1
$\begingroup$

I want to know whether ot not Proposition 1.12 (2) in p. 120 of the book [KN] is typo.

[KN] : Foundations of differential geometry Volume II - Kobayashi and Nomizu 1969 Interscience Publishing

Let $\phi$ be a two form associated to Hermitian inner product $h$ such that $\phi(X,Y) = h(X,JY)$ where $J$ is an almost complex structure.

Then Proposition 1.12 (2) says that $\phi = -2i \sum_{j,k=1}^n h_{j\overline{k}} \xi^j \wedge \overline{\xi}^k$

I can not understand why 2 is needed in the above equation.

In the proof,
$\phi(Z,W)=-i\sum_{j,k=1}^n h_{j\overline{k}} (\xi^j(Z)\overline{\xi}^k(W)-\xi^j(W)\overline{\xi}^k (Z))$. This equation can be understood. In fact, in (5) of p. 155 the fundamental two form also has 2 (i.e. $\Phi = -2i \sum_{i, j} g_{ij} dz^i \wedge d\overline{z}^j$). Summarizingly, do Proposition 1.12 (2) in p. 120 and (5) of p. 155 have typos ?
Or, please give me an explanation.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Hee Kwon Lee: Your question will become more readable if you enclose the TeX in dollar signs! Just click the edit button. If you have trouble, there is a link at the right of the page, below the list of related questions. $\endgroup$ – Mark Grant Apr 27 '12 at 14:11
5
$\begingroup$

Some authors define exterior products as quotient spaces of tensor products, letting $\alpha\wedge \beta$ be the coset represented by $\alpha\otimes\beta$. Others define exterior products as subspaces of tensor products, letting $\alpha\wedge \beta$ be $\alpha\otimes\beta-\beta\otimes\alpha$. Or one half of that. You can see that this can lead to confusion. This has been discussed elsewhere at MO.

I think you just have to make sure that you know what the convention is in that book.

$\endgroup$

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.