10
$\begingroup$

It is well known that every smooth and every complex manifold equipped with a group action by a (compact) Lie group $G$ admits a stratification by orbit types.
I would like to know if there is a similar orbit type stratification in every one of the following cases:

1.) smooth symplectic manifolds;

2.) holomorphic symplectic manifolds;

3.) Kaehler manifolds;

Most importantly, I would like to know if the strata are smoothly/holomorphically symplectic resp. Kaehler. I would appreciate if you can give some references/literature.

$\endgroup$
15
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Hassan Jolany: Thank you for the references and your answer. Does this stratification go through in the case of a complex manifold equipped with a non-degenerate closed (2,0)-form? Do you know if it goes through for Kaehler manifolds? $\endgroup$ – Flavius Aetius Oct 12 '17 at 11:14
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @Flavius Aetius Your question depends on the meaning of non-degeneracy of symplectic (2,0)-form: You may find your answer here: Fehér, L. M.; Némethi, A.; Rimányi, R. Degeneracy of 2-forms and 3-forms. Canad. Math. Bull. 48 (2005), no. 4, 547–560. $\endgroup$ – user21574 Oct 12 '17 at 11:27
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ You may check for simplest example(I learnt long times ago from someone): $G^\mathbb C≃T^∗G$ ,which is Kähler manifold and the symplectic quotient $G^{\mathbb C}//G$ is a stratified singular Kähler space. The quotient may be identified with the $ \mathbb T^{\mathbb C}/W$, where $\mathbb T^{\mathbb C}$ is the complexification of a maximal torus $\mathbb T$ in $G$ and $W$ is the Weyl group. The dimension of orbits of this stratification varies $\endgroup$ – user21574 Oct 12 '17 at 11:55
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ @Flavius Aetius There is a nice survey paper of See Theorem1.3 numdam.org/article/AMBP_2006__13_2_209_0.pdf . I think you can ask your question of the author of this paper. Ask of Dr.Baohua FU $\endgroup$ – user21574 Oct 13 '17 at 3:15
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ I think your question is very important.There is a very important conjecture of Fu-Yau . Conjecture 6.5 arxiv.org/pdf/math/0111089.pdf. Every birational contraction from a smooth projective symplectic variety is necessarily strictly semismall. Equivalently, it can always be symplectically stratified. $\endgroup$ – user21574 Oct 13 '17 at 3:28
1
$\begingroup$

I have a partial answer to my own question that I posed 5 days ago. It turns out that at least in the case of a smooth symplectic manifold you can perform an orbit type stratification. Here is why:

Asume $X$ is a symplectic manifold equipped with a symplectic form $\omega$. Assume furthermore that a compact Lie group acts by symplectomorphisms on $X$. Then if we ignore the symplectic form for a while, $X$ is a smooth $G$-manifold. It therefore naturally decomposes in so-called orbit types $X_{(H)}:=\{x\in X: (Stab(x))=(H)\}$, where $H$ is a closed Lie subgroup of $G$ and the brackets $(~~)$denote the conjugacy class. These are in general not connected, but their connected components, $X_{(H)}^{i}$, have the structure of locally closed submanifolds. These connected components are referred to as orbit type strata of $X$ and satisfy a bunch of useful conditions, the most important of which is the frontier condition. These conditions are irrelevant here, so I will not mention them further. The smooth manifold $X$ is decomposed in a disjoint union of orbit type strata. Interestingly, each orbit type stratum $X_{(H)}^{i}$, coincides with some connected component $X_{H}^{j}$ of the isotropy type $X_{H}:=\{x\in X| Stab(x)=H\}$. Here is where the symplectic picture comes into play. By Lemma 27.1 in the book "Symplectic techniques in physics" by Guillemin and Sternberg the tangent space at the every point $x$ in $X_{H}$, $T_xX_H$ is a symplectic subspace of the symplectic tangent space at the point $x$ in all of $X$, $(T_xX, \omega_x)$. Hence $X_H$ is in fact a symplectic sub-manifold of $X$. Hence each connected component $X_{H}^{j}$ will be a symplectic submanifold. Thus, the orbit types $X_{(H)}^{i}$ will be symplectic submanifolds. The additional conditions, that strata need to satisfy, are topological in nature so I don't believe that the symplectic form $\omega$ will affect them. In light of what I tried to explain in the above, I believe that a smooth symplectic manifold $X$ endowed with a group action by a compact symplectic Lie group, can be stratified by symplectic orbit types. Moreover, I am quite certain that the above argumentation goes through in the case of a complex symplectic manifold, since in that case we have in advance a complex stratification by holomorphic orbit types. The only thing missing is that the strata admit a closed, non-degenerate $(2, 0)$-form. This however can be demonstrated in a similar fashion as in the book of Guillemin and Sternberg.

$\endgroup$
14
  • $\begingroup$ Flavius : Interesting $\endgroup$ – user21574 Oct 18 '17 at 13:46
  • $\begingroup$ Hassan Jolany: I am assuming the orbit type stratification of a smooth/complex G-manifold. This, as mentioned in my original question, always exists. Then in case we have a smooth/holomorphic symplectic form what remains to be done is to show that the orbit type strata are in fact smoothly/holomorphically symplectic. I hope I did not miss something. I would recommend Symplectic techniques in physics by Guillemin and Sternberg. $\endgroup$ – Flavius Aetius Oct 18 '17 at 14:25
  • $\begingroup$ I know this book. I had read half of this book 5 years ago. It is nice book and the book written friendly $\endgroup$ – user21574 Oct 18 '17 at 14:27
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, the relevant part is section II, chapter 27 Group actions and foliations. The only drawback is that everything is done in the smooth category. $\endgroup$ – Flavius Aetius Oct 18 '17 at 14:29
  • $\begingroup$ @FlaviusAetius I think, there is a small error in your argument. The statement "each orbit type stratum $X^i_{(H)}$ coincides with some connected component $X^j_H$ of the isotropy type $H$" does not hold. The orbit type strata are $G$-invariant, while only the normalizer of $H$ acts on the isotropy type submanifold. Moreover, the tangent space to the isotropy type submanifold is not the space of $H$-invariant vector (you still have an additional direction in the orbit direction), see for example Prop. 2.4.6 in Ortega & Ratiu. $\endgroup$ – Tobias Diez Oct 21 '17 at 12:20

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.