Skip to main content
Notice removed Draw attention by Shinichiro Nakamura
Bounty Ended with Danny Ruberman's answer chosen by Shinichiro Nakamura
Notice added Draw attention by Shinichiro Nakamura
Bounty Started worth 50 reputation by Shinichiro Nakamura
added 107 characters in body; edited tags; edited title
Source Link

Intuition behind the definition of $E_{\omega}$ in Wall's paperthe Siegel-Eichler transformation

Recently I am reading Wall's paper "On the Orthogonal Groups of Unimodular Quadratic Forms II". In this paper, I encountered with the map $E^1_\omega$, which now I am interested in.

Let $X$ be an unimodular integral lattice, and $H$ denotes the unimodular lattice which has a basis $x$, $y$ satisfying $x\cdot x=y\cdot y=0$, and $x\cdot y=1$. For $\omega \in X$ with $\omega\cdot\omega\in 2\mathbb{Z}$, we define the isometry $E^1_\omega$ of $X\oplus H$ as follows.

  • For $\xi\in X$, $E^1_\omega(\xi)=\xi-(\xi\cdot\omega)x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(x)=x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(y)=y+\omega-2^{-1}(\omega\cdot\omega)x$.

My question is: What is algebraic intuition behind the definition of $E^1_\omega$?


EDIT 1 : As D. Ruberman answered below, there exists intuition behind the map $E^1_\omega$ from the view point of differential topology. In fact, Wall proved that, for any closed simply-connected 4-manifold $M$ which has indefinite unimodular form $X$ as intersection form, any automorphism of $X\oplus H$ is realized by some diffeomorphisms of $M\#S^2\times S^2$.

He proved it as follows.

Step 1 : He had showed that the automorphism group of $X\oplus H$ is generated by $E^1_\omega$ and $E^2_\omega$, where $E^2_\omega$ is defined by interchanging the roles of $x$ and $y$ in $E^1_\omega$.

Step 2 : He also proved that each of $E^i_\omega$ is induced from a diffeomorphism of $M\#S^2\times S^2$. This completes the proof.

I already knew the proof of Step 2 which intuitively explains the map $E^i_\omega$ from the topological point of view. But I want to know some intuition behind Step 1, which is algebraic part of the proof.

EDIT 2 : The map $E^i_\omega$ is called the Siegel-Eichler transformation in a lot of literature.

Intuition behind the definition of $E_{\omega}$ in Wall's paper

Recently I am reading Wall's paper "On the Orthogonal Groups of Unimodular Quadratic Forms II". In this paper, I encountered with the map $E^1_\omega$, which now I am interested in.

Let $X$ be an unimodular integral lattice, and $H$ denotes the unimodular lattice which has a basis $x$, $y$ satisfying $x\cdot x=y\cdot y=0$, and $x\cdot y=1$. For $\omega \in X$ with $\omega\cdot\omega\in 2\mathbb{Z}$, we define the isometry $E^1_\omega$ of $X\oplus H$ as follows.

  • For $\xi\in X$, $E^1_\omega(\xi)=\xi-(\xi\cdot\omega)x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(x)=x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(y)=y+\omega-2^{-1}(\omega\cdot\omega)x$.

My question is: What is algebraic intuition behind the definition of $E^1_\omega$?


EDIT : As D. Ruberman answered below, there exists intuition behind the map $E^1_\omega$ from the view point of differential topology. In fact, Wall proved that, for any closed simply-connected 4-manifold $M$ which has indefinite unimodular form $X$ as intersection form, any automorphism of $X\oplus H$ is realized by some diffeomorphisms of $M\#S^2\times S^2$.

He proved it as follows.

Step 1 : He had showed that the automorphism group of $X\oplus H$ is generated by $E^1_\omega$ and $E^2_\omega$, where $E^2_\omega$ is defined by interchanging the roles of $x$ and $y$ in $E^1_\omega$.

Step 2 : He also proved that each of $E^i_\omega$ is induced from a diffeomorphism of $M\#S^2\times S^2$. This completes the proof.

I already knew the proof of Step 2 which intuitively explains the map $E^i_\omega$ from the topological point of view. But I want to know some intuition behind Step 1, which is algebraic part of the proof.

Intuition behind the definition of the Siegel-Eichler transformation

Recently I am reading Wall's paper "On the Orthogonal Groups of Unimodular Quadratic Forms II". In this paper, I encountered with the map $E^1_\omega$, which now I am interested in.

Let $X$ be an unimodular integral lattice, and $H$ denotes the unimodular lattice which has a basis $x$, $y$ satisfying $x\cdot x=y\cdot y=0$, and $x\cdot y=1$. For $\omega \in X$ with $\omega\cdot\omega\in 2\mathbb{Z}$, we define the isometry $E^1_\omega$ of $X\oplus H$ as follows.

  • For $\xi\in X$, $E^1_\omega(\xi)=\xi-(\xi\cdot\omega)x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(x)=x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(y)=y+\omega-2^{-1}(\omega\cdot\omega)x$.

My question is: What is algebraic intuition behind the definition of $E^1_\omega$?


EDIT 1 : As D. Ruberman answered below, there exists intuition behind the map $E^1_\omega$ from the view point of differential topology. In fact, Wall proved that, for any closed simply-connected 4-manifold $M$ which has indefinite unimodular form $X$ as intersection form, any automorphism of $X\oplus H$ is realized by some diffeomorphisms of $M\#S^2\times S^2$.

He proved it as follows.

Step 1 : He had showed that the automorphism group of $X\oplus H$ is generated by $E^1_\omega$ and $E^2_\omega$, where $E^2_\omega$ is defined by interchanging the roles of $x$ and $y$ in $E^1_\omega$.

Step 2 : He also proved that each of $E^i_\omega$ is induced from a diffeomorphism of $M\#S^2\times S^2$. This completes the proof.

I already knew the proof of Step 2 which intuitively explains the map $E^i_\omega$ from the topological point of view. But I want to know some intuition behind Step 1, which is algebraic part of the proof.

EDIT 2 : The map $E^i_\omega$ is called the Siegel-Eichler transformation in a lot of literature.

added 11 characters in body
Source Link

Recently I am reading Wall's paper "On the Orthogonal Groups of Unimodular Quadratic Forms II". In this paper, I encountered with the map $E^1_\omega$, which now I am interested in.

Let $X$ be an unimodular integral lattice, and $H$ denotes the unimodular lattice which has a basis $x$, $y$ satisfying $x\cdot x=y\cdot y=0$, and $x\cdot y=1$. For $\omega \in X$ with $\omega\cdot\omega\in 2\mathbb{Z}$, we define the isometry $E^1_\omega$ of $X\oplus H$ as follows.

  • For $\xi\in X$, $E^1_\omega(\xi)=\xi-(\xi\cdot\omega)x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(x)=x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(y)=y+\omega-2^{-1}(\omega\cdot\omega)x$.

My question is: What is algebraic intuition behind the definition of $E^1_\omega$?


EDIT : As D.Ruberman Ruberman answered below, there exists intuition behind the map $E^1_\omega$ from the view point of differential topology. In fact, Wall proved that, for any closed simply-connected 4-manifold $M$ which has indefinite unimodular form $X$ as intersection form, any automorphism of $X\oplus H$ is realized by some diffeomorphisms of $M\#S^2\times S^2$.

He proved it as follows.

Step 1 : He had showed that the automorphism group of $X\oplus H$ is generated by $E^1_\omega$ and $E^2_\omega$, where $E^2_\omega$ is defined by interchanging the roles of $x$ and $y$ in $E^1_\omega$.

Step 2 : He also proved that each of $E^i_\omega$ is induced from a diffeomorphism of $M\#S^2\times S^2$. This completes the proof.

I already knew the proof of Step 2 which intuitively explains the map $E^i_\omega$ from the topological point of view. But I want to know some intuition behind Step 1, which is algebraic part of the proof.

Recently I am reading Wall's paper "On the Orthogonal Groups of Unimodular Quadratic Forms II". In this paper, I encountered with the map $E^1_\omega$, which now I am interested in.

Let $X$ be an unimodular integral lattice, and $H$ denotes the unimodular lattice which has a basis $x$, $y$ satisfying $x\cdot x=y\cdot y=0$, and $x\cdot y=1$. For $\omega \in X$ with $\omega\cdot\omega\in 2\mathbb{Z}$, we define the isometry $E^1_\omega$ of $X\oplus H$ as follows.

  • For $\xi\in X$, $E^1_\omega(\xi)=\xi-(\xi\cdot\omega)x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(x)=x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(y)=y+\omega-2^{-1}(\omega\cdot\omega)x$.

My question is: What is intuition behind the definition of $E^1_\omega$?


EDIT : As D.Ruberman answered below, there exists intuition behind the map $E^1_\omega$ from the view point of differential topology. In fact, Wall proved that, for any closed simply-connected 4-manifold $M$ which has indefinite unimodular form $X$ as intersection form, any automorphism of $X\oplus H$ is realized by some diffeomorphisms of $M\#S^2\times S^2$.

He proved it as follows.

Step 1 : He had showed that the automorphism group of $X\oplus H$ is generated by $E^1_\omega$ and $E^2_\omega$, where $E^2_\omega$ is defined by interchanging the roles of $x$ and $y$ in $E^1_\omega$.

Step 2 : He also proved that each of $E^i_\omega$ is induced from a diffeomorphism of $M\#S^2\times S^2$. This completes the proof.

I already knew the proof of Step 2 which intuitively explains the map $E^i_\omega$ from the topological point of view. But I want to know some intuition behind Step 1, which is algebraic part of the proof.

Recently I am reading Wall's paper "On the Orthogonal Groups of Unimodular Quadratic Forms II". In this paper, I encountered with the map $E^1_\omega$, which now I am interested in.

Let $X$ be an unimodular integral lattice, and $H$ denotes the unimodular lattice which has a basis $x$, $y$ satisfying $x\cdot x=y\cdot y=0$, and $x\cdot y=1$. For $\omega \in X$ with $\omega\cdot\omega\in 2\mathbb{Z}$, we define the isometry $E^1_\omega$ of $X\oplus H$ as follows.

  • For $\xi\in X$, $E^1_\omega(\xi)=\xi-(\xi\cdot\omega)x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(x)=x$.
  • $E^1_\omega(y)=y+\omega-2^{-1}(\omega\cdot\omega)x$.

My question is: What is algebraic intuition behind the definition of $E^1_\omega$?


EDIT : As D. Ruberman answered below, there exists intuition behind the map $E^1_\omega$ from the view point of differential topology. In fact, Wall proved that, for any closed simply-connected 4-manifold $M$ which has indefinite unimodular form $X$ as intersection form, any automorphism of $X\oplus H$ is realized by some diffeomorphisms of $M\#S^2\times S^2$.

He proved it as follows.

Step 1 : He had showed that the automorphism group of $X\oplus H$ is generated by $E^1_\omega$ and $E^2_\omega$, where $E^2_\omega$ is defined by interchanging the roles of $x$ and $y$ in $E^1_\omega$.

Step 2 : He also proved that each of $E^i_\omega$ is induced from a diffeomorphism of $M\#S^2\times S^2$. This completes the proof.

I already knew the proof of Step 2 which intuitively explains the map $E^i_\omega$ from the topological point of view. But I want to know some intuition behind Step 1, which is algebraic part of the proof.

grammar
Source Link
Ben McKay
  • 26.3k
  • 7
  • 67
  • 102
Loading
added 979 characters in body
Source Link
Loading
Source Link
Loading