathbb P(E \oplus \mathcal O_M )$. This follows from Corollary 6.8 of Hartshorne's Cohomological dimension of algebraic varieties.

There is also an analytic version by Andreotti, which precedes Hartshorne's paper, implying the same result.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I would like to make one guess concerning one particular situation.

Correction In fact, the following guess is wrong (thanks to jvp)! But I don't want to delete this answer, since jvp left a comment to it with a cool link, that shows why the guess is wrong

Guess. Suppose that $M\cong \mathbb CP^1$, and $E=O(1)\oplus...\oplus O(1)$. In this case $X$ is rational, i.e. birational to $\mathbb CP^n$.

I have to say that I don't know how to prove this guess and even not 100% sure that this guess is correct. But first of all, this statement is obviously true if $n=2$ and I rather belive it should be possible to prove this for $n=3$ using twistor theory. The reason to make this guess is that if you have such a line in $X$ you can start to deform it and it deforms (at least locally) in exactly the same way as a line in $\mathbb CP^n$. Also, it is obvious that $X$ is rationally connected in this case.

Of course, this guess is a pure speculation. But maybe someone can prove it? :)

Remark 1. You can always blow up something in $X$ that does not touch the image of the zero section of $N$, so one can only say something (if one can at all) about birational type of $X$.

Remark 2. Note that if you don't assume $X$ to be Kaehler, but only ask it to be complex, then the guess is completely wrong. There exist huge amount of complex 3-folds containing lines with neighborhoods biholomorphic to a neighbourhood of a line in $\mathbb CP^3$. Such examples come from twistor theory -- one should take the twistor space of a conformally flat 4-manifold.

share|improve this answer
1  
Related paper arxiv.org/PS_cache/math/pdf/0304/0304006v1.pdf –  jvp Sep 26 '11 at 17:28
    
Thank you for this link, this is an interesting paper! –  Dmitri Sep 26 '11 at 18:26
    
You are welcome Dmitri. –  jvp Sep 26 '11 at 20:02
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.