5
$\begingroup$

I am wondering whether the bijection that takes a $k$-dimensional subspace $W\subset V$ in an $n$-dimensional space $V$ to its orthogonal complement $W^\bot$ is a rational (algebraic) morphism between the Grassmanians $Gr_k(V)$ and $Gr_{n-k}(V)$. And how to see this?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Well, this requires the data of an inner product on $V$. If you want something that doesn't require an inner product (so works over any field) you should take a subspace $W \subset V$ to its annihilator in $V^{\ast}$. $\endgroup$ Mar 4, 2012 at 22:42
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, yes of course I mean there is a given inner product on V. Then why is the map algebraic? $\endgroup$
    – Jerry
    Mar 5, 2012 at 0:11
  • $\begingroup$ I edited your post a little. It's customary not to write "thanks" or to sign your questions, since your username is automatically displayed below. $\endgroup$
    – Ryan Reich
    Mar 5, 2012 at 0:29

3 Answers 3

5
$\begingroup$

To expand on what Qiaochu wrote in his comment, there is a slight ambiguity about the notion of "inner product" when you are working over $\mathbb{C}$. You could use a nondegenerate, symmetric bilinear form, which gives essentially the same thing he wrote and works for any field. Or you could use a Hermitian inner product, which requires conjugation and thus only works for $\mathbb{C}$.

The upshot is that the bijection, using a Hermitian inner product, is rational (algebraic) as a map from $\operatorname{Gr}_k(\mathbb{C}^n) \to \operatorname{Gr}_{n - k}(\mathbb{C}^n)$, but only as varieties over $\mathbb{R}$. When using a general $\mathbb{C}$-bilinear form, it is rational over $\mathbb{C}$, and $\mathbb{C}$ can be replaced by any field as well.

To see this, there is a standard way of understanding $\operatorname{Gr}_k(\mathbb{C}^n)$, namely as the set of $n \times k$ matrices $M$ of full rank $k$, modulo column operations. The columns represent basis vectors in one of the $k$-dimensional subspaces $V$ of $\mathbb{C}^n$, and clearly, $V^\perp$ (with respect to the standard symmetric bilinear form) is the kernel of $M^t$. Since a basis for the kernel can be computed using row reduction, which is algebraic, there's your isomorphism.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Ryan! The only thing bothering me is that how can I see that the entries in the matrix (why are not uniquely determined) correspond to the canonical coordinates (the k-th exterior product) in the Grassmannian in an algebraic way? $\endgroup$
    – Jerry
    Mar 5, 2012 at 0:33
  • $\begingroup$ The matrix entries are indeed non-unique, though if you column-reduce it you can get a somewhat-canonical form (depending on which rows you choose to put the 1's in). The coordinates in $\bigwedge^k (\mathbb{C}^n)$ are just the set of all $k\times k$ minors (determinants) from the matrix $M$. $\endgroup$
    – Ryan Reich
    Mar 5, 2012 at 0:38
7
$\begingroup$

One can define an orthogonal complement map without any usage of a metric metric or bilinear form, just as they do in algebraic geometry. The "orthogonal" complement of a subspace $L\subset V$ is the subspace $L^\perp \subset V^*$ consisting of linear functionals $v:V\to\mathbb{C}$ such that

$$v(x)= 0,\;\;\forall x\in L. $$

We get a map

$$\mathcal{O}: Gr_k(V)\to Gr_{\dim V-k}(V^* ). $$

If we fix $L_0\in Gr_k(V)$, then all $k$ dimensional subspaces of $V$ close to $L_0$ are graphs of a linear map

$$T: L_0\to V/L_0, $$

i.e., a neighborhood of $L_0$ in $GR_k(V)$ can be identified with $ {\rm Hom}\;(L_0, V/L_0) $. Now observe that the dual of $V/L_0$ is naturally identified with $L_0^\perp$ and we can view the dual (transpose) of $T$ as a map

$$ L_0^\perp\to V^*/L_0^\perp $$

The map $\mathcal{O} $ in the above coordinates by the transpose map

$$ {\rm Hom}\;(L_0, V/L_0)\to {\rm Hom}\;(\; (V/L_0)^*, L_0^* )= {\rm Hom}\;( L_0^\perp, V^*/L_0^\perp). $$

Since the above map is linear, we conclude that $\mathcal{O}$ is rational.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ This is very enlightening! When we take $V=\mathbb{C}^n$, is this map biholomorphic? (I'm sure it is a diffeomorphism when we take $V=\mathbb{R}^n$) $\endgroup$ Jul 17, 2021 at 2:12
6
$\begingroup$

Let's be more explicit. Let $k^N$ have orthonormal basis $e_1$, \ldots, $e_n$. Let $L$ be a $d$-plane with Plucker coordinates $p_I$. Let $q_J$ be the Plucker coordinates of $L^{\perp}$. Then $p_I = \pm q_{[n] \setminus I}$, where I am too lazy to work out the sign. In particular, this is a well defined morphism, not just a rational map. Here $[k]$ denotes $\{1,2,\ldots, k \}$.

This is probably more easily done by an example than a proof. Let's look at the $2$-plane in $5$-space given as the row span of $$\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & a & b & c \\ 0 & 1 & d & e & f \end{pmatrix}$$ Its Plucker coordinates are $$p_{12} =1,\ p_{13} = d,\ p_{14}=e,\ p_{15}=f,\ p_{23}=-a,\ p_{24} = -b,\ p_{25} = -c,$$ $$\ p_{34} = ae-bd,\ p_{35} = af-cd,\ p_{45} = bf-ce.$$

The orthogonal complement is $$\begin{pmatrix} a & d & -1 & 0 & 0 \\ b & e & 0 & -1 & 0 \\ c & f & 0 & 0 & -1 \end{pmatrix}.$$ (Check it for yourself!) The Plucker coordinates of this matrix are $$q_{345} = -1,\ q_{245} = d,\ q_{235} = -e,\ q_{234}=f,\ q_{145} = a,\ q_{135}=-b,\ q_{134} = c$$ $$q_{125} = - (ae-bd),\ q_{124} = af-cd,\ q_{123} = - (bf-ce).$$ It should be pretty clear how to redraw this example for a larger Grassmannian, up to getting the sign details right.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I find this answer a lot more satisfying than the checked answer (sorry Ryan!). $\endgroup$ Mar 21, 2012 at 14:16

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.