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

I'm reading through Brylinski's "Loop Spaces, Characteristic Classes and Geometric Quantization" and I am stuck on a piece of Theorem 2.2.15, which asserts that If $K$ is a closed complex-valued 2-form on a paracompact manifold $M$ whose cohomology class is in the image of $H^2(M, \mathbb{Z}(1)) \rightarrow H^2(M, \mathbb{C})$ then there exists a line bundle $L$ with connection on $M$, whose curvature is equal to $K$.

The proof goes like so:

Let $K^{\bullet} = \underline{\mathbb{C}}^* \ \underrightarrow{d\ log} \ \underline{A}^1_{M, \mathbb{C}}$ and so we have an exact sequence of complexes of sheaves: $$0 \rightarrow {\mathbb{C}}^* \rightarrow K^{\bullet} \rightarrow \underline{A^2}{M, cl}[-1] \rightarrow 0 $$

Where that nastily noted $\underline{A^2}{M, cl}[-1]$ means the two term complex with 0 in the first slot and closed 2 forms on $M$ in the second slot. The fact that this sequence is exact is beautifully explained in my other question: here.

Ok well given the above exact sequence, we would thus be able to get the exact sequence: $$0 \rightarrow H^1(M,{\mathbb{C}}^*) \rightarrow H^1(M,K^{\bullet}) \rightarrow \underline{A^2}{M, cl} \rightarrow H^2(M, \mathbb{C}^ * ) $$

The above sequence makes sense to me. HOWEVER The claim is now that since our closed 2-form K is in the image of

$H^2(M, \mathbb{Z}(1)) \rightarrow H^2(M, \mathbb{C})$

Then the cohomology class $[K] \in H^2(M, \mathbb{C})$ has zero image in $H^2(M, \mathbb{C}^*)$ and so by the above sequence it must come from $H^1(M, K^{\bullet})$, i.e. it comes from being the curvature of a line bundle with connection.

I hope it is understandable why this is not obvious to me. There seems to be many different identifications going on with all of the possible places you can get a map $H^2(M, \mathbb{Z}(1)) \rightarrow H^2(M, \mathbb{C}) $, *not all of which are clearly linked with a map * $H^2(M, \mathbb{C}) \rightarrow H^2(M, \mathbb{C}^*)$

I think that this mysterious map $H^2(M, \mathbb{Z}(1)) \rightarrow H^2(M, \mathbb{C}) $ comes from first thinking of the $\mathbb{Z}(1)$-valued Cech cocyle living in $\mathbb{R}(2)$ Deligne Cohomology, obtaining a 2-form and then using the De-Rham Cech isomorphism! phew! That still doesn't explain the mapping properties and identifications made above. I will update this last bit and clarify as soon as possible.

share|improve this question
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.