8
$\begingroup$

Do there exist non-algebraic Kähler threefolds with abelian $\pi_1$ of arbitrarily large rank?

$\endgroup$
10
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Yes. Take an abelian variety $A$ of dimension $g$ embedded in some projective space, and a general surface section $S$ of $A$. By Lefschetz theorem $\pi_1(S)=\pi_1(A)=\Bbb{Z}^{2g}$. $\endgroup$
    – abx
    Commented Sep 7, 2020 at 12:42
  • $\begingroup$ @abx thank you, I modified the question. $\endgroup$
    – user164740
    Commented Sep 7, 2020 at 14:37
  • $\begingroup$ Voisin showed the existence of Kahler tori which are not algebraic: see Example 3.1.1. math.columbia.edu/~thaddeus/seattle/voisin.pdf If one could find hyperplanes in Kahler manifolds, then one could cut it down to a 3-fold. However I suppose a hyperplane section of a non-algebraic Kahler manifold could be algebraic. Maybe one can show that the 1-D intermediate Jacobian is non-algebraic? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate_Jacobian However, I don't know of the existence of hyperplane section in Kahler manifolds. $\endgroup$
    – Ian Agol
    Commented Sep 14, 2020 at 0:56
  • $\begingroup$ @IanAgol I don't understand, in what ambient space would the hyperplane live? $\endgroup$
    – user164740
    Commented Sep 14, 2020 at 5:44
  • $\begingroup$ Just a codimension-1 kahler submanifold $\endgroup$
    – Ian Agol
    Commented Sep 14, 2020 at 8:13

1 Answer 1

0
+350
$\begingroup$

Let's construct such a Kahler $3$-fold $X$. It will be obtained as an elliptic fibration over a projective surface $S$ with abelian fundamental group $\mathbb Z^{2g}$.

Construction. Recall first that the space of principally polarised Abelian varieties of dimension $g$ has dimension $g(g+1)/2$. Let us consider the space of all complex tori of dimension $g+1$ that are obtained as an extension of a principally polarized Abelian variety $A_g$ by an elliptic curve $E$

$$E\to T_{g+1}\to A_g.$$

It is not hard to see that (up to natural equivalence) this space has dimension $g(g+1)/2+1+g$. Here $g(g+1)/2$ stands for the dimension of the space of ppavs, $1$ for elliptic curves, and $g=2g-g$ - for the dimension of extensions of a fixed Abelian variety by a fixed elliptic curve modulo the natural equivalence .

Since $g(g+1)/2+1+2g=(g+1)(g+2)/2$, we see that the space of such tori has the same dimension as the moduli space of principally polarized Abelian variteties of dimension $g+1$. However, not all constructed tori are projective*, and so we can pick one of such $T_{g+1}$ that is not an Abelian variety.

Now, take a very ample line bundle $L$ on the corresponding $A_g$ and consider a compete intersection $S\subset A_g$ of dimension $2$. Finally we take $X\subset T_{g+1}$ as the induced elliptic fibration

$$E\to X\to S.$$

Since $\pi_1(S)\cong \mathbb Z^{2g}$, and the elliptic fibration is a topologically trivial bundle, we have $\pi_1(X)\cong \mathbb Z^{2g+2}$. So we only need to prove that $X$ is not projective.

(non) Projectiveness of $X$. Assume by contradiction that $X$ is projective, I want to deduce then that $T_{g+1}$ is projective as well. To do this, I believe it is enough to construct a divisor $D$ on $T_{g+1}$ that intersects positively the fibre of the fibration. To construct it, take a curve $C\subset S$ such that $C+C+\ldots + C$ ($g$ times) is $A_g$. Let $E\to Y\to C$ be the restriction of the bundle to $C$. Since $Y$ is a projective surface, we can take a curve $C'\subset Y$ that projects to $C$ with positive degree. Finally take $g$-fold sum $C'+\ldots +C'=D\subset T_{g+1}$. This is the desired divisor (since by construction it projects to the whole $A_g$).

Once we have $D$, we can construct a divisor in $T_{g+1}$ whose $g+1$ power is positive, hence it is ample. This contradicts the fact that $T_{g+1}$ is not projective.

*I think this can be deduced, for example from Poincare reducibility, as follows. Let $T_{g+1}$ be one of constructed complex tori. Assume that it is an Abelian variety. Then the dual $T_{g+1}^*$ is also an Abelian variety. Moreover, it contains a sub-torus, and so thanks to Poincare reducibility it is isogenous to a product of two tori. Hence the same holds for $T_{g+1}$. But this is not the case for a general member of the constructed family.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.