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

Consider the canonical symplectic structure $(\omega, J)$ on $\mathbb{R}^{2n}$.

(i) What can be said about the density of the lagrangian grassmannian $L$ (i.e. those rank $n$ totally isotropic linear subspaces of $\mathbb{R}^{2n}$) in the usual Grassmannian $Gr=Gr_{n}(\mathbb{R}^{2n})$ of rank $n$ linear subspaces?

(ii) How stable is $L$ within $Gr$. ie. which homeomorphisms of $Gr$ preserve $L$ (not necessarily pointwise)?

(iii) In what sense can we see $Gr$ as ''swept out'' by $L$ ie. decompose $Gr$ as the orbits of $L$.

(iv) What projections $Gr \to L$ can we produce?

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 7 down vote accepted

jmart has modified the question since I posted my original answer. I'll now modify my answer to correspond:

(i) The Lagrangian Grassmannian ($L$ in your notation) is a closed submanifold of $Gr_n(\mathbb{R}^{2n})$, so it's not dense at all. In fact, it has dimension $\frac12n(n{+}1)$.

(ii) $L$ is homogeneous under the action of $\textrm{Sp}(n)\subset \textrm{GL}(2n,\mathbb{R})$, the subgroup that preserves the symplectic structure $\omega$. (The $J$ is not needed to define $L$.) Conversely, the subgroup of $\textrm{GL}(2n,\mathbb{R})$ that preserves $L$ in $Gr_n(\mathbb{R}^{2n})$ is easily seen to be the subgroup of $\textrm{GL}(2n,\mathbb{R})$ that preserves $\omega$ up to a multiple.

(iii) I don't really know what you mean by 'the orbits of $L$', since $L$ is not a group. Of course, $Gr_n(\mathbb{R}^{2n})$ is homogeneous under $\textrm{GL}(2n,\mathbb{R})$ so it's the $\textrm{GL}(2n,\mathbb{R})$-orbit of any point of $L$. Perhaps you actually want to know the orbits of $\textrm{Sp}(n)$ acting on $Gr_n(\mathbb{R}^{2n})$, with $L$ being the closed $\textrm{Sp}(n)$-orbit. If you consider, for any $n$-plane $E\in Gr_n(\mathbb{R}^{2n})$, the rank $r(E)$ of the pullback of $\omega$ to $E$, then the $\textrm{Sp}(n)$-orbits are the level sets of $r$ (which takes values in nonnegative integers).

(iv) I'm not sure what you mean by 'projections'. If by 'projection', you mean a smooth map $\pi:Gr_n(\mathbb{R}^{2n})\to L$ that is the identity on $L$, such a thing does not exist.

share|improve this answer
    
Dimension counts do not answer questions of density. The dimension of the lagrangian grassmannian $L$ shows only that $L$ is not generic in $Gr_n$. (Silly example: the rationals in $\mathbb{R}$). So there is a question as to how close a linear subspace is to being lagrangian. Now with my original question I should have known better: that $L$ and $Gr$ are homogenous spaces resolves very easily some simple questions. But this is still unsatisfactory. These identifications are only obtained by ''pushing a basis around''. About the stability of $L$ in $Gr$ I had the following in mind: –  J. Martel Jan 24 '12 at 21:26
    
Consider an almost complex structure $J$ on $(\mathbb{R}^{2n}, \omega)$ ie. we require $J$ to be $\omega-$compatible. Then, for $\theta \in \mathbb{R}$, the automorphism $e^{J \theta}$ acts on $L$. But the orbit $\{e^{J\theta} \ell \}_{\theta}$ of any lagrangian $\ell$ will be one-dimensional in $L$. A question: can we describe explicitly a larger family of ''similiar'' automorphisms of $L$? –  J. Martel Jan 24 '12 at 21:38
    
A simpler question (which i'm still uncertain of) is whether $e^{J \theta}$ is periodic in $\theta$. –  J. Martel Jan 24 '12 at 21:39
    
@jmart: You should look up some sources on symplectic linear algebra, which would answer many of your questions. Re your comments: $L$ is a compact submanifold of $Gr_n$, being defined by equations, so it is not dense in $Gr_n$. Since $J^2=-I$, we have $e^{J\theta} = \cos\theta\ I + \sin\theta\ J$, so $e^{J\theta}$ is periodic (of period $2\pi$), defining a free circle action on $L$. Any $\omega$-compatible $J$ will define a free $S^1$-action on $L$, and these are 'similar', but, of course, there are many $1$-parameter subgroups of $\textrm{Sp}(n,\mathbb{R})$ that are not 'similar'. –  Robert Bryant Jan 25 '12 at 7:56
    
Thank you Prof. Bryant. I will get to work. –  J. Martel Jan 25 '12 at 17:30

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.