Skip to main content
I have tried to improve the format without modify the content
Source Link

So I'm reading the part in Ana Cannas da Silva's book "Lectures on Symplectic Geometry" available (on her website) about hamiltonian group actions on a symplectic manifold. She starts by defining $\mathbb{R}$$\mathbb R$-actions and $S¹$$\mathbb S^1$ actions by saying that the vector field on M$M$ that they generate must be hamiltonian. Then she defines hamiltonian $T^n$$\mathbb T^n$-actions (p.154) by the requirement that the restriction of the action to each circle ${1} \times\ldots\times S¹\times\ldots\times\{1\}$$\{1\} \times\ldots\times\mathbb S^1\times\ldots\times\{1\}$ be hamiltonian (plus the requirement that each of the n$n$ corresponding hamiltonian functions be invariant uneunder the action of the rest of $T^n$$\mathbb T^n$)

And then, finally, she defines a hamiltonian action of a general Lie group G as one having a "moment map". This is a natural generalisation because the existence of a moment map is equivalent (I believe!) to the fact that for each $X\in Lie(G)$$X\in\operatorname{Lie}(G)$, the vector field $X^* $ on M$M$ induced by $X$ is hamiltonian (i.e. $ X^*_p=\frac{d}{dt}(\exp(tX)\cdot p)(0)$).

For indeed, if that it that case, then on can just define the moment map $\mu : M \rightarrow Lie(G)^* $$\mu : M \rightarrow\operatorname{Lie}(G)^* $ by setting $<\mu(p),X>:=\mu^X(p)$$\langle\mu(p),X\rangle:=\mu^X(p)$, where $\mu^X$ is a hamiltonian function for $X^* $ chosen so that $\mu$ is G-equivariant with respect to the coadjoint action on $Lie(G)^* $$\operatorname{Lie}(G)^* $. (Note that in the case where $G$ is commutative such as $G=T^n$$G=\mathbb T^n$, this last condition boils down to $\mu$ being $G$-invariant.)

The question: I am trying to prove that the ad-hoc definition implies the general definition in the $T^n$$\mathbb T^n$ case. The problem I am having is that we only know that n vector fields $ X_1^*,\ldots,X_n^* $ (one for each subcircle $ 1\times\ldots\times S¹\times\ldots\times 1 \subset T^n $$ 1\times\ldots\times\mathbb S^1\times\ldots\times 1 \subset\mathbb T^n $) are hamiltonian. Knowing that the $X_i$'s form a basis of $Lie(T^n)$$\operatorname{Lie}(\mathbb T^n)$, does this imply that every $X\in Lie(T^n)$$X\in\operatorname{Lie}(\mathbb T^n)$ induces a hamiltonian $X^* $. Does something like '$(X+Y)^* =X^* +Y^* $'$\color{red}{(X+Y)^* =X^* +Y^*}$ hold?

More generally, given a Lie group $G$ acting on a symplectic manifold $M$, is it necessary to check that each $X\in Lie(G) $$X\in\operatorname{Lie}(G) $ induce a hamiltonian vector field on $M$, or is it sufficient to check this for a basis of $Lie(G) $$\operatorname{Lie}(G) $ ?

Thanks.

So I'm reading the part in Ana Cannas da Silva's book "Lectures on Symplectic Geometry" available (on her website) about hamiltonian group actions on a symplectic manifold. She starts by defining $\mathbb{R}$-actions and $S¹$ actions by saying that the vector field on M that they generate must be hamiltonian. Then she defines hamiltonian $T^n$-actions (p.154) by the requirement that the restriction of the action to each circle ${1} \times\ldots\times S¹\times\ldots\times\{1\}$ be hamiltonian (plus the requirement that each of the n corresponding hamiltonian functions be invariant une the action of the rest of $T^n$)

And then, finally, she defines a hamiltonian action of a general Lie group G as one having a "moment map". This is a natural generalisation because the existence of a moment map is equivalent (I believe!) to the fact that for each $X\in Lie(G)$, the vector field $X^* $ on M induced by $X$ is hamiltonian (i.e. $ X^*_p=\frac{d}{dt}(\exp(tX)\cdot p)(0)$).

For indeed, if that it that case, then on can just define the moment map $\mu : M \rightarrow Lie(G)^* $ by setting $<\mu(p),X>:=\mu^X(p)$, where $\mu^X$ is a hamiltonian function for $X^* $ chosen so that $\mu$ is G-equivariant with respect to the coadjoint action on $Lie(G)^* $. (Note that in the case where $G$ is commutative such as $G=T^n$, this last condition boils down to $\mu$ being $G$-invariant.)

The question: I am trying to prove that the ad-hoc definition implies the general definition in the $T^n$ case. The problem I am having is that we only know that n vector fields $ X_1^*,\ldots,X_n^* $ (one for each subcircle $ 1\times\ldots\times S¹\times\ldots\times 1 \subset T^n $) are hamiltonian. Knowing that the $X_i$'s form a basis of $Lie(T^n)$, does this imply that every $X\in Lie(T^n)$ induces a hamiltonian $X^* $. Does something like '$(X+Y)^* =X^* +Y^* $' hold?

More generally, given a Lie group $G$ acting on a symplectic manifold $M$, is it necessary to check that each $X\in Lie(G) $ induce a hamiltonian vector field on $M$, or is it sufficient to check this for a basis of $Lie(G) $ ?

Thanks.

So I'm reading the part in Ana Cannas da Silva's book "Lectures on Symplectic Geometry" available (on her website) about hamiltonian group actions on a symplectic manifold. She starts by defining $\mathbb R$-actions and $\mathbb S^1$ actions by saying that the vector field on $M$ that they generate must be hamiltonian. Then she defines hamiltonian $\mathbb T^n$-actions (p.154) by the requirement that the restriction of the action to each circle $\{1\} \times\ldots\times\mathbb S^1\times\ldots\times\{1\}$ be hamiltonian (plus the requirement that each of the $n$ corresponding hamiltonian functions be invariant under the action of the rest of $\mathbb T^n$)

And then, finally, she defines a hamiltonian action of a general Lie group G as one having a "moment map". This is a natural generalisation because the existence of a moment map is equivalent (I believe!) to the fact that for each $X\in\operatorname{Lie}(G)$, the vector field $X^* $ on $M$ induced by $X$ is hamiltonian (i.e. $ X^*_p=\frac{d}{dt}(\exp(tX)\cdot p)(0)$).

For indeed, if that it that case, then on can just define the moment map $\mu : M \rightarrow\operatorname{Lie}(G)^* $ by setting $\langle\mu(p),X\rangle:=\mu^X(p)$, where $\mu^X$ is a hamiltonian function for $X^* $ chosen so that $\mu$ is G-equivariant with respect to the coadjoint action on $\operatorname{Lie}(G)^* $. (Note that in the case where $G$ is commutative such as $G=\mathbb T^n$, this last condition boils down to $\mu$ being $G$-invariant.)

The question: I am trying to prove that the ad-hoc definition implies the general definition in the $\mathbb T^n$ case. The problem I am having is that we only know that n vector fields $ X_1^*,\ldots,X_n^* $ (one for each subcircle $ 1\times\ldots\times\mathbb S^1\times\ldots\times 1 \subset\mathbb T^n $) are hamiltonian. Knowing that the $X_i$'s form a basis of $\operatorname{Lie}(\mathbb T^n)$, does this imply that every $X\in\operatorname{Lie}(\mathbb T^n)$ induces a hamiltonian $X^* $. Does something like $\color{red}{(X+Y)^* =X^* +Y^*}$ hold?

More generally, given a Lie group $G$ acting on a symplectic manifold $M$, is it necessary to check that each $X\in\operatorname{Lie}(G) $ induce a hamiltonian vector field on $M$, or is it sufficient to check this for a basis of $\operatorname{Lie}(G) $ ?

Thanks.

Source Link
Gigou
  • 135
  • 7

Question about the definition of hamiltonian group action.

So I'm reading the part in Ana Cannas da Silva's book "Lectures on Symplectic Geometry" available (on her website) about hamiltonian group actions on a symplectic manifold. She starts by defining $\mathbb{R}$-actions and $S¹$ actions by saying that the vector field on M that they generate must be hamiltonian. Then she defines hamiltonian $T^n$-actions (p.154) by the requirement that the restriction of the action to each circle ${1} \times\ldots\times S¹\times\ldots\times\{1\}$ be hamiltonian (plus the requirement that each of the n corresponding hamiltonian functions be invariant une the action of the rest of $T^n$)

And then, finally, she defines a hamiltonian action of a general Lie group G as one having a "moment map". This is a natural generalisation because the existence of a moment map is equivalent (I believe!) to the fact that for each $X\in Lie(G)$, the vector field $X^* $ on M induced by $X$ is hamiltonian (i.e. $ X^*_p=\frac{d}{dt}(\exp(tX)\cdot p)(0)$).

For indeed, if that it that case, then on can just define the moment map $\mu : M \rightarrow Lie(G)^* $ by setting $<\mu(p),X>:=\mu^X(p)$, where $\mu^X$ is a hamiltonian function for $X^* $ chosen so that $\mu$ is G-equivariant with respect to the coadjoint action on $Lie(G)^* $. (Note that in the case where $G$ is commutative such as $G=T^n$, this last condition boils down to $\mu$ being $G$-invariant.)

The question: I am trying to prove that the ad-hoc definition implies the general definition in the $T^n$ case. The problem I am having is that we only know that n vector fields $ X_1^*,\ldots,X_n^* $ (one for each subcircle $ 1\times\ldots\times S¹\times\ldots\times 1 \subset T^n $) are hamiltonian. Knowing that the $X_i$'s form a basis of $Lie(T^n)$, does this imply that every $X\in Lie(T^n)$ induces a hamiltonian $X^* $. Does something like '$(X+Y)^* =X^* +Y^* $' hold?

More generally, given a Lie group $G$ acting on a symplectic manifold $M$, is it necessary to check that each $X\in Lie(G) $ induce a hamiltonian vector field on $M$, or is it sufficient to check this for a basis of $Lie(G) $ ?

Thanks.