Let $X$ be a smooth complete variety over an algebraically closed field of dimension $\geq3$. Given a divisor $D_1$ on $X$ with $D_1 \cdot C>0$ for every curve $C \subset X$, and a divisor $D_2$ on $X$ satisfying $D_2^2 \cdot S>0$ for every surface $S \subset X$, does there exist a divisor $D$ on $X$ satisfying $D \cdot C>0$ and $D^2 \cdot S>0$ for every curve and surface respectively? I am willing to make any assumption on $X$, except that $X$ be projective.

As I understand it, since $D_1$ is nef, we have that $D_1^2 \cdot S\geq 0$, so even if for $m>>0$ we manage to have $(mD_1+D_2) \cdot C>0$ for every curve, the other requirement becomes $(mD_1+D_2)^2 \cdot S = m^2(D_1^2 \cdot S) + 2m(D_1\cdot D_2 \cdot S) + D_2^2 \cdot S >0$. The first term is non-negative, the last term is positive, but what needs to happen to ensure the middle term is non-negative also?


I am not sure whether your original question is true, but it seems to me that your proposed solution does not work. Here is why:

The main problem is that you know very little about $D_2$. Given what we know, it does not even have to be effective!

Example Let $X$ be a smooth complete variety with divisors $A,B$ such

  • $A\cdot B=0$

  • $(A^2+B^2)\cdot S>0$ for any surface $S$, and

  • $B$ and $B^2$ are effective classes.

Then $D_2=A-B$ has the property that $D_2^2\cdot S>0$ for any $S$, but $D_1\cdot D_2\cdot B\cdot H <0$ for any $D_1$ divisor satisfying the criterion given in the question and an appropriate $H$ such that $B\cdot S$ is an effective surface and $B^2\cdot H$ is an effective curve.

To make this complete I should give an example that such an $X$ with $A,B$ exists. I think I can construct an example (a product of two surfaces blown up along a surface) satisfying these properties, but I don't know a simple one. In any case I think it is reasonable to expect that such an example exists which shows that $D_1\cdot D_2\cdot S$ is not necessarily non-negative even on a projective variety.

  • $\begingroup$ Yes, you're right Sandor. It seems one cannot get around this without making some critical assumptions on $D_1 \cdot D_2$. Thank you. $\endgroup$ – Parsa Oct 28 '11 at 11:27

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.