Skip to main content
14 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 19, 2017 at 17:37 comment added byu "On a conjecture of Count Dracula" - I'd like to see that on the arxiv.
Jan 17, 2017 at 16:54 comment added Jason Starr @CountDracula. In that case, you should offer us some questions that we can misattribute to you as conjectures :)
Jan 17, 2017 at 16:13 comment added Count Dracula @abx It is a time honored tradition in Algebraic Geometry to misattribute conjectures and I for one will continue to do so...
Jan 17, 2017 at 14:41 comment added Daniel Loughran @abx: Thanks for pointing this out and apologies for the misattribution to Hartshorne for the case of rank bigger than $2$. If anyone knows of results towards my question I would still be interested, but it's looking increasingly doubtful something useful is known...
Jan 17, 2017 at 14:36 comment added Mohan I do not think whether the two questions mentioned above are known to be equivalent, except in the codimension 2 case and rank 2 vector bundles. Even in this case, one of the important ingredients is Barth's theorem, which is valid for all low codimensional varieties. For codimension 2, of course Serre's construction plays the deciding tool in one direction. There is also the published (Inv. Math.) incorrect proof that unstable bundles of rank 2 are split if $n\geq 4$ over complex numbers, due to Remmert and Schneider (I think).
Jan 17, 2017 at 14:30 comment added abx @Count Dracula: I read in the paper you mention: "I do not feel that I have sufficient evidence to formulate a conjecture about bundles of rank >2" (says Hartshorne). That doesn't seem to me sufficient ground to talk about the "Hartshorne conjecture" for rank >2 bundles.
Jan 17, 2017 at 14:28 comment added Francesco Polizzi @DanielLoughran: I do not know. Hartshorne says that the equivalence of the two conjectures for rank $2$ vector bundles in $\mathbb{P}^6$ follows from a result of Barth, one should read that paper.
Jan 17, 2017 at 14:25 comment added Count Dracula @abx: This is definitively known as Hartshorne's conjecture, but maybe should be called Hartshorne's question. See ams.org/journals/bull/1974-80-06/S0002-9904-1974-13612-8/… especially the discussion following Conjecture 6.3.
Jan 17, 2017 at 14:22 comment added Daniel Loughran @Francesco Polizzi: Yes, but this is only stated in the reference for rank $2$ vector bundles. Are the two conjectures equivalent in general?
Jan 17, 2017 at 14:20 comment added Daniel Loughran The problem seems to be closely related to Hartshorne's conjecture that every smooth subvariety of projective space of small codimension is a complete intersection. There are particular results towards this conjecture (e.g. Corollary 3 of ams.org/journals/jams/1991-04-03/S0894-0347-1991-1092845-5/…), so I was hoping there would also be partial results towards the closely related problem on vector bundles.
Jan 17, 2017 at 14:20 comment added Francesco Polizzi This was stated by Hartshorne as an equivalent conjecture regarding the fact that varieties of low codimension in projective spaces should be complete intersections. See [R. Hartshorne, *Algebraic vector bundles on projective spaces: a problem list], in particular the discussion following Problem 3. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0040938379900302
Jan 17, 2017 at 14:17 comment added Daniel Loughran @abx: Thanks for the comment, it is very useful. As for references there is for example mathoverflow.net/questions/13990/…. Admittedly this is only stated for rank 2 bundles, but I had assumed that an analogous conjecture exists for arbitrary rank vector bundles.
Jan 17, 2017 at 13:34 comment added abx First of all, I am surprised that you assign this conjecture to Hartshorne -- do you have a reference? I am not an expert, but my impression is that there has been no significant progress on these questions since the 80's. At that time, the best result was Horrocks' construction of an indecomposable rank 3 bundle on $\mathbb{P}^5$. I would guess that there are still no example known on $\mathbb{P}^n$ for $n\geq 6$. On the other hand, proving that they do not exist (i.e. the existence of the integer $n_0$ in your question) is wide open.
Jan 17, 2017 at 12:48 history asked Daniel Loughran CC BY-SA 3.0