Isomorphism classes of line bundles over a scheme $X$ are described by the Picard group $Pic(X)$. Now there is a paper that describes the moduli space of line bundles with connections. This paper is quite technical for me to understand but I do understand that it must be quite different than $Pic(X)$. We can fix our $X$ (I am mainly interested in complex surfaces). Since we have fixed rank as well ($r=1$). I suspect that the moduli space I am interested in is a fibration over the Picard group (maybe of the moduli space of connections?).

Maybe we can take as an example $X = \mathbb{CP}^2$. Then we know that $Pic(X) = \mathbb{Z}$ since the invertible sheaves $=$ line bundles are classified by the degree of the corresponding divisor. Now, let us fix for a moment such a degree say $l$ for the class of line bundle associated to $\mathcal{O}(l)$. Equip this space with a connection $A \in \mathcal{A}^{(l)}$ where the latter is the affine space of connections over $X$. Of course we want to consider connections up to endomorphisms $f \in G^{(l)}$. Therefore, for the line bundle $\mathcal{O}(l)$ the corresponding moduli space of connections on it is $\mathcal{M}^{(l)} := \mathcal{A}^{(l)}/G^{(l}$. I can only assume then that the moduli space of line bundles with connections is a "combination" of $Pic(X)$ and $\sqcup_l \mathcal{M}^{(l)}$. How far off am I?

Of course I might be saying completely crazy things. I would like to get some intuition so anything you might say might be of some help.

P.S. In this question the OP claims that line bundles over $X$ are parametrised by their Chern classes. Is this parametrisation an isomorphism class one? And if so what is the relation with Pic($X$) and the question above?

  • $\begingroup$ You are indeed far off. A vector bundle with a connection has trivial Chern classes. For $X=\mathbb{P}^2$, the only line bundle with a connection is $(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^2},d)$. $\endgroup$ – abx Mar 3 '18 at 11:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What does this notation mean (the $d$ part)? But I do not understand why a vector bundle with connection has trivial Chern classes? Do you mean fixed? $\endgroup$ – Marion Mar 3 '18 at 11:45
  • $\begingroup$ @abx do you have a reference / proof for the fact you mention? (i.e. a vector bundle with connection has trivial chern classes) I'd never heard of it and I'm very interested. $\endgroup$ – Yosemite Sam Mar 3 '18 at 17:57
  • $\begingroup$ @YosemiteSam I don't think this statement is quite true. Analytically a connection will define a curvature and that is directly related to the $c_1$, the first Chern class. For a line bundle $c_1$ is far from trivial while indeed $c_2=0$. $\endgroup$ – Marion Mar 3 '18 at 17:59
  • $\begingroup$ @YosemiteSam: the classic refence is Atiyah, Complex analytic connections in fibre bundles, Transactions of the Amer. Math. Soc. 85 (1957), 181-207. MR 19:172c. $\endgroup$ – Ben McKay Apr 2 '18 at 20:48

This is more of a comment. First of all, you have to be clear about which category you're working in. Do you want $C^\infty$ line bundles with $C^\infty$ connections, or holomorphic line bundles with holomorphic connections, or...? If it's the second, as I suspect, then abx is correct, the first Chern class is zero for $X$ smooth projective (cf, Atiyah, Complex analytic connections in fibre bundles, Transactions AMS 1957). Assuming this case, then the a collection of line bundles with connection is well known to be $$LineConn(X)=\mathbb{H}^1(X,dlog: O_X^*\to \Omega_X^1)$$ For an explanation, see Esnault-Viehweg's article on Deligne-Beilinson cohomology, or probably the paper you linked. From the standard exact sequence, we get $$ 0\to H^0(X,\Omega_X^1)\to LineConn(X)\to Pic^\tau(X) \to 0$$ I think this is what you're looking for. $Pic^\tau$ is the group of line bundles with trivial $c_1$ in rational cohomology.

  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, physicist here. I am not sure that I agree that $c_1$ is zero even in the case of holomorphic line bundles with holomorphic connections. Assume $X = \mathbb{CP}^2$ and $L \to E$ a hermitian line bundle over $X$ and equip it with a hermitian connection $A$ (local one-form presented here) s.t. $F = dA$ is the curvature. Then over a cycle $S$ we can have $\int_S F \backsim c_1(L)$ and this does not have to be zero. This is what physicists call magnetic flux. $\endgroup$ – Marion Mar 3 '18 at 18:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You seem to be talking about $C^\infty$ connection on a holomorphic line bundle. And that's fine. But as I said, you have to clear from the beginning about what the category is that you're working in. $\endgroup$ – Donu Arapura Mar 3 '18 at 18:36
  • $\begingroup$ But from Kobayashi-Hitchin a $C^{\infty}$ connection corresponds to a hermitian connection. And a hermitian connection is defined on a hermitian line bundle which is holomorphic. $\endgroup$ – Marion Mar 3 '18 at 18:38
  • $\begingroup$ No. The connection form for holomorphic connection is holomorphic, whereas for a hermitian connection it isn't ( its $\partial \log ||f||$ where $f$ is a $C^\infty$ section.) Anyway, that's all I have to say about this. $\endgroup$ – Donu Arapura Mar 3 '18 at 18:45
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Marion: Arapura is correct of course. Do you want a smooth connection on a holomorphic vector bundle or a holomorphic connection on that bundle? The question is whether the connection has holomorphic coefficients $A^{\mu}_{\nu}$ in a holomorphic trivialization. A Hermitian connection which is not flat cannot be holomorphic, because a holomorphic connection has $(2,0)$ type curvature, while a Hermitian connection has $(1,1)$ type curvature. Look at Huybrechts, Complex Geometry. $\endgroup$ – Ben McKay Apr 2 '18 at 20:45

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.