5
$\begingroup$

$\DeclareMathOperator{im}{im}$

I want to prove that Bott-Chern cohomology group $H^{p,q}_{BC}=\frac{\ker\partial\cap \ker\bar{\partial}}{\im\partial\bar{\partial}}$ has finite dimension via Hodge decomposition like argument. References lead me to this article written by M. Schweitzer.

In 2.b he defines "Bott-Chern Laplacian" as $\Delta^{p,q}_{BC}=(\partial\bar{\partial})(\partial\bar{\partial})^*+\partial^*\partial+\bar{\partial}^*\bar{\partial}.$ He states that if $\Delta^{p,q}_{BC}$ where elliptic, then we would have following decomposition: $$\mathcal{E^{p,q}}=\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\Delta_{BC}}\oplus\im\partial\bar{\partial}\oplus (\im\partial^*+\im\bar{\partial}^*).\hspace{20pt}(*)$$ So far so good. Cause $\Delta^{p,q}_{BC}$ is self-adjoint and assuming that $\Delta^{p,q}_{BC}$ is elliptic gives us that $$\mathcal{E^{p,q}}=\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\Delta_{BC}}\oplus\im\Delta^{p,q}_{BC}.$$ Repeating standard Hodge decomposition argument we notice that $$\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\Delta_{BC}}\perp\im (\partial\bar{\partial})(\partial\bar{\partial})^*\perp \im(\partial^*\partial+\bar{\partial}^*\bar{\partial})\perp\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\Delta_{BC}}$$ Additionally we easily verify that $$\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\Delta_{BC}}\perp\im (\partial\bar{\partial})^*\perp \im(\partial^*\partial+\bar{\partial}^*\bar{\partial})\hspace{5pt}\text{and} \hspace{5pt}\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\Delta_{BC}}\perp( \im\partial^*+\im\bar{\partial}^*)\perp \im (\partial\bar{\partial})(\partial\bar{\partial})^*.$$ So $(*)$ holds (assuming that $\Delta^{p,q}_{BC}$ is elliptic).

Next he shows that $\Delta^{p,q}_{BC}$ is not elliptic. As a result he introduces new operator $$\tilde{\Delta}_{BC}^{p,q}=(\partial\bar\partial)(\partial\bar\partial)^*+(\partial\bar\partial)^*(\partial\bar\partial)+(\bar\partial^*\partial)(\bar\partial^*\partial)^*+(\bar\partial^*\partial)^*(\bar\partial^*\partial)+\bar\partial^*\bar\partial+\partial^*\partial$$ and proves its ellipticity. After that he notice that $$\tilde{\Delta}_{BC}^{p,q}=0\iff \bar\partial=\partial=\bar\partial^*\partial^*=0.$$ Which in fact means that $\ker\Delta_{BC}^{p,q}=\ker\tilde{\Delta}_{BC}^{p,q},$ i.e. $\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\Delta_{BC}}=\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\tilde{\Delta}_{BC}}.$ As a result of the above he states Theorem 2.2 which claims exactly $(*).$

I do not see how to infer $(*)$. Since $\Delta_{BC}^{p,q}$ is not elliptic, I believe we cannot infer $(*)$ just by the fact that $\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\Delta_{BC}}=\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\tilde{\Delta}_{BC}}.$

PS. Article is written in French, so I might misunderstood something. Please correct me if I wrote something incorrectly.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah, he omitted some simple calculations. You can find the details for the dual case of Aeppli cohomology in an old paper of Bigolin archive.numdam.org/article/ASNSP_1969_3_23_2_259_0.pdf, see Theorem 1.7 and Corollary 1.8, pp.284-285. It is easy to adapt these to the case of Bott-Chern. $\endgroup$
    – YangMills
    Jun 21, 2016 at 15:19
  • $\begingroup$ All you need to check (if you want, following Bigolin) is that the image of $\tilde{\Delta}_{BC}$ equals the image of $\partial\overline{\partial}$ plus the image of $\partial^*$ plus the image of $\overline{\partial}^*$. $\endgroup$
    – YangMills
    Jun 21, 2016 at 15:39
  • $\begingroup$ see also the note on page 286 of Bigolin, where he remarks that the arguments he gives for Aeppli also apply to Bott-Chern, just switching $\partial$ with $\overline{\partial}^*$. $\endgroup$
    – YangMills
    Jun 21, 2016 at 16:24
  • $\begingroup$ @YangMills This is exactly what I was looking for. I will go through the details and see if everything works flawless. Thank you. $\endgroup$
    – Fallen Apart
    Jun 22, 2016 at 13:16

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1
$\begingroup$

$\DeclareMathOperator{im}{im}$

Based on @YangMills suggestion I examined Bruno Bigolin's paper titled "Gruppi di Aeppli" and as a result I am now able to show the following relation

$$\ker\partial\cap\ker\bar\partial=\im\partial\bar\partial\oplus_\perp\mathcal{H}.$$

Let $\psi\in\ker\partial\cap\ker\bar\partial.$ We can represent $\psi$ as $$\psi=\Delta G\psi+\pi\psi=\\\color{red}{\partial\bar\partial\bar\partial^*\partial^* G\psi}+\color{blue}{\bar\partial^*\partial^*\partial\bar\partial G\psi}+\color{blue}{\bar\partial^*\partial\partial^*\bar\partial G\psi}+\color{green}{\partial^*\bar\partial\bar\partial^*\partial G\psi}+\color{blue}{\bar\partial^*\bar\partial G\psi}+\color{green}{\partial^*\partial G\psi} + \pi\psi=\\\color{red}{\partial\bar\partial\alpha}+\color{green}{\partial^*\lambda}+\color{blue}{\bar\partial^*\mu}+h,$$ where $G$ is Green's operator and $\pi$ is projection on $\mathcal{H}.$ As a result $$\partial^*\lambda+\bar\partial^*\mu=\psi-\partial\bar\partial\alpha-h.$$ Now since $\psi,\partial\bar\partial\alpha,h\in\ker\partial\cap\ker\bar\partial$, so as $\partial^*\lambda+\bar\partial^*\mu\in\ker\partial\cap\ker\bar\partial.$ And then $$||\partial^*\lambda+\bar\partial^*\mu||^2=\langle\partial(\partial^*\lambda+\bar\partial^*\mu),\lambda\rangle+\langle\bar\partial(\partial^*\lambda+\bar\partial^*\mu),\mu\rangle=0.$$ Hence $$\psi=\partial\bar\partial\alpha+h.$$ And yet $\im\partial\bar\partial\perp\mathcal{H}.$ In fact $$\langle\partial\bar\partial\alpha,h\rangle=\langle\alpha,\bar\partial^*\partial^*h\rangle=0.$$ So we proved that $$\ker\partial\cap\ker\bar\partial=\im\partial\bar\partial\oplus_\perp\mathcal{H}.$$ Immediate consequence of above is that $$H_{BC}\cong\mathcal{H}.$$ And since $\Delta$ is elliptic we get that $\dim_\mathbb{C}H_{BC}<\infty.$

PS. Above $\Delta=\tilde\Delta_{BC}^{p,q},\mathcal{H}=\mathcal{H}^{p,q}_{\tilde\Delta_{BC}}, H_{BC}=H^{p,q}_{BC}$ and $\psi\in\mathcal{E}^{p,q}.$

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.