MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The motivation for this question comes from the Volume Conjecture of Kashaev-Murakami-Murakami. The Jones family of invariants of knots and $3$-manifolds can all be defined using $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ and some corresponding character varieties, but somehow these invariants can "see" representations into $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb C)$ as well (in particular, the volumes of these representations). Thus it is natural to ask how the theory would/could extend to $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb C)$.

In the Witten-Reshetikhin-Turaev TQFT, we associate to a surface $\Sigma$ a certain space $Z(\Sigma)$ as follows. There is a natural line bundle $\mathcal L$ over the character variety $$X:=\operatorname{Hom}(\pi_1(\Sigma),\mathrm{SU}(2))/ \mathrm{SU}(2).$$ There is a natural symplectic form on $X$, and choosing a complex structure on $\Sigma$ equips $X$ with a complex structure which together with the symplectic form makes $X$ a Kahler manifold. Then $Z(\Sigma)$ is the Hilbert space of square integrable holomorphic sections of $\mathcal L$ (note $\mathcal L$ carries a natural inner product, and the curvature form of the induced connection coincides with the natural symplectic form on $X$).

Everything works well here in part because $X$ is compact (trivially, since $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ is compact). But what if I want to work with the $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb C)$ character variety instead? Let's call this character variety $X_{\mathbb C}$ (note that everything I've said above about the symplectic form, Kähler structure, and line bundle all extend naturally to $X_{\mathbb C}$).

Do the sections forming $Z(\Sigma)$ naturally extend to sections of $\mathcal L$ over $X_{\mathbb C}$? In what sense are they still square-integrable? In particular, $X_{\mathbb C}$ is now non-compact, so how do I pick a finite-dimensional subspace of the space of sections of $\mathcal L$?

A justification of the notation $X_{\mathbb C}$ is as follows. If we consider a point on the variety $x^2+y^2+z^2+w^2=1$ as representing the matrix $\left(\begin{smallmatrix}x+iy&z+iw\cr-z+iw&x-iy\end{smallmatrix}\right)$, then the real points are exactly $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ and the complex points are $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb C)$. Using these coordinates for the construction of character varieties shows that $X_{\mathbb C}$ is indeed the complexification of $X$.

share|cite|improve this question
Once again, the SU(2) characters are not all of the real points of the SL(2,C) character variety. – Charlie Frohman Jul 30 '11 at 21:22

Let $K$ be a connected compact connected Lie group and let $G$ be the complexification of $K$. Then $G/K$ is an affine space. For any finitely presented $\Gamma$, $\mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma, K)\subset \mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma,G)$ and less obviously we have an inclusion of character varieties: $$\mathfrak{X}_{\Gamma}(K):=\mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma,K)/K\hookrightarrow \mathfrak{X}_{\Gamma}(G):=\mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma,G)/\!\!/G.$$

The polar decomposition writes $G=K\times \mathfrak{p}$ as a space (not a group). We therefore have a projection map: $G\to K$. This induces a projection mapping $\mathrm{Hom}(F_r,G)\to \mathrm{Hom}(F_r,K)$ for a rank $r$ free group $F_r$. The polar decomposition is $K$-equivariant, and thus this projection mapping descends to a mapping $\mathrm{Hom}(F_r,G)/K\to \mathrm{Hom}(F_r,K)/K$ and thus by inclusion (and restriction) to a projection $\mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma,G)/K\to \mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma,K)/K$ for any surjection $F_r\to \Gamma$.

Since $\mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma,G)/K$ projects to $\mathfrak{X}_{\Gamma}(G)$, we have a commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccc} \mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma,G)/K&\twoheadrightarrow& \mathfrak{X}_{\Gamma}(K)\\ \downarrow& &\downarrow\\ \mathfrak{X}_{\Gamma}(G)& =&\mathfrak{X}_{\Gamma}(G) \end{array} $$

Perhaps analyzing the fibers of the top and left surjections, and how they relate in $\mathrm{Hom}(\Gamma,G)/K$ would be helpful?

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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