6
$\begingroup$

Let $\mathcal{L}_g$ be the space of abelian differentials on Riemann surfaces of genus $g\ge 2$ and $\mathcal{TH}_g:=\mathcal{L}_g/Diff_0^+(S_g)$ be the Teichmuller space of abelian differentials on Riemann surfaces as it is defined in this article http://arxiv.org/pdf/1311.2758v1.pdf by Giovanni Forni and Carlos Matheus. Let $\mathcal{TH}(k)$ be a stratum of $\mathcal{TH}_g$.

At page 20 they state: "It is possible to prove that every $\omega_0\in \mathcal{TH}(k)$ has an open neighborhood $U_0\subset\mathcal{TH}(k)$ such that, after identifying, for all $\omega\in U_0$, the cohomology $H^1(M,\Sigma(\omega),\mathbb{C})$ with the fixed complex vector space $H^1(M,\Sigma(\omega_0),\mathbb{C})$ via the Gauss-Manin connection (i.e., through identification of the integer lattices $H^1(M,\Sigma(\omega),\mathbb{Z}+i\mathbb{Z})$ and $H^1(M,\Sigma(\omega_0),\mathbb{Z}+i\mathbb{Z})$), the period map $\Theta : U_0 \rightarrow H^1(M,\Sigma(\omega_0),\mathbb{C})$ that is, the map defined by the formula

$\Theta(\omega) :=( \gamma \mapsto\int_\gamma\omega )\in Hom(H^1(M, \Sigma(\omega), \mathbb{Z}); \mathbb{C}) \simeq H^1(M, \Sigma(\omega), \mathbb{C}) \simeq H^1(M, \Sigma(\omega_0), \mathbb{C})$ ,

is a local homeomorphism."

In fact in the next page they also state that the period map $\Theta$ gives $\mathcal{TH}(k)$ the structure of a complex manifold.

My question is really silly, but I'm not sure which are the complex coordinates given by $\Theta$.

My guess is this: fix $\omega_0$ and $U_0$. Then choose a basis $\{\tau_1,\dots,\tau_{2g+\sigma-1}\}$ of $H_1(M,\Sigma(\omega_0),\mathbb{Z})$. Then for every $\omega\in U_0$, $\Theta(\omega)=(\int_{\tau_1}\omega,\dots,\int_{\tau_{2g+\sigma-1}}\omega)\in\mathbb{C}^{2g+\sigma-1}$. So the complex coordinates are $(\int_{\tau_1}\omega,\dots,\int_{\tau_{2g+\sigma-1}}\omega)$ and a change of atlas consists in a change of basis of $H_1(M,\Sigma(\omega_0),\mathbb{Z})$.

Am I right?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ What about asking the authors ? $\endgroup$ – Thomas Jun 16 '16 at 16:21
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ it's a standard construction, they're not the only ones doing it $\endgroup$ – user0029 Jun 16 '16 at 16:22
3
$\begingroup$

Yes, $(\int_{\tau_1}\omega,...,\int_{\tau_{2g+\sigma-1}}\omega)$ are the complex coordinates 'given by $\Theta$'. In fact, the authors prove (using the Moser trick) that these integrals are locally injective. To prove that $\Theta$ maps to an open subset in $\mathbb C^{2g+\sigma-1}$ one observes that there exist closed complex-valued $\alpha_1,..,\alpha_{2g+\sigma-1}$ 1-forms such that they vanish identically on a neighborhood of the given set of zeros, and such that $(\int_{\tau_j}\alpha_i)$ is invertible.

Coordinate changes are then given by either changing the basis of $H^1(M,\Sigma(\omega_0),\mathbb Z)$ or by changing $\Sigma(\omega_0)$, i.e. the Riemann surface and the abelian differential.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ could you explain why you say "To prove that $\Theta$ maps to an open set in $\mathbb{C}^{2g+\sigma-1}$ one observes that there exist closed complex forms which vanish identically on a neighborhood of the zeroes? Why is the condition of vanishing in a neighborhood of the zeroes important? This also seems very relevant to this question mathoverflow.net/questions/309498/… $\endgroup$ – User28341 Sep 4 '18 at 21:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It can be used to define a Riemann surface structure: Take $\omega+t\alpha_k$ for $t\in\mathbb C$ small enough such that the zeros of $\omega+t\alpha_k$ are the same as the zeros of $\omega$. Then, away from the zeros of $\omega+t\alpha_k$, this closed form is the differential of a local diffeomorphism onto $\mathbb C$, which can be used to define a new Riemann surface structure on $M\setminus\{\text{ zeros of } \omega\}$.Near the zeros of $\omega$, we can use the old complex structure (for which $\omega$ is holomorphic), and the vanishing of $\alpha_k$ near the zeros shows compatibility. $\endgroup$ – Sebastian Sep 5 '18 at 10:01
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! So, if I understand correctly, the purpose of vanishing in a neighborhood of the zeroes is that then each complex differential $\omega+t\alpha_k$ admits a complex structure with respect to which $\omega+t\alpha_k$ is an Abelian differential. Am I right to say that this proves that the Period map $\Theta:U_0\rightarrow H^1(M,\Sigma(\omega_0),\mathbb{C})$ is surjective? $\endgroup$ – User28341 Sep 5 '18 at 14:39
  • $\begingroup$ I think, by this argument you only get that the map is open. $\endgroup$ – Sebastian Sep 5 '18 at 14:53

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.