Skip to main content
Became Hot Network Question
Weird line break fixes, and other light editing
Source Link
LSpice
  • 12.9k
  • 4
  • 45
  • 69

Isomorphic Jacobian Varieties Just Like Abelian Varieties $-$ Torelli's Theorem

Torelli's theorem states that:

(Torelli's Theorem). Let $R$, $R'$ be compact
Riemann surfaces of genus $g$, $J(R)$, $J(R')$ their Jacobian varieties, $\Theta$, $\Theta'$ their respective theta divisors. The Riemann surfaces $R$ and $R'$ are isomorphic if and only if $(J(R), \Theta)$ and $(J(R'), \Theta')$ are isomorphic as principally polarized abelian varieties.

Let $R$, $R'$ be compact Riemann surfaces of genus $g$, $J(R)$, $J(R')$ their Jacobian varieties, $\Theta$, $\Theta'$ their respective theta divisors. The Riemann surfaces $R$ and $R'$ are isomorphic if and only if $(J(R), \Theta)$ and $(J(R'), \Theta')$ are isomorphic as principally polarized Abelian varieties.

In this theorem, $J(R)$, and $J(R')$ are required to be
isomorphic isomorphic not only as abelianAbelian varieties but also as principally polarized abelianAbelian varieties. It turns out that the condition for $J(R)$ and $J(R')$ to be isomorphic as abelianAbelian varieties alone need not imply that $R$ and    $R'$ are isomorphic.

Does anyone know where IWhere can I find an example that shows that being $ J (R) $$J(R)$ and $ J (R ') $$J(R')$ being isomorphic just as Abelian varietyvarieties, does not imply that $ R $$R$ and $ R' $$R'$ are isomorphic?

Isomorphic Jacobian Varieties Just Like Abelian Varieties $-$ Torelli's Theorem

Torelli's theorem states that:

(Torelli's Theorem). Let $R$, $R'$ be compact
Riemann surfaces of genus $g$, $J(R)$, $J(R')$ their Jacobian varieties, $\Theta$, $\Theta'$ their respective theta divisors. The Riemann surfaces $R$ and $R'$ are isomorphic if and only if $(J(R), \Theta)$ and $(J(R'), \Theta')$ are isomorphic as principally polarized abelian varieties.

In this theorem, $J(R)$, $J(R')$ are required to be
isomorphic not only as abelian varieties but also as principally polarized abelian varieties. It turns out that the condition for $J(R)$ and $J(R')$ to be isomorphic as abelian varieties alone need not imply that $R$ and  $R'$ are isomorphic.

Does anyone know where I can find an example that shows that being $ J (R) $ and $ J (R ') $ isomorphic just as Abelian variety, does not imply that $ R $ and $ R' $ are isomorphic?

Isomorphic Jacobian Varieties Just Like Abelian Varieties Torelli's Theorem

Torelli's theorem states:

Let $R$, $R'$ be compact Riemann surfaces of genus $g$, $J(R)$, $J(R')$ their Jacobian varieties, $\Theta$, $\Theta'$ their respective theta divisors. The Riemann surfaces $R$ and $R'$ are isomorphic if and only if $(J(R), \Theta)$ and $(J(R'), \Theta')$ are isomorphic as principally polarized Abelian varieties.

In this theorem, $J(R)$ and $J(R')$ are required to be isomorphic not only as Abelian varieties but also as principally polarized Abelian varieties. It turns out that the condition for $J(R)$ and $J(R')$ to be isomorphic as Abelian varieties alone need not imply that $R$ and  $R'$ are isomorphic.

Where can I find an example that shows that $J(R)$ and $J(R')$ being isomorphic just as Abelian varieties, does not imply that $R$ and $R'$ are isomorphic?

Source Link
Manoel
  • 560
  • 2
  • 9

Isomorphic Jacobian Varieties Just Like Abelian Varieties $-$ Torelli's Theorem

Torelli's theorem states that:

(Torelli's Theorem). Let $R$, $R'$ be compact
Riemann surfaces of genus $g$, $J(R)$, $J(R')$ their Jacobian varieties, $\Theta$, $\Theta'$ their respective theta divisors. The Riemann surfaces $R$ and $R'$ are isomorphic if and only if $(J(R), \Theta)$ and $(J(R'), \Theta')$ are isomorphic as principally polarized abelian varieties.

In this theorem, $J(R)$, $J(R')$ are required to be
isomorphic not only as abelian varieties but also as principally polarized abelian varieties. It turns out that the condition for $J(R)$ and $J(R')$ to be isomorphic as abelian varieties alone need not imply that $R$ and $R'$ are isomorphic.

Does anyone know where I can find an example that shows that being $ J (R) $ and $ J (R ') $ isomorphic just as Abelian variety, does not imply that $ R $ and $ R' $ are isomorphic?