8
$\begingroup$

Let $S^{d}$ denote the standard $d$-dimensional sphere. I heard from a physicist that from physical arguments they have been able to show that the vector bundle:

$E_{d} = TS^{d}\oplus \Lambda ^{d-2}T^{\ast}S^{d}$

is topologically trivial, meaning that it is parallelizable. The convention is that $\Lambda ^{0}T^{\ast}S^{2} = \mathbb{R}$ and $E_{1} = TS^{1}$. They call this bundles $E_{d}$ "generalized spheres".

Is this claim true? For $d=2$ it can be easily checked that it is correct.

Edit: What about the opposite question? namely which orientable, $d$-dimensional, Riemannian manifolds $M_{d}$ have the corresponding $E_{d} = TM_{d}\oplus \Lambda^{2} T^{\ast}M_{d}$ trivial? For example:

$S^{6}$ is the prototypical example of irreducible nearly Kahler manifold. Is it true that $E_{6}$ is trivial when taking $M_{6}$ to be any irreducible nearly-Kahler manifold?

$S^{7}$ is an example of nearly parallel $G_{2}$-manifold. Is it true that $E_{7}$ is trivial when taking $M_{7}$ to be any nearly-parallel $G_{2}$ manifold?

Thanks.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ $S^d$ has a metric and orientation, which gives $T\simeq T^*$ and $\Lambda^kT\simeq\Lambda^{d-k}T$. Thus, the claim is that $T\oplus\Lambda^2T$ is trivial. As others have said, this is certainly true stably. I would guess that it is not true unstably, but that is just a guess. $\endgroup$ – Neil Strickland Apr 15 '15 at 7:07
  • $\begingroup$ @NeilStrickland: Thanks Neil. What means "stably" in this context? $\endgroup$ – Bilateral Apr 15 '15 at 10:35
14
$\begingroup$

It is true in general that $E_d$ is trivial. As remarked by Neil Strickland above, this boils down to showing that $TS^d\oplus\Lambda^2 TS^d$ is always a trivial bundle. To see this, represent $S^d$ as $SO(d+1)/SO(d)$. Then all bundles in question are homogeneous vector bundles (and the isomorphisms used in the comment are compatible with the homogeneous structure). These homogeneous bundles are classified by representations of $SO(d)$ and the representation in question is $\mathbb R^d\oplus\Lambda^2\mathbb R^d\cong \mathbb R^d\oplus\mathfrak{so}(d)$. But as a representation of $SO(d)$, this is isomrophic to the restriction of the adjoint representation $\mathfrak{so}(d+1)$ of $SO(d+1)$. This implies that $TS^d\oplus\Lambda^2 TS^d$ actually is an associated bundle to the the principal bundle $SO(d+1)\times_{SO(d)}SO(d+1)\to SO(d+1)/SO(d)$ and this principal bundle is easily seen to be trivial (mapping $(g,g')\to (gSO(d),gg')$ factorises to an isomorphism from the associated bundle to $(SO(d+1)/SO(d))\times SO(d+1)$).

This actually is an istance of a so-called tractor bundle over the homogeneous model of a Cartan geometry. There is an anlogous result associated to any representation of $SO(d+1)$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the answer. What about the opposite question? namely which orientable Riemannian manifolds $M$ have the corresponding $E_{d} = TM_{d}\oplus \Lambda^{2} T^{\ast}M_{d}$ trivial? For example: $S^{6}$ is a prototypical example of irreducible nearly Kahler manifold. It is true that $E_{6}$ is trivial when taking $M_{6}$ to be any irreducible nearly-Kahler manifold? $\endgroup$ – Bilateral Apr 15 '15 at 12:17
  • $\begingroup$ By the way, does this answer depend on whether $S^{d}$ is the standard or the squashed sphere? $\endgroup$ – Bilateral Apr 15 '15 at 13:57
  • $\begingroup$ While the argument I gave is based on the fact that $S^d$ is a space-form, the statement about triviality of the bundle is invariant under diffeomorphisms. So if by "squashed sphere" you mean the sphere endowed with a different metric, the statement holds there, too. I have no idea whether there is a relation to nearly K\"ahler structures, but I would rather doubt it. $\endgroup$ – Andreas Cap Apr 15 '15 at 18:00
  • $\begingroup$ I am not sure about the relation to nearly Kahler. But there is an analog of the result for any symmetric space, and I think this gives a refinement for $S^6$. Namely, $TS^6\oplus\mathfrak{su}(TS^6)$ is a trivial bundle (where in the second summand you take skew-Hermitian rather than skew symmetric maps). This is related to viewing $S^6$ as a homogeneous space of $G_2$. $\endgroup$ – Andreas Cap Apr 22 '15 at 5:56
  • $\begingroup$ (ttoo small to edit): istance -> instance, anlogous -> analogous $\endgroup$ – ypercubeᵀᴹ Nov 26 '16 at 0:16
7
$\begingroup$

Actually, this is simpler than I thought. The map $$ (u,v) \mapsto x\wedge u + v $$ gives an isomorphism $$ T_xS^n \oplus \Lambda^2 T_xS^n \to \Lambda^2(\mathbb{R}^{n+1}), $$ and this trivialises the bundle $T\oplus\Lambda^2T$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ would the same proof work for manifolds different than $S^{d}$? $\endgroup$ – Bilateral Apr 17 '15 at 12:48
  • $\begingroup$ @Neil is there a short proof as above to prove that $TS^{n}\oplus TS^{n}$ is trivial? $\endgroup$ – Ali Taghavi Apr 20 '15 at 15:28
-1
$\begingroup$

Yes, every sphere (and even every homotopy sphere) is stably parallelizable. See page 79 in this paper by Tim Lance.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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