The Hodge conjecture seems to me the most mysterious among the Millennium problems (and many others). In particular, I am not sure about its logical complexity. It is not difficult to see that the conjecture is equivalent to a $\Pi^0_2$ statement if restricted to varieties over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$. (Basically, it is because these varieties form a recursive set, and the statement sounds like "for any Hodge class there is an algebraic cycle".) However the conjecture may be true over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$ but false in general ; if I am not mistaken, this possibility has not being ruled out yet. My guess is that the Hodge conjecture may be formulated as a $\Pi^0_3$ statement but, at present, not as $\Pi^0_2$. Is it true?

Some remarks. As is well known, the Hodge conjecture may be separated into two parts:

I. Hodge classes are absolute,

II. Absolute Hodge classes are algebraic.

The second part is $\Pi^0_2$. (It follows from results of Voisin, "Hodge loci and absolute Hodge classes", Compositio Mathematica, Vol. 143 Part 4, 945-958, 2007. ) So, the logically hard part seems to be the first one. In view of Proposition 0.5 of the Voisin's paper, it boils down to whether Hodge loci are defined over $\overline{\mathbb{Q}}$ or not. I have some ideas about how to translate this into $\Pi^0_3$ but nothing close to $\Pi^0_2$. Naturally, if it is true that the Hodge conjecture can not be formulated as a $\Pi^0_2$ statement for now, there is no way one can actually prove this fact. In case it is not unlikely to be so, I am only asking for an expert opinion. Also, if possible, I would appreciate a slick and sound proof of the "upper bound" $\Pi^0_3$ (although I have some ideas about it, I do not really like them).



Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.