This paper introduces a higher rank shear construction method for building solvable Lie algebras from Euclidean spaces, enabling the creation of geometric structures like G2 and semi-Kähler on these algebras.
Contribution
It generalizes the shear construction to higher ranks using vector bundles with flat connections, allowing systematic construction of all solvable Lie algebras from bf6n spaces.
Findings
01
Constructed solvable Lie algebras via successive shears.
02
Obtained geometric structures such as calibrated G2 and semi-Kähler on these algebras.
03
Classified G2-structures on specific Lie algebra forms.
Abstract
The twist construction is a method to build new interesting examples of geometric structures with torus symmetry from well-known ones. In fact it can be used to construct arbitrary nilmanifolds from tori. In our previous paper, we presented a generalization of the twist, a shear construction of rank one, which allowed us to build certain solvable Lie algebras from Rn via several shears. Here, we define the higher rank version of this shear construction using vector bundles with flat connections instead of group actions. We show that this produces any solvable Lie algebra from Rn by a succession of shears. We give examples of the shear and discuss in detail how one can obtain certain geometric structures (calibrated G2, co-calibrated G2 and almost semi-K\"ahler) on two-step solvable Lie algebras by shearing almost Abelian Lie algebras. This…
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsHomotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology · Algebraic Geometry and Number Theory · Ubiquitin and proteasome pathways
The twist construction is a method to build new interesting examples
of geometric structures with torus symmetry from well-known ones.
In fact it can be used to construct arbitrary nilmanifolds from
tori.
In our previous paper, we presented a generalization of the twist, a
shear construction of rank one, which allowed us to build certain
solvable Lie algebras from Rn via several shears.
Here, we define the higher rank version of this shear construction
using vector bundles with flat connections instead of group actions.
We show that this produces any solvable Lie algebra from Rn by
a succession of shears.
We give examples of the shear and discuss in detail how one can
obtain certain geometric structures (calibrated G2, co-calibrated
G2 and almost semi-Kähler) on two-step solvable Lie algebras by
shearing almost Abelian Lie algebras.
This discussion yields a classification of calibrated
G2-structures on Lie algebras of the form
(h3⊕R3)⋊R.
Research partially supported by Danish Council for Independent
Research | Natural Sciences projects DFF - 4002-00125
(M. Freibert) and DFF - 6108-00358 (A. Swann).
1. Introduction
The twist construction, introduced in its full generality by the
second author in [Swa10], is a geometric model of
T-duality, a duality relation between different physical
theories closely related also to mirror symmetry of Calabi-Yau
three-folds [SYZ96].
In particular, the S1-version of the twist [Swa07] generalises
T-duality constructions of Gibbons, Papadopoulos and Stelle
[GPS97] in HKT geometry.
However, applications of the twist are not restricted to specific
geometric structures from physics.
In general, one may take an arbitrary tensor field on a manifold M
invariant under the action of a connected n-dimensional Abelian Lie
group A and twist it to a tensor field on a twist space W of
the same dimension as M.
The twist considers double fibrations M←P→W
where both projections are principal A-bundles and the principal
actions commute.
An appropriate choice of principal A-connection gives horizontal
spaces Hp that are identified with corresponding tangent spaces
of M and W under the projections.
This enables one to transfer any invariant tensor field on M to a
unique tensor field on W.
Moreover, one may recover P and W under suitable assumptions
from “twist data” on M, cf. [Swa10].
Hence, one can study properties of the transferred geometric
structures solely on M, without constructing the transferred
structure, or even W or P, explicitly.
This has been successfully applied to produce new
interesting examples of various geometric structures from known ones,
e.g. examples of SKT, hypercomplex or HKT manifolds with special
properties [Swa07] or generalisations of them [FU13, IP13], and
includes and generalizes well-known geometric constructions in hyper-
and quaternionic Kähler geometry [MS15, Swa16] if one first performs
an appropriate “elementary deformation” of the initial structures.
A number of the above examples of the twist are motivated by known
results for nilmanifolds.
Indeed, we will show that the construction is powerful enough to
construct any nilmanifold from the torus by several successive twists.
It follows that the twist can reproduce all the invariant geometric structures
on nilpotent Lie groups or nilmanifolds constructed in the last years,
see [BDV09, CF11, Uga07], for example, and may be used to create new ones.
On the other hand, there is much current interest in invariant
geometric structures on the larger class of solvable Lie groups and
solvmanifolds, see [Fre12, Fre13, CFS11, FV15], for example.
But, as we will see, the natural algebraic interpretation of the twist
cannot produce these.
The aim of this paper is to provide a more general geometric
construction that works naturally for solvable groups and
solvmanifolds.
A rank one version of such a construction was proposed in [FS16],
and called the shear construction.
This was good enough to construct any 1-connected completely
solvable Lie groups G from Rn by subsequent shears.
Here, we extend the definition of the shear to arbitrary rank and show
that this allows one to shear Rn to any simply-connected solvable
Lie group G by a sequence of shears.
Even for the rank one case this extensions turns out to be slightly
more general than that of [FS16].
The main idea is to replace the Abelian group actions in the twist
constructions by morphisms of flat vector bundles satisfying a
torsion-free condition.
Initial data for a shear consists of two flat vector bundles E, F
over M of equal rank.
There should be a vector bundle morphism ξ:E→TM,
so the image is locally generated by commuting vector fields that are
images of flat sections.
Furthermore, there is a two form ω∈Ω2(M,F) with values
in F satisfying d∇ω=0.
One then constructs shears by considering an appropriate submersion
π:P→M whose vertical subbundle V is
isomorphic to π∗F and which carries a connection-like one-form
θ∈Ω1(P,π∗F) with d∇θ=π∗ω.
Shears S of M are then obtained by lifting ξ to an injective
bundle morphism ξ˚:π∗E→TP and taking
S to be the leaf space of the distribution ξ˚(π∗E).
As in the twist, there is a pointwise identification of tangent spaces
of M and S via horizontal spaces in P, but the tensors that may
now be transferred satisfy an invariance condition modified by the
connections.
We motivate the particular construction of the shear by first
examining the left-invariant situation in detail and understanding the
twist construction in this context.
In §2.1 we see that the left-invariant twist
describes central extensions
aP↪p↠g quotiented by a
central ideal a~G.
We then demonstrate how one twists Rn to any nilpotent Lie
algebras by several twists.
For the Lie algebra shear §2.2, we
replace central ideals by arbitrary Abelian ideals and determine the
necessary data.
This is sufficient to show how to build an arbitrary solvable Lie
algebra from Rn by a sequence of shears.
In §3.1, we define the general shear for arbitrary
manifolds equipped with appropriate vector bundles and describe the
relevant shear data.
An important ingredient is a description of the lift procedure for
the bundle morphisms ξ:E→M to ξ˚:π∗E→TP, see Theorem 3.5.
When P is a fibre bundle, we note how this may be described via
Ehresmann connections.
We proceed to determine the conditions for tensor fields on M to
be shear-able to tensor fields on W and obtain useful formulas for
the exterior differentials of sheared forms and Nijenhuis tensors of
sheared almost complex structures.
Finally, in §3.4 we provide conditions
which ensure that the shear is invertible, yielding a dual
relationship between M and S.
In §4, we apply the shear construction to specific
examples.
After demonstrating in §4.1 that the fibres of
π in the shear construction may vary and that even in the fibre
bundle and rank one case, π need not to be a principal bundle in
contrast to the findings in [FS16] for our previous definition of a
rank one shear, we focus attention on the original situation of
left-invariant shears.
We explain in §4.2 how our Lie algebra
version of the shear considered in §2.2
arises from the general shear of §3.1.
We then apply the left-invariant shear to different geometric
structures on almost Abelian Lie algebras, i.e. Lie algebras
of the form Rn⋊R.
We concentrate mainly on calibrated and cocalibrated G2-structures
on seven-dimensional almost Abelian Lie algebras.
The two classes of G2 structures are of interest for various
reasons: calibrated G2-structures on compact manifolds have
interesting curvature properties, e.g. scalar flatness [Bry06] or
the Einstein condition [CI07] already imply that they are
Ricci-flat; cocalibrated G2-structures are structures naturally
induced on oriented hypersurfaces in Spin(7)-manifolds and may,
conversely, be used as initial values for the Hitchin flow [Hit01]
whose solutions define such manifolds.
The almost Abelian cases were classified by the first author
in [Fre12, Fre13].
To apply the shear to almost Abelian Lie algebras, we make a natural
ansatz for shear data on these Lie algebras and determine when the
shear of a calibrated or cocalibrated G2-structure is again
calibrated or cocalibrated, respectively.
In this way, we obtain many explicit examples of such structures on
general solvable Lie algebras of step-length two.
This leads to a full classification of all calibrated
G2-structures on Lie algebras of the form
(h3⊕R3)⋊R.
We close the paper with a similar discussion for almost semi-Kähler
geometries on solvable Lie algebras.
2. Left-invariant constructions
This section provides detailed motivation for the full definition of
the shear construction which will appear in the next section.
We describe the twist construction in the setting of left-invariant
structures on Lie groups and see how it may be generalized.
This involves seeing that the twist in this setting may be considered
as first building an extension of the initial Lie algebra g by a
central Abelian ideal and then constructing the twisted Lie
algebra by taking the quotient of this extension by an appropriate
central Abelian ideal.
To obtain the \qqshear construction in this left-invariant setting,
we examine what happens when the Abelian ideals are not necessarily
central.
We then explain how we can apply this kind of shear repeatedly to
reduce any solvable Lie algebra to the Abelian Lie algebra Rm.
2.1. A review of the twist construction
Recall that in general the twist construction [Swa10] considers
double fibrations
[TABLE]
Here each fibration is a principal A-bundle for some connected
n-dimensional Abelian Lie group A and the two principal actions on P
are required to commute.
It follows that both M and W carry actions of the group A.
Furthermore P→M is equipped with a principal A-connection
θ which is also invariant under the principal A-action of
P→W.
A transversality condition ensures that this connection allows one to
relate each A-invariant differential form α on M to a
unique differential forms αW on W by requiring that the
corresponding pull-backs agree on the horizontal space
H:=kerθ.
Under suitable assumptions, one can start with \qqtwist data on M
and use it to construct first P and then W.
The twist data is given by:
\edefnn(a)
an AM≅A-action on M expressed infinitesimally by a Lie
algebra homomorphism ξ:aM→X(M),
2. \edefnn(b)
an n-dimensional Abelian Lie algebra aP and a closed
integral two-form ω∈Ω2(M,aP) with values in
aP such that Lξω=0, ξ∗ω=0 and
3. \edefnn(c)
a smooth function a:M→aP⊗aM∗ such
that ξ┘ω=−da.
Then π:P→M is the principal A-bundle over M with
connection one-form θ∈Ω1(P,aP) having curvature
π∗ω.
Moreover, if we denote by ξ~:aM→X(P) the
horizontal lift of ξ:aM→X(P) and by
ρ:aP→X(P) the infinitesimal principal action of
π:P→M, then
W:=P/⟨ξ˚(aM)⟩ for
ξ˚:aM→X(P) given by
ξ˚=ξ~+ρ∘a.
In the left-invariant setting, G:=M, P and H:=W
are all Lie groups and π:P→G, πW:P→H are
Lie group homomorphisms.
We may now boil everything down to the associated Lie algebras g,
p and h.
The curvature two-form ω becomes a closed element of
Λ2g∗⊗aP, the maps ξ:aG→g,
ρ:aP→p and ξ˚:aG→p
are Lie algebra homomorphisms and a is constant.
Hence, ξ┘ω=−da=0, which implies that
Lξω=0 and ξ∗ω=0 hold automatically.
Now let us impose that any element of g∗ may be twisted to an
element of h∗.
This requires
0=Lξα=ξ┘dα=−α([ξ,⋅]) for all
α∈g∗, which means that ξ(aG) is
central in g.
Note that, p=g⊕aP as vector spaces with aP
an ideal in p.
As g=H=kerθ and as dθ=π∗ω for
π:p→g, we get [g,aP]={0} and
[X,Y]p=[X,Y]g−ω(X,Y) for all
X,Y∈g⊂p.
This means that aP is central and
aP↪p↠g is a central
extension of g by aP.
The extension is determined, up to equivalence, by the Lie algebra
cohomology class [ω]∈H2(g).
Furthermore, ξ˚(aG) is a central Abelian ideal in
p as ξ~(aG) and aP are central.
Since h=p/ξ˚(aG),
ξ˚(aG)↪p↠h is
a central extension as well.
Remark 2.1*.*
We will show that we can repeatedly twist any simply-connected
m-dimensional nilpotent Lie group to the Abelian Lie group
Rm.
By duality it will follow that all such nilpotent Lie groups can be
constructed by repeatedly twisting from Rm.
Let N be a simply-connected nilpotent Lie group.
Write n for the associated r-step nilpotent Lie algebra and
let n0=n,n1,…,nr=[n,nr−1]={0}
be the corresponding lower central series of length r, so
n1=n′=[n,n] and ni=[n,ni−1].
Then nr−1 is central and non-zero.
Take aP=aG=nr−1 with ξ:aG→n
the inclusion and a:aG→aP the identity map.
Now a:=aP=aG=nr−1 and
a↪n↠n/a is a central
extension of n/a.
Choosing a linear splitting p:n/a→n gives us a
closed two form
ω0∈Λ2(n/a)∗⊗a defined
by ω0(X,Y)=p[X,Y]−[p(X),p(Y)].
Pulling ω0 back to n, we obtain a closed two-form
ω∈Λ2n∗⊗a.
This satisfies ξ┘ω=0 and is exact as a smooth form
on N, since N is diffeomorphic to Rm.
Hence, we can build a principal Rn-bundle π:P→N,
for n=dima, with connection one-form
θ∈Ω1(P,a) such that dθ=π∗ω.
The total space P is also a simply-connected Lie group and
θ is left-invariant.
As vector spaces, one has p=n⊕a and
ξ˚(aG)=Δ(a) is the diagonal in the
central subalgebra a⊕a of p.
So the twist H=P/Δ(A) is a simply-connected Lie group and
the associated Lie algebra h has
h≅n/a⊕a as Lie algebras.
Note that n/a⊕a is nilpotent of length r−1.
Thus iterating this construction, we arrive after r−1 such twists
at the Abelian Lie algebra Rm.
2.2. Shears for Lie algebras
An obvious generalization of this situation is to consider arbitrary
Abelian extensions.
To this end, let g be a Lie algebra and let aP be an
Abelian Lie algebra. An extension
[TABLE]
of g by aP is determined by a two-form
ω∈Λ2g∗⊗aP with values in aP and
a representation η∈g∗⊗gl(aP) of g on
aP such that
[TABLE]
More precisely, we have p=g⊕aP as vector spaces
with aP being an Abelian ideal.
The other Lie brackets are given by
[TABLE]
for all X,Y∈g and all Z∈aP.
Note that there is an associated principal Rn-bundle P→G,
given by the associated simply-connected Lie groups, and a
left-invariant one-form
[TABLE]
which is the projection to the aP-factor in
p=g⊕aP.
Again, we set H:=kerθ=g⊂p and call
H the horizontal space. Note that
[TABLE]
for all X,Y∈g⊂p and all Z∈aP. So
[TABLE]
for the projection π:p→g.
Now regard ω as a two-form on G with values in the trivial
vector bundle F:=G×aP and η as a connection
∇ on F in the sense that ∇Xf=X(f)+η(X)(f) for
all vector fields X on G and all sections f of F, regarded as
smooth functions f:G→aP.
The condition that η is a representation is equivalent to
∇ being flat.
In the case of a central extension, ∇ is just the natural flat
connection on the trivial bundle F=G×aP.
The flatness of the connection ∇ implies that the associated
exterior covariant derivative
d∇:Ωk(G,F)→Ωk+1(G,F) squares to [math].
As this derivative satisfies d∇α=η∧α+dα
for all α∈Ωk(G,F)=Ωk(G,aP), we have
We may consider θ as a left-invariant one-form on P with
values in the trivial bundle P×aP.
This trivial bundle is the pull-back of F, so we can pull the
connection ∇ back to P×aP.
We denote the resulting connection by ∇ too. Then we have
[TABLE]
By analogy with the twist, we wish to construct a new Lie algebra
homomorphism
[TABLE]
from an Abelian Lie algebra aG of the same dimension
as aP, with the property that ξ˚(aG) is an
n-dimensional Abelian ideal in p. We will then define
[TABLE]
to be the shear of g.
The associated simply-connected Lie groups will then give us a
principal Rn-bundle P→H and so a double fibration
[TABLE]
As in the twist, the construction of ξ˚ should arise
from a Lie algebra homomorphism ξ:aG→g with
ξ=π∘ξ˚, which we require to be injective as
in the twist case this corresponds to the action being effective.
We can write
[TABLE]
where ξ~:aG→H=g⊂p is the
horizontal lift and ρ:aP→p is the inclusion.
We will require the map a:aG→aP to be an
isomorphism of Lie algebras.
In the vector space splitting p=g⊕aP, the
prescription for ξ˚ just reads
ξ˚Z=(ξZ,aZ) for Z∈aG.
We need some notations for stating our results on the existence of
ξ˚.
The map ξ:aG→g may be considered as a bundle
morphism ξ:E→TG, where E:=G×aG is
the trivial bundle. This carries a connection given by
[TABLE]
We now have induced connections on all bundles of the form
E⊗r⊗F⊗s for r,s∈Z.
This gives associated covariant exterior derivatives for k-forms on
G with values in these bundles.
To simplify the notation, we denote all these connections by ∇
and the associated covariant exterior derivatives by d∇.
For any k-form β on G with values in such a bundle, we set
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let ξ:aG→g be an injective Lie algebra
homomorphism.
Then the map ξ˚:aG→p defined as above
is a Lie algebra homomorphism with image an Abelian ideal if and
only if
\edefitn(i)
[ξe1,ξe2]=ξ(∇ξe1e2−∇ξe2e1)*
for all e1,e2∈Γ(E),*
2. \edefitn(ii)
ξ∗ω=0,
3. \edefitn(iii)
Lξ∇α=0* for all
α∈g∗.*
If these conditions are true, then all connections ∇ are flat, so (d∇)2=0, and
[TABLE]
Proof.
The condition that ξ˚ is a Lie algebra homomorphism is
equivalent to ξ˚(aG) being Abelian. For
Z,W∈aG, this says
[TABLE]
which implies that
ξ∗ω(Z,W)=ω(ξZ,ξW)=η(ξZ)(aW)−η(ξW)(aZ) is equivalent to ξ˚(aG) being Abelian.
To investigate the condition that ξ˚(aG) is an
ideal, we compute
[TABLE]
for X∈g, Y∈aP and Z∈aG. Thus
ξ˚(aG) is an ideal in p if and only if
[ξZ,X]g=−ξa−1(ω(ξZ,X)+η(X)(aZ))=−ξ(γ(X)Z) and 0=ξ(a−1η(ξZ)(Y)). As
ξ is injective, the latter equation is equivalent to
η(ξZ)(Y)=0 for all Y∈aP and Z∈aG.
Moreover, for α∈g∗, we have
[TABLE]
for all X∈g and all Z∈aG. Hence,
ξ˚(aG) is an Abelian ideal if and only if
ii and iii from the statement
hold and η(ξZ)Y=0 for all Y∈aP and Z∈aG
holds.
So assume now that ii and iii
are true. If then also η(ξZ)Y=0 holds for any
Y∈aP,Z∈aG, condition ii implies
γ(ξZ)(Y)=0 and so
[ξ(Z),ξ(Y)]=0=ξ(∇ξ(Z)Y−∇ξ(Y)Z) for
all Z,Y∈aG. Hence, condition i holds.
Conversely, if additionally i is valid, we obtain
[TABLE]
and so γ(ξX)Y=0 for all X,Y∈aG. But then
condition ii implies
η(ξY)Z=0 for all Y∈aG,
Z∈aP.
Now if i–iii are true, we have
[ξ(⋅),X]=−ξ∘γ(X) for all X∈g and the
Jacobi identity gives us [γ(X),γ(Y)]=γ([X,Y]) for
all X,Y∈g.
Thus ∇ is flat on E and so the induced connections
∇ on bundles of the form E⊗r⊗F⊗s
are flat as well. In particular, (d∇)2=0. Now
(d∇a)(Y,X)=∇X(a(Y))−a(∇XY)=η(X)aY−aγ(X)Y=−ω(ξ(Y),X) for all X∈g and
all Y∈aG, i.e. d∇a=−ξ┘ω. But then
Lξ∇ω=ξ┘d∇ω+d∇(ξ┘ω)=−(d∇)2a=0. Finally,
Lξ˚∇θ=ξ˚┘π∗ω+d∇π∗a=π∗(ξ┘ω+d∇a)=0.
∎
Remark 2.3*.*
The proof of Lemma 2.2 shows that for non-injective
ξ:aG→g, conditions
i–iii in
Lemma 2.2 still imply that ξ˚(aG)
is an ideal in p, but not necessarily Abelian anymore.
Definition 2.4**.**
If in the situation of Lemma 2.2 the conditions
i–iii are true, then we build the
Lie algebra h:=g/ξ˚(aG) and call it the shear of g.
Proposition 2.5**.**
Any two solvable Lie algebras of the same dimension are related via
a sequence of shear constructions.
Proof.
It is enough to show how to relate any solvable algebra to the
Abelian algebra of the same dimension.
Let s be an r-step solvable Lie algebra r-step of
dimension n.
We will obtain the Abelian algebra Rn by a series of r−1
shears.
Let
s(0)=s,…,s(r)=[s(r−1),s(r−1)]={0} be the derived series of s.
Then a:=s(r−1) is an Abelian ideal in s.
We take aG=aP=a, let ξ be the inclusion, take
a:aG→aP to be the identity map and use the
canonical flat connection η=0 on F:=G×aP.
Choose a vector space splitting p:g/a→g of
a↪g↠g/a.
This induces a projection πa:g→a with kernel
p(g/a).
Let ω∈Λ2g∗⊗a be the negative of
projection of the Lie bracket to a, so
ω(X,Y)=−πa[X,Y]. Then d∇ω=dω=0 by
the Jacobi identity. Moreover, ξ∗ω=0 as a is an
Abelian ideal in g. Now
γ=a−1(ξ┘ω)+a−1ηa=ξ┘ω
gives ∇ξXY=γ(ξX)(Y)=ω(ξY,ξX)=0
for all X,Y∈aG, so condition i in
Lemma 2.2 is satisfied.
Finally, for X∈aG and Y∈g, we have
γ(Y)(X)=ω(ξX,Y)=−[ξX,Y] since
a=ξ(aG) is an ideal.
By the proof of Lemma 2.2, this is equivalent to
condition iii from Lemma 2.2.
We may then use this data to shear g to the solvable Lie
algebra h=p/ξ˚(a).
Now p=g⊕a as vector spaces and
ξ˚Z=(Z,Z)∈p=g⊕a for
Z∈a.
It follows that h is the Lie algebra direct sum
h=(g/a)⊕a, since for A,B∈g,
[A,B]p=([A,B],πa([A,B]))≡((1−πa)[A,B],0)modξ˚(a).
In particular the shear h is solvable of step length (r−1).
Iterating the construction, after r−1 shears we arrive at the
Abelian Lie algebra Rm, as claimed.
Conversely, suppose we are given h=(g/a)⊕a.
Then k:h=(g/a)⊕a→g,
k((X,Y)):=p(X)+Y is a vector space isomorphism.
A shear that recovers g is now given by the two-form
ω~:=k∗ω∈Λ2h∗⊗a, the one-form
η~:=k∗γ∈h∗⊗gl(a),
ξ~:=−inc and a~:=ida, cf. also Theorem 3.14
∎
3. The shear
3.1. Lifting certain vector bundle morphisms
Now we define the shear construction in full generality. Motivated by
the last section, we start with a vector bundle πE:E→M
endowed with a flat connection ∇=∇E and a vector bundle
morphism ξ:E→TM satisfying condition i
above, that is
[TABLE]
We will then say that (ξ,∇) is torsion free.
Moreover, we assume that we have a second vector bundle
πF:F→M of the same rank with flat connection
∇=∇F and a two-form ω∈Ω2(M,F) with
values in F such that d∇ω=0. We do not require
condition ii here as it will naturally follow from
our set-up below. Condition iii will arise as the
appropriate invariance condition when we consider transferring
differential forms in §3.2.
Let us assume that M is the leaf space of a foliation on some
manifold P with leaves of dimension
rk(E)=rk(F). Write π:P→M for the
projection, which is a surjective submersion. We wish to identify the
pull-back of F to P with the tangent spaces to the leaves
of the foliation.
Definition 3.1**.**
Suppose there are a vector bundle morphism ρ:π∗F→TP
and a one-form θ∈Ω1(P,π∗F), so a bundle morphism
θ:TP→π∗F, such that
\edefnn(1)
θ∘ρ=idπ∗F,
2. \edefnn(2)
dπ∘ρ=0 and
3. \edefnn(3)
d∇θ=π∗ω.
Then we call (P,θ,ρ) a shear total space
for ω. We will call dimP−dimM the
rank of P.
It follows that the dimension of each leaf of the foliation on P
is equal to the rank of F. We define the natural subbundles
[TABLE]
of TP. We note that our assumptions give V=ρ(π∗F), so
TP=H⊕V. We call H the horizontal and V
the vertical subbundles.
Remark 3.2*.*
For a shear total space, conditions 1 and
2 identify the vertical subbundle V with the
flat vector bundle π∗F.
In particular, the element θ^=ρ∘θ in
Ω1(P,V)=Hom(TP,V)⊂End(TP) is a
projection onto the vertical subbundle V.
Thus, if P is actually a fibre bundle, then θ^ is (the
connection form of) an Ehresmann connection on P.
Recall that the curvatureR∈Ω2(P,TP) of the
Ehresmann connection θ^ is R(X,Y)=θ^[XH,YH]
for all X,Y∈X(P), where ZH is the horizontal part
of Z∈X(P).
Hence, condition 3 implies R=−ρ∘π∗ω
since both forms are horizontal and
d∇θ(X,Y)=∇X(θY)−∇Y(θX)−θ[X,Y]=−θ[X,Y] for horizontal X and Y.
Suppose now that we are given an arbitrary Ehresmann connection
θ^ on a fibre bundle π:P→M as in
Remark 3.2.
Then the natural question arises when θ^ gives rise to a shear
total space (P,θ,inc).
This question is answered in the following
Proposition 3.3**.**
Let π:P→M be a fibre bundle such that the
vertical subbundle V is the pull-back of a flat vector bundle
(F,∇) over M.
Write inc:π∗F=V→TP for the inclusion map.
Then an Ehresmann connection θ^∈End(TP) gives rise to
a shear total space (P,θ,inc),
θ^=inc∘θ, for some ω∈Ω2(M,F),
if and only if
[TABLE]
for all vertical X1,X2∈X(P) and all local parallel
vertical vector fields preserve the horizontal subbundle H.
If this is the case, then the curvature R of θ^
satisfies d∇θ=π∗ω=−R.
Proof.
Note that there is an ω∈Ω2(M,F) with
d∇θ=π∗ω if and only if for all local parallel
frames (f1,…,fk) of F the forms
f1∘d∇θ,…,fk∘d∇θ are basic.
As d(fi∘d∇θ)=fi∘d∇d∇θ=0 for all
i=1,…,k, this is, in turn, equivalent to d∇θ being
horizontal.
To check the horizontality of d∇θ, first let X1, X2 be
two vertical vector fields on P. Then
[TABLE]
as [X1,X2] is vertical.
So d∇θ(X1,X2)=0 if and only if equation
(3.2) holds.
Next, let X, Y be vector fields on P with X vertical and Y
horizontal.
As V=π∗F has a local basis of parallel sections, we may
assume that X is parallel.
Hence, d∇θ(X,Y)=−θ([X,Y]), which is zero if and only
if LXY=[X,Y] is horizontal, i.e. if and only if X preserves
the horizontal subbundle.
∎
Remark 3.4*.*
By equation (3.2), the fibres of
π:P→M are endowed with a torsion-free flat
connection, so they are affine manifolds.
Moreover, V is the pull-back of a vector bundle over M, so the
fibres are parallelisable.
As the connection is a pull-back, there is a parallel, and so
commuting, basis of vector fields on each fibre.
This is in accordance with the twist case where the fibres were
connected Abelian Lie groups.
The proof of Proposition 3.3 shows that
for an arbitrary shear total space (P,θ,ρ) we have
[ρf1,ρf2]=ρ(∇ρf1f2−∇ρf2f1) for all f1,f2∈Γ(π∗F), which is the
torsion-free condition (3.1).
Finally, note that the condition that (local) parallel vertical
vector fields preserve the horizontal subbundle in
Proposition 3.3 corresponds in the twist
case to the principal action preserving the horizontal subbundle.
Now we want to find conditions under which there exists a vector
bundle morphism ξ˚:π∗E→TP
covering ξ, i.e.
[TABLE]
commutes, such that ξ˚ preserves θ:
[TABLE]
and (ξ˚,∇) is torsion-free:
[TABLE]
for all e~1,e~2∈Γ(π∗E).
Let us motivate our interest in such a bundle map ξ˚.
Firstly, the two conditions were true in the left-invariant case
discussed in the previous section and they hold for the map ρ of
a shear total space, since
Lρ∇θ=ρ┘d∇θ+d∇idπ∗F=ρ┘π∗ω=0.
Furthermore, the torsion-free condition implies that
ξ˚(π∗E) is involutive; we will see that it is
equivalent to involutivity under our assumptions.
When ξ˚ has constant rank, this is, in turn, equivalent to
the integrability of ξ˚(π∗E).
The shear should then be the leaf space of the corresponding foliation
on P.
For the first condition, note that
Lξ˚∇θ=0 may be written as
[TABLE]
for all vector fields X∈X(P) and sections
e~∈Γ(π∗E). As E and F are flat, they
have local bases of parallel sections. Take e~=π∗e for
some local parallel section e of E. If X is horizontal,
this gives θ([ξ˚(π∗e),X])=0, so
ξ˚(π∗e) preserves the horizontal space, just as the
lifted action does in the twist construction. If X is a local
vertical vector field with θX is parallel, we obtain that
[ξ˚(π∗e),X] is horizontal. However,
ξ˚(π∗e) is π-related to ξe and X is
π-related to [math], so the commutator has to be vertical too.
This shows
[TABLE]
which in the twist construction is the requirement that the lifted and
principal actions commute.
After this motivation, we are interested in expressing the
requirements for a lift ξ˚ as above in equivalent
conditions for data on M.
Theorem 3.5**.**
Under the above assumptions (3.1) and
Definition 3.11–3,
there exists a vector bundle morphism
ξ˚:π∗E→TP covering ξ:E→TM,
preserving θ and with (ξ˚,∇)
torsion-free if and only if Lξ∇ω=0,
ξ┘ω is d∇-exact and ξ∗ω=0.
Proof.
Using H, we can lift ξ:E→TP uniquely to a bundle
morphism ξ~:π∗E→TP covering ξ with
ξ~(π∗E)⊂H. When ξ˚ exists we
get dπ(ξ˚−ξ~)=0, so
(ξ˚−ξ~)(π∗E)⊂V. As
ρ:π∗F→TP is injective and ρ(π∗F)=V,
there is a uniquely defined bundle map
a˚:π∗E→π∗F with
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
and so Lξ˚∇θ=0 if and only if
π∗(ξ┘ω)=−d∇a˚. But then
∇ρa˚=ρ┘d∇a˚=−ρ┘π∗(ξ┘ω)=0. Thus
∇Va˚=0. This implies that
a˚ is basic, so a˚=π∗a for some
bundle map a:E→F. Thus,
Lξ˚∇θ=0 if and only if there
exists a bundle map a:E→F with
[TABLE]
which says ξ┘ω is d∇-exact. Conversely,
given (3.9), we immediately get
Lξ∇ω=d∇(ξ┘ω)+ξ┘d∇ω=0, since (d∇)2=0 and d∇ω=0 and may construct
ξ˚ via (3.8) with
Lξ˚∇θ=0.
Now we compute
[ξ˚e~1,ξ˚e~2] for two
sections e~1,e~2∈Γ(π∗E). It suffices
to consider e~i=π∗ei, i=1,2, for
e1,e2∈Γ(E). Denote by X∼∈X(p) the
horizontal lift of a vector field X∈X(M) and observe that
ξ~(π∗ei)=(ξei)∼ for i=1,2. Hence,
[TABLE]
Thus, using (3.1), the horizontal part of
[ξ˚(π∗e1),ξ˚(π∗e2)] is equal to
as dπ∘ρ=0. Now ρ∘θ is the projection
onto the vertical part and so
[TABLE]
As ρ and π∗ are injective, we have
ξ˚(∇ξ˚e~1e~2−∇ξ˚e~2e~1)=[ξ˚e~1,ξ˚e~2] for all
e~1,e~2∈Γ(π∗E) if and only if
ξ∗ω=0.
∎
As noted in the proof, if ξ┘ω is d∇-exact and
ω is d∇-closed, then we automatically get
Lξ∇ω=0. Hence,
Theorem 3.5 naturally leads to the
following definition.
Definition 3.6**.**
Shear data on a smooth manifold M is a triple
(ξ,a,ω) consisting of a bundle map ξ:E→TM, an
invertible bundle morphism a:E→F and a two-form
ω∈Ω2(M,F) with values in F, where E and F are
flat vector bundles over M of the same rank and
Suppose additionally there is a shear total space
(P,θ,ρ) as in Definition 3.1.
Define ξ˚:π∗E→TP by
ξ˚:=ξ~+ρ∘π∗a, with
ξ~ the horizontal lift of ξ. Then, by
Theorem 3.5, ξ˚(π∗E) is
an integrable distribution. Furthermore, invertibility of a
ensures that it is of constant rank. The leaf space
[TABLE]
is called the shear of (M,ξ,a,ω) when it is a smooth
manifold.
Remark 3.7*.*
Locally the shear is essentially the twist construction. Given
shear data (ξ,a,ω) on a manifold M, choose parallel
frames (e1,…,ek) and (f1,…,fk) of E and F
locally. Then we may write ω=∑i=1kωifi
and a=∑i,j=1kaijei⊗fj. Putting
aM=aP:=Rk,
Ω:=(ω1,…,ωk)∈Ω2(M,aP),
A:=(aij)i,j=1,…,k∈C∞(M,aP⊗aM∗) and Ξ:aM→X(M),
Ξ(x1,…,xm):=∑i=1kxiξ(ei),
conditions i–iv of
Definition 3.6 show that (Ξ,Ω,A) is local twist
data. Note that these identifications depend on the choices of the
flat structures.
Remark 3.8*.*
In some cases we may construct a suitable space P via a
principal bundle on the universal cover M~ of M.
The pull-back of F to M~ is flat and has a global
basis of parallel sections. The pull-back of ω may
then be interpreted as the curvature two-form for a principal bundle
P~→M~ with Abelian structure group. This
imposes integrality conditions on the pull-back of ω, and
one then needs to investigate whether P~ can be chosen
so that it descends to a bundle over M. We examined these
questions in detail for one-dimensional fibres in [FS16].
Consideration of similar questions phrased in the language of Lie
algebroids may be found in [Mac05, Mac87]. However, as will see
later, candidate spaces P may arise in other ways, unrelated
to principal bundles.
3.2. Differential forms
Let us now fix some shear data (ξ,a,ω) on a manifold M and
a corresponding triple (π:P→M,θ,ρ) as in
Definition 3.6 such that the shear
S=P/ξ˚(π∗E) is smooth.
Write πS:P→S for the projection to S.
We are interested in how to move geometric structures on M to S.
In particular, how to relate (p,0)-tensor fields on M with
(p,0)-tensor fields on S.
Definition 3.9**.**
Let α be a (p,0)-tensor field on M and αS be a
(p,0)-tensor field on S. We say that α is
H-related toαS, in symbols
[TABLE]
if
[TABLE]
For differential forms, this relation may be concretely described.
Proposition 3.10**.**
A k-form α on M is H-related to some k-form
αS on the shear S if and only if
Lξ∇α=0. In this case, the k-form
αS is uniquely determined by
[TABLE]
Proof.
Suppose that α∈ΩkM is H-related to
αS∈ΩkS. If we decompose πS∗αS with
respect to H and V, we get by definition
[TABLE]
for certain
βi∈Ωk−i(P,Λi(π∗F)∗) with
βi∣V=0. Here θi denotes the element
Λiθ∈Γ(End(ΛiTP,Λiπ∗F))≅Ωi(P,Λiπ∗F) pointwise induced by
θ∈Ω1(P,π∗F)≅Γ(End(TP,π∗F)). For
X1,…,Xi∈X(P), this means
θi(X1∧⋯∧Xi)=θ(X1)∧⋯∧θ(Xi).
As ξ˚┘πS∗αS=0, we get
[TABLE]
As (ρ∘π∗a)┘θi=π∗aθi−1, this
tells us π∗(ξ┘α)=(−1)kβ1π∗a and
(ξ~┘βi−1)∧θi−1=(−1)k−i+1βi∧π∗aθi−1 for i=2,…,k. It
follows that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for e∈Γ(π∗E), X1,…,Xk−i∈X(P),
f1,…,fi−1∈Γ(π∗F) and i=2,…,k. As
a is invertible, we may write e=π∗a−1(f0) and
see that the last condition says
[TABLE]
for i=2,…,k. Note that there is also the implicit statement
that both sides are anti-symmetric when evaluated on i
sections of π∗F. Recursion now gives
[TABLE]
and this is, in fact, anti-symmetric in sections of π∗F. Thus the
claimed formula for αS holds, when αS exists.
So, to finish the proof, we have to consider the
semi-basic k-form
[TABLE]
and have to determine when this is basic for πS as exactly then
α^ will be the pull-back of a unique αS
on S. For α^ to be basic requires
Lξ˚eα^=0 for each
e∈Γ(π∗E). This condition is
[TABLE]
which just says Lξ˚∇α^=0. Now
Lξ˚∇θ=0, so we have
[TABLE]
Taking the horizontal part, we see that
Lξ˚∇α^=0 implies
Lξ∇α=0.
Conversely, assume that Lξ∇α=0. For an
ℓ-form τ with values in (F∗)⊗r and local
parallel sections e of E, fj of F, note
(Lξ∇τ)(e,f1,…,fr)=Lξe(τ(f1,…,fr)). Writing ei:=a−1(fi),
ξ(i)=ξ(ei) and ιX=X┘, we find
[TABLE]
using the torsion-free condition (3.1) in
the penultimate step. But we compute
[TABLE]
and so
\bigl{(}{\mathcal{L}}_{\xi}^{\nabla}\bigl{(}(\xi\circ a^{-1}\lrcorner\,)^{i}\alpha\bigr{)}\bigr{)}(e,f_{1},\dots,f_{i})=0. As the local parallel
sections span E and F, we get
{\mathcal{L}}_{\xi}^{\nabla}\bigl{(}(\xi\circ a^{-1}\lrcorner\,)^{i}\alpha\bigr{)}=0
and conclude that Lξ∇α^=0.
∎
Next we consider the differentials of H-related k-forms:
Corollary 3.11**.**
Let α∈ΩkM be a k-form on M with
Lξ∇α=0 and take αS∈ΩkS
with α∼HαS. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
As Lξ∇α=0, Lξ∇ω=0
and Lξ∇(ξ∘a−1┘α)=0 by the proof
of Proposition 3.10, we have
{\mathcal{L}}_{\xi}^{\nabla}\bigl{(}d\alpha-(\xi\circ a^{-1}\lrcorner\,\alpha)\wedge\omega\bigr{)}=0. So Proposition 3.10 tells us
that there exists a unique (k+1)-form on S which is
H-related to
dα−(ξ∘a−1┘α)∧ω.
This (k+1)-form has to be equal to dαS as differentiating
the formula for πS∗αS in
Proposition 3.10 gives us horizontally
[TABLE]
as claimed.
∎
3.3. Vector fields and almost complex structures
With the notation from the previous section, we say that a vector
field X on M is H-related to a vector field XS
on S if and only if their horizontal lifts X,
XS to P agree.
For given X∈X(M) there is at most one XS∈X(S) with
X∼HXS. Furthermore, XS exists if and only if
[X,Γ(ξ˚(π∗E))]⊂Γ(ξ˚(π∗E)). Now from
equation (3.6) we obtain that for given
e∈Γ(E) the vertical component of
[X,ξ˚(π∗e)] equals the vertical component
of
ξ˚(∇Xπ∗e)=ξ˚(π∗(∇Xe)) and the horizontal component of
[X,ξ˚(π∗e)] equals
[X,ξ(e)]. So the existence of XS∈X(S) with
X∼HXS is equivalent to [ξ(e),X]=−ξ(∇Xe) for all
e∈Γ(E). Defining
(Lξ∇X)(e):=[ξ(e),X]+ξ(∇Xe) for
e∈Γ(E), the H-related vector field XS exists
if and only if
[TABLE]
Note that Lξ∇ behaves as the usual Lie derivative
under contractions:
(Lξ∇α)(X)=Lξ∇(α(X))−α(Lξ∇X) for all X∈X(M) and all
α∈Ω1M.
After these preliminaries, we consider Lie brackets of H-related
vector fields:
Lemma 3.12**.**
Suppose the vector fields X,Y∈X(M), XS,YS∈X(S)
satisfy X∼HXS and Y∼HYS. Then the identity
[TABLE]
holds.
Proof.
Considering the decomposition into horizontal and vertical subspaces
of π, we have
[X,Y]=[X,Y]+ρθ[X,Y]. For πS, note that the
projection to the vertical subspace of πS is given by
ξ˚π∗a−1θ=ξ~π∗a−1θ+ρθ. This gives
[TABLE]
Thus
\bigl{(}[X,Y]+\xi a^{-1}\omega(X,Y)\bigr{)}^{\sim}=\widehat{[X_{S},Y_{S}]} as claimed.
∎
Next, we consider almost complex structures I on M and IS on
S and say that they are H-related if and only if for all
p∈P and all v∈Tπ(p)M we have
Iv=(ISdπSv~). Then, given an almost
complex structure I on M, there exists an H-related almost
complex structure on S if and only if Lξ∇I=0,
where we extend Lξ∇ in the usual way to
(1,1)-tensors. Moreover, the definition of the Nijenhuis tensor
NI of an almost complex structure I and
Lemma 3.12 yield:
Proposition 3.13**.**
For almost complex structures I on M and IS on S with
I∼HIS, the Nijenhuis tensors are related by
[TABLE]
where F=ξa−1ω. ∎
3.4. Duality
In this section, we assume that we are in the situation of
§3.1 and show how we can then invert the shear
construction.
A first necessary condition to invert the shear is to construct flat
vector bundles ES and FS over the shear S such that
πS∗ES≅π∗F and πS∗FS≅π∗E as bundles with flat
connections. If we have such
vector bundles and if we fix identifications πS∗ES≅π∗F and πS∗FS≅π∗E,
we may extend ∼H to k-forms and vector fields
with values in tensor powers of these bundles. For example, we say that
α∈Ωk(M,E⊗r⊗F⊗s) is
H-related to
αS∈Ωk(S,ES⊗s⊗FS⊗r) if
and only if π∗α∣H=πS∗αS∣H.
Theorem 3.14**.**
Suppose (M,E,ξ,F,a,ω) shears via a total space
(P,θ,ρ) to S. Suppose in addition that
π∗E and π∗F can be trivialised by flat sections in
a neighbourhood of each leaf of ξ˚ on P. Then
there is shear data (ξS,aS,ωS) on S realising
M as the shear of S.
More precisely, there are flat bundles ES,FS→S, a
torsion-free bundle map ξS:ES→TS, a two-form
ωS∈Ω2(S,FS) and an
aS∈Ω0(S,ES∗⊗FS) such that
\edefitn(a)
as flat bundles πS∗ES≅π∗F and
πS∗FS≅π∗E,
2. \edefitn(b)
M* is the shear of S
via (P,θS=(π∗a−1)θ,ρS=ξ˚).*
Proof.
Recall that the fibres of πS:P→S are the leaves
of ξ˚ and that by assumption π∗F can be
trivialised by flat sections in a neighbourhood of each leaf. So we
may define a locally free sheaf F on S by letting
F(U) be those sections σ of π∗F over
πS−1(U) which are constant on the leaves under a trivialisation
by flat sections.
Let ES be the associated vector bundle; by construction we have
πS∗ES=π∗F. We give ES a flat
connection ∇ by declaring a local section to be parallel
if its pull-back to π∗F is parallel. In a similar way, we
construct a flat bundle FS→S with
πS∗FS=π∗E.
Computing
[TABLE]
we conclude that a˚=πS∗aS−1 for some vector
bundle morphism aS:ES→FS.
To define ξS:ES→TS, we wish to push
ρ:πS∗ES=π∗F→TP forward so that the diagram
[TABLE]
commutes. We thus define
(ξS)x(ex):=(dπS)p(ρp(p,ex)) for any
x∈S, ex∈(ES)x and for some p∈πS−1(x), but
need to show this is independent of p. To this end, let e be
a local parallel section of ES extending ex. Then
θρ(πS∗e)=πS∗e is parallel, so
(3.7) gives that
[ρ(πS∗e),ξ˚(π∗e)]=0 for each local
parallel section e of E. Thus ρ(πS∗e) is
projectable, as required, and ξS is well-defined.
For the torsion-free condition, let e1 and e2 be
two sections of ES. Then ρ(πS∗ei) projects to
ξSei, so [ρ(πS∗e1),ρ(πS∗e2)] projects
to [ξSe1,ξSe2]. Moreover,
[TABLE]
and so
ρ(∇ρ(πS∗e1)πS∗e2−∇ρ(πS∗e2)πS∗e1) projects to
ξS(∇ξS(e1)e2−∇ξS(e2)e1).
Thus, ξS is torsion-free as ρ is torsion-free by
Remark 3.4.
Defining
θS:=a˚−1∘θ∈Ω1(P,πS∗FS) and ρS:=ξ˚, we
verify the conditions 1–3 of
Definition 3.1. Firstly,
θS∘ρS=a˚−1∘θ∘(ξ+ρ∘a˚)=a˚−1θρa˚=idπ∗E=idπS∗FS. Furthermore, S
is defined to be the leaf space of ξ˚, so
dπS∘ξ˚=0. Now a computation gives
[TABLE]
From this we conclude
ξ˚┘d∇θS=π∗(a−1ξ∗ω)∧θS=0 and so
Lξ˚∇d∇θS=0. Thus, there is a
two-form ωS∈Ω2(S,FS) with
πS∗ωS=d∇θS. Indeed
a−1ω∼HωS.
Having found aS and ωS, it remains to verify
ii–iv in
Definition 3.6.
ii is automatic from the flatness of ∇.
We compute
To see that we obtain M as the resulting shear, it is
sufficient to show that ξ˚S=ρ. But
ξ˚=ξ+ρ∘a˚ and
πS∗aS=a˚−1 imply
[TABLE]
Now the final term is πS-vertical and the first one
lies in H=kerθ=kerθS. As ρ
projects to ξS, we conclude that
ξS=−ξ∘a˚−1,
thus ξ˚S=ρ and
−ξ∘a−1∼HξS.
∎
4. Examples
4.1. Shears via non-principal bundles
In [FS16], we considered a first version of a rank one shear construction
with the bundles E and F trivialised. We showed in [FS16, §3.4] that
then P always has the structure of a principal bundle. This is no
longer true in the general shear construction, even when P has rank
one. This fails for two reasons: we no longer require P to be a
fibre bundle and we only require E and F to be flat, not
trivial.
Let us give a simple example where P is not a fibre bundle and
the topology of the fibres can change. Take
P=T2=S1×S1, M=S1 and W=S1.
There is a twist of the form M=S1←P=T2→W=S1
with the first map being the projection onto the first S1-factor
and the second one given by (x,y)↦x−1y. This corresponds
to twist data (ξ,a,ω) with Abelian Lie algebras
aP=aM=R, ξ(1)=∂φ,
a=idR, ω=0 and θ=dψ, where φ
describes the first S1-factor and ψ the second one in T2.
Taking E=F=M×R with the natural flat connections, this
can also be understood as a shear construction.
Now we may remove one point p∈T2. Then, still
M=S1←P′=T2∖{p}→S=S1 is a shear,
but neither map P′→M,S is a fibre bundle, indeed most
fibres are circles, but one fibre is homeomorphic to R. More
generally, one may remove a closed segment L in one fibre of
T2→M=S1, then P′′=T∖L→S=S1 is
still surjective but has fibres which are topologically R over a
closed segment in S=S1.
Even if we assume that P→M is a fibre bundle, we cannot conclude
that P has the structure of a principal bundle. To see this, take a
non-trivial flat vector bundle (E,∇) of rank k and
P=F=E. Then P=E→M does not admit the structure of a
principal Rk-bundle: if it did, the structure group could be
reduced to the maximal compact subgroup {0}⩽Rk
contradicting non-triviality.
Take the Ehresmann connection
θ^∈Ω1(E,V)⊂End(TE) associated
to ∇.
We get an induced splitting
TE=H⊕V≅π∗TM⊕π∗E and θ
corresponds to the projection onto the second factor.
Using Proposition 3.3, we see that
(P,θ,inc) is a shear total space for ω=0:
•
For Xi=π∗ei vertical with ei∈Γ(E), i=1,2,
one gets [X1,X2]=0 as
φtXi(e~)=e~+tei(π(e~)) is the flow of
Xi=π∗ei and
∇XiXj=∇Xiπ∗ej=π∗(∇dπ(Xi)ej)=0 for all {i,j}={1,2}. Thus, equation
(3.2) holds.
•
Let X=π∗e for a parallel (local) section e∈Γ(E)
and let Y be horizontal.
Then [X,Y]=dtd∣t=0dφ−tX(Y(φ(t)))
for φtX(e~)=e~+te(π(e~)).
As our Ehresmann connection comes from a covariant derivative
∇ on E, the differentials of the scalar multiplication and
the addition on E preserve the horizontal subbundle.
Moreover, de(dπ(v)) is horizontal for any v∈TE as e is
parallel.
So dφ−t(Y(φ(t))) is in the horizontal subbundle for
all t, which implies that X=π∗e preserves the horizontal
subbundle.
Moreover, if ξ:E→TM is any bundle map and a:E→E any bundle isomorphism, then (ξ,a,0) defines shear data exactly
when (ξ,∇) is torsion-free and ∇a=d∇a=0. For
such a shear, we have dα∼HdSαS if
α∼HαS. As we may always take ξ=0 and a=idE to get a
shear M←E→M for which both projections coincide, there are, in fact, examples of
rank one shears for which P→M does not have the structure of a principal
bundle.
Note that if E=TM and ξ=idTM, then (ξ,∇) being
torsion-free means exactly that ∇ is torsion-free. We may take
then a=J to be an almost complex structure on M. As ∇J=0 and ∇ torsion-free implies that J is integrable, a triple
(J,idTM,0) defines shear data if and only if (M,J,∇) is a
special complex manifold in the sense of [ACD01] with ∇
being complex, i.e. ∇J=0. If, conversely, we take ξ=J being an almost
complex structure and a=idTM, then (idTM,J,0) defines
shear data precisely when [JX,JY]=J(∇JXY−∇JYX) for all
X,Y∈X(M). If additionally ∇ is torsion-free, this condition
implies that J is integrable. Hence, for ∇ being torsion-free, (idTM,J,0)
defines shear data if and only if (M,J,∇) is a
special complex manifold.
If E=TM, we may also take ω to be the torsion T∇ of a
non-torsion-free flat connection ∇.
Namely, first of all, a short computation shows
[TABLE]
Furthermore, we have V≅π∗TM in TP=TTM=π∗TM⊕π∗TM=H⊕V. So the one-form A∈Ω1(TM,π∗TM), A:=θ+η with θ as
above and η∈Ω1(TM,π∗TM) being the projection onto the
horizontal subbundle, satisfies d∇A=d∇η=π∗T∇.
Hence, (ρ,A,T∇) is a shear total space for T∇.
Then a triple (ξ,a,T∇) with
ξ,a∈End(TM) and a being invertible defines shear
data if and only if T∇∣ξ(TM)×ξ(TM)=0,
T∇(⋅,ξ(⋅))=∇a and ∇ξξ is
symmetric.
4.2. Shears on Lie algebras revisited
In §2.2, we introduced the shear
construction on Lie algebras by replacing in the left-invariant twist
construction central ideals and central extension by Abelian ones.
The results of that section then motivated our general definition of
shear data and the shear in Definition 3.6. Here, we like
to see how we can recover the shear on Lie algebras from
\qqleft-invariant shear data on a Lie group G.
Definition 4.1**.**
Let G be a 1-connected Lie group
and E and F be trivial vector bundles of rank k over G
endowed with flat connections ∇E and ∇F,
respectively, which are both left-invariant in the sense that
the connection forms with respect to frames of constant sections are left-invariant.
We write E=G×aG and F=G×aP for k-dimensional
Abelian Lie algebras aG and aP.
Suppose (ξ,a,ω)∈Γ(Hom(E,TG))×Γ(Hom(E,F))×Ω2(G,F) is shear data on G. Let G
act by left translations and their differentials on G and TG,
respectively, on E and F by left-translation on the first and
trivially on the second factor and extend these actions naturally to tensor products of
these vector bundles. Then we say the shear data is
left-invariant if (ξ,a,ω) are G-equivariant sections
of the corresponding bundles and Lξ∇Eα=0
for all left-invariant one-forms α∈Ω1G.
Note that (ξ,a,ω) being G-equivariant is equivalent to
ξ mapping constant sections of E to left-invariant vector
fields, a mapping constants sections of E to constant sections
of F and ω mapping pairs of left-invariant vector fields to
constant sections of F. So we can consider a as an element of
aG∗⊗aP, ξ as a Lie algebra homomorphism from
aG to g and ω as an element of Λ2g∗⊗aP. The flat connections are determined by
γ∈g∗⊗gl(aG) and η∈g∗⊗gl(aP), so ∇XEe=X(e)+γ(X)(e) or ∇XFe=X(f)+η(X)(f), for any X∈X(G) and any e∈Γ(E), f∈Γ(F).
Condition iii for shear data in
Definition 3.6 is ξ┘ω=−d∇a. As
[TABLE]
for all X∈aP, Y∈g, this gives us
γ=a−1(ξ┘ω)+a−1ηa, which is
equation (2.2). Moreover, (ξ,∇) being
torsion-free yields
[TABLE]
for all X,Y∈aG. Furthermore, we have
[TABLE]
for all α∈g∗, and so [ξX,ξY]=−ξ(γ(ξY)(X)) for all X,Y∈aG. With
(4.1) we deduce that ξ(γ(ξX)(Y))=0
for all X,Y∈aG and so [ξX,ξY]=0. Hence
ξ:aG→g is a Lie algebra homomorphism. Thus, we
got the same data as in §2.2
fulfilling the requirements of Lemma 2.2, except that
ξ is not necessarily injective.
Definition 3.6ii yields 0=d∇ω=dω+η∧ω. Using the flatness of ∇F,
we get that η∈g∗⊗gl(aP)=Hom(g,gl(aP)) is a representation.
We may define now a natural shear total space for ω as follows:
First of all, as in
§2.2, ω and η define an Abelian
extension aP↪p↠g together
with a vector space splitting p=g⊕aP. Let P be
the 1-connected Lie group with Lie algebra p and define
θ∈Ω1(P,π∗F)=Ω1(P,aP) and
ρ:P×aP=π∗F→TP as in §2.2,
i.e. θ corresponds to the projection p→aP onto aP
induced by the splitting and ρ to the injection aP↪p.
Then (P,θ,ρ) is a shear total space for ω.
Moreover, ξ˚:P×aG=π∗E→TP, ξ˚=ξ~+ρ∘a can be considered as a linear map from
aG to p and Lemma 2.2 gives us that ξ˚ is a Lie
algebra homomorphism and that ξ˚(aG) is an Abelian
ideal in p. The leaves of the distribution
ξ˚(aG) are the left cosets of the normal Lie
subgroup N of P with Lie algebra ξ˚(aG). Thus,
the shear is the Lie group H:=P/N with Lie algebra h
agreeing with that of Definition 2.4. In this sense,
the left-invariant shear on 1-connected Lie groups with injective ξ
via the natural shear total space (P,θ,ρ) from above and the shear
on Lie algebras presented in §2.2 are the same and
we will not distinguish them in the following sections.
4.3. Shears on almost Abelian Lie algebras
As explained at the end of
§2.2, we can successively shear Rn to
any n-dimensional solvable Lie algebra such that each shear
increases the solvable step length by one. One important example of solvable
Lie algebras of step length one is provided by almost Abelian Lie
algebras: g with a codimension one Abelian ideal u.
Choosing X∈g\u, these Lie algebras are
determined by a single endomorphism f:=ad(X)∣u∈End(u). Experience shows that a range of different geometric
structures may be constructed on these g [Fre12, Fre13].
The following proposition gives conditions when left-invariant data
(ξ,a,ω)∈Hom(aG,g)×Hom(aG,aP)×Λ2g∗⊗aP of a particular form is shear data on
the associated simply-connected Lie group G and when the shear of a
closed left-invariant form is again closed. We write α∈g∗ for the unique element in the annihilator of u with
α(X)=1.
We will consider an f-invariant subspace a of u, take
aG=a=aP and let E:=G×aG, F:=G×aP be trivial vector bundles endowed with flat
left-invariant connections determined by γ∈g∗⊗gl(aG) and η∈g∗⊗gl(aP), respectively.
Proposition 4.2**.**
Let G be a
simply-connected almost Abelian Lie group with Lie algebra data
(g,u,X,α,f). Let a⊂u be an f-invariant
subspace and take flat bundles as above.
Fix a left-invariant two-form ω∈Λ2g∗⊗aP. Consider the decomposition ω=ω0+α∧ν, with ω0∈Λ2u∗⊗a and ν∈u∗⊗a⊂End(u).
Assume that ω0=0 and ω0∣a⊗u=0.
\edefitn(a)
Then (inc,ida,ω), with
inc:a→g the inclusion, is left-invariant shear data
on G if and only if
[TABLE]
2. \edefitn(b)
Suppose (inc,ida,ω) is
left-invariant shear data on G. Let ψ∈Λrg∗ be a
closed left-invariant r-form on G and decompose ψ uniquely as
ψ=χ∧α+τ with χ∈Λr−1u∗
and τ∈Λru∗. Then the H-related form
ψh on the shear h is closed if and only if
[TABLE]
where κ:Λku∗⊗a→Λk−1u∗ is the unique linear map given on
decomposable elements ρ⊗A by κ(ρ⊗A)=A┘ρ.
In the above statement (f.ω0)(X,Y)=−ω0(fX,Y)−ω0(X,fY) for X,Y∈u.
Remark 4.3*.*
Here is one motivation for the
case considered. As a:aG→aP is invertible, it is no
restriction to assume that a=aG=aP and that a=ida. Moreover, it is natural to assume that ξ:aG→g is injective and so we may take ξ to be the
inclusion. The image of ξ is an Abelian ideal, so it is reasonable to take
a⊂u as f-invariant subspaces of u are such
ideals.
The condition ω0=0 is equivalent to the new algebra
h obtained by the shear no longer being almost Abelian. Finally,
for (inc,id∣a,ω) to be shear data, we must have
ξ∗ω=0, which is equivalent to ω0∣Λ2a=0. This is ensured by the stronger condition
ω0∣a⊗u=0, which is much simpler to work with.
a By Remark 4.3, condition
iv in Definition 3.6 is fulfilled
since ω0∣u⊗a=0.
Moreover, the discussion in §4.2 gives
us that the validity of iii in
Definition 3.6 for (inc,ida,ω) is
equivalent to
γ=ω∣a⊗g+η=−α⊗ν∣a+η.
As in §2.2, we see that
Lξ∇β=0 for all β∈g∗ is equivalent
to γ(X)=ξ∘γ(X)=[X,ξ(⋅)]=ad(X)∣a
for all X∈g, and so to γ=α⊗f∣a.
Then η=α⊗(f+ν)∣a. The formulas for
η and γ imply that the associated connections are flat
and that (inc,∇) is torsion-free.
Finally, we have to check when d∇ω=0 holds. We have
[TABLE]
So d∇ω=0 if and only if f.ω0=−(f+ν)∘ω0.
b By the formula for the differential
dhψ in Corollary 3.11 and since
dψ=0, we have to investigate when
(ξ┘ψ)∧ω is zero. First of all,
[TABLE]
since a is in the kernel of ω0. Now
also
[TABLE]
for all X1,…,Xr∈g, and the result
follows.
∎
4.3.1. Cocalibrated G2-structures
Suppose we have a G2-structure φ∈Λ3g∗ on a
seven-dimensional almost Abelian Lie algebra g with Abelian ideal
u of codimension 1. Choosing some unit-length α∈g∗ in the
annihilator of u, it is well-known, cf. e.g. [MC06], that
φ naturally induces a special almost Hermitian structure
(σ,ρ)∈Λ2u∗×Λ3u∗ on u
with
[TABLE]
We use the convention that the two-form σ, the
induced almost complex structure J and the induced Riemannian
metric g are related by σ=g(⋅,J⋅). Put X∈g\u to be the unique element orthogonal to u
with α(X)=1.
Suppose φ is cocalibratedd⋆φφ=0. Then f:=ad(X)∣u lies in sp(u,σ)
by [Fre12], so tr(f)=0. Consider ω=ω0+α∧ν∈Λ2g∗⊗a fulfilling the
requirements of Proposition 4.2 with respect to
some a⊂u. We aim at a partial classification of all
such ω for which (inc,ida,ω) is left-invariant
shear data with the shear φh of φ cocalibrated.
First note that the gl(a)-valued left-invariant one forms η
and γ which define the flat connections are fixed by
equation (4.2). Furthermore, as u is
six-dimensional, κ:Λ6u∗⊗a→Λ5u∗ is injective. It follows that the first equation in
(4.3) is given by σ2∧ω0=0, which
in turn is equivalent to
[TABLE]
So by Proposition 4.2 we are
left with solving the second equation in (4.3) and the
first one in (4.2). This is complicated, so we restrict
to certain special cases and obtain the following result.
Proposition 4.4**.**
Let (g,u,φ) be
a seven-dimensional almost Abelian Lie algebra with a cocalibrated
G2-structure φ∈Λ3g∗. Let a be an
f-invariant subspace of u and ω=ω0+α∧ν∈Λ2g∗⊗a be as in
Proposition 4.2.
\edefitn(a)
If ω0∈[Λ01,1u∗]⊗a, then
(inc,ida,ω) shears (g,φ) to a
cocalibrated structure if and only if dim(a)≤2, ν∈sp(u,σ) and either
\edefitn(i)
dim(im(ω0))=1, f.ω0=0 and ν∣im(ω0)=−f∣im(ω0), or
2. \edefitn(ii)
dim(im(ω0))=2, ω0=∑i=12ω~i⊗Yi, with Y1,Y2∈a a
basis, ω~i∧ω~j=δijω~12 for i,j∈{1,2},
f.ω~1=aω~2, f.ω~2=−aω~1, ν(Y1)=aY2−f(Y1) and ν(Y2)=−aY1−f(Y2) for some a∈R.
2. \edefitn(b)
If dim(a)=4 and
J(im(ω0))⊥a, then (inc,ida,ω)
shears (g,φ) to a cocalibrated structure if and only if
f∣im(ω0)=−tr(f∣a)idim(ω0) and
[TABLE]
where ν~∈End(u) is
ν~(W)=−ρ(JW,κ(J∘ω0)♯,⋅)♯ for W∈Jimω0 and
ν~∣(Jimω0)⊥=0.
3. \edefitn(c)
If dim(a)=4 and
J(im(ω0))⊂a, then (inc,ida,ω)
shears (g,φ) to a cocalibrated structure if and only if
a is a σ-degenerate subspace of u and
[TABLE]
where ν~ is given for Y∈im(ω0) with ∥Y∥=1 by
[TABLE]
and ν~∣U=μidU on U=(imω0+Jimω0)⊥∩a, with μ∈R
fixed by κ(ω0∧ρ)∣Λ4span(Y,JY)⊥=−μσ2∣Λ4span(Y,JY)⊥.
Proof.
a Here, ρ∧ω0=0 and so the second
equation in (4.3) simplifies to
ν.σ∧σ=0, i.e. to ν.σ=0, since the
Lefschetz operator is bijective on two-forms in six dimensions.
Thus we regard ν as an endomorphism of u and see that
ν∈sp(u,σ).
Let ⋆u be the Hodge star operator on u. Then using
Schur’s Lemma and a concrete element, we find
⋆uω~=−ω~∧σ for each
ω~∈[Λ01,1].
Hence, for such ω~,
σ∧ω~2=−ω~∧⋆uω~=−g(ω~,ω~)61σ3, showing that
σ∧ω~2 is non-zero if ω~ is
non-zero.
In particular, any non-zero element in [Λ01,1] has rank
at least four.
The condition ω0∣a⊗u=0, then gives
dim(a)≤2, and so dim(im(ω0))≤2.
If dim(im(ω0))=1, then
(f+ν)∘ω0=λω0 for some λ∈R,
and the first equation in (4.2) gives
f.ω0=−λω0.
Now
0=σ∧ω02∈Λ6u∗⊗a⊗2 and so, recalling that tr(f)=0, we have
[TABLE]
giving λ=0. Thus, f.ω0=0 and
ν∣im(ω0)=−f∣im(ω0).
Let us now consider the case dim(im(ω0))=2.
Then dim(a)=2 and a is a J-invariant subspace as it
is the kernel of a (1,1)-form.
It follows that tr(f∣a)=0.
As the space of four-forms on u with annihilator a is
one-dimensional and the square of any non-zero element in
[Λ01,1u∗] which annihilates a is non-zero, we
may choose a basis Y1,Y2 of a, so that
ω0=ω~1⊗Y1+ω~2⊗Y2 with
ω~1,ω~2∈[Λ01,1u∗]
annihilating a and satisfying
ω~i∧ω~j=δijω~12=0.
Since tr(f∣a)=0 and tr(f)=0, we have
f.(ω~i∧ω~j)=0 for all
i,j=1,2.
Moreover, the first equation in (4.2) yields
f.ω~i∈span(ω~1,ω~2) for
i=1,2.
Hence, we obtain f.ω~1=aω~2 and
f.ω~2=−aω~1 for some a∈R.
But then the first equation in (4.2) is equivalent to
ν(Y1)=aY2−f(Y1) and ν(Y2)=−aY1−f(Y2).
b & c For these
cases, note that ω0 has kernel equal to a, that
ω02=0 and that dim(imω0)=1.
So the equation σ2∧ω0=0 is equivalent to
a being a σ-degenerate subspace, as claimed.
The f-invariance of a and tr(f)=0 give
f.ω0=tr(f∣a)ω0.
So the first equation in (4.2) is equivalent to
ν∣im(ω0)=−tr(f∣a)idim(ω0)−f∣im(ω0) and we are
left with solving the equation
[TABLE]
Note that the space of ν:u→a⊂u solving equation (4.4) and with
ν∣im(ω0) given as above is an affine subspace of
End(u) modelled on {ν^∈sp(u,σ)∣ν^(u)⊂a,ν^∣imω0=0}.
b Before checking that ν~ as in
the statement is a solution of
equation (4.4), we show that any solution
ν of equation (4.4) has to fulfil
ν∣imω0=0 and so we must have
f∣imω0=−tr(f∣a)idimω0.
As dim(im(ω0))=1, im(ω0) lies in the kernel of
κ(ω0∧ρ).
Let Y be a non-zero element of im(ω0).
Then ω0=ω~⊗Y, ω~ has
kernel a and
κ(ω0∧ρ)=ω~∧(Y┘ρ).
Hence,
0=Y┘κ(ω0∧ρ)=(Y┘ν.σ)∧σ+ν.σ∧(Y┘σ). We define
[TABLE]
Restricting the previous identity to Λ3Z, we get
Y┘ν.σ∣Z=0. As
im(ν)⊂a⊂(JY)⊥, this implies
ν(Y)∈span(Y,JY)∩a=span(Y). So ν(Y)=λY for
some λ∈R.
Then 0=(ν.σ∧σ)(Y,JY,⋅,⋅)∣Λ2Z
gives us ν.σ=λσ on Λ2Z. Now the
kernel of the four-form ν.σ∧σ has to be at least
two-dimensional. Moreover,
(ν.σ∧σ)∣Λ2a⊥∧Λ2a=ω~∣Λ2a⊥∧(Y┘ρ)∣Λ2a=0 and
(ν.σ∧σ)∣a⊥∧Λ3a=0. So the kernel of ν.σ∧σ is contained
in a and, hence, has non-zero intersection with Z. Thus,
0=(ν.σ∧)∣Λ4Z=λσ2∣Λ4Z giving λ=0 as claimed.
Now consider ν~. Let W∈Jim(ω0) be non-zero.
We first note that ν~(W)∈a, as a is in the
kernel of ω0, so
κ(J∘ω0)♯∈(a⊕Jimω0)⊥, which gives
ν~(W)=−ρ(JW,κ(J∘ω0)♯,⋅)♯∈span(W,κ(J∘ω0)♯)⊥=a. Moreover, both
κ(ω0∧ρ) and ν~.σ∧σ
are zero when we restrict to Λ4(Jim(ω0))⊥.
Besides,
(σ∧Y┘ρ)∣Λ4span(JY)⊥=0.
Since
J(JY┘ω~)♯=Jκ(J∘ω0)♯∈\linebreakspan(JY)⊥, we get on
Λ3(Jimω0)⊥=Λ3span(JY)⊥ that
c Using the results from above, we only have
to show that ν~ defined as in
Proposition 4.4c solves
equation (4.4). Now, as JY∈a, the
left-hand side is zero if we insert Y or JY. Since
a⊥=JU, straightforward computations show
[TABLE]
So ν~.σ∧σ is also zero if
we insert Y or JY.
Finally, on Λ4(U⊕JU) we have
ν~.σ∧σ=−μσ2=κ(ω0∧ρ) as required, since
U⊕JU=span(Y,JY)⊥.
∎
Let us give examples of all cases in Proposition 4.4.
Example 4.5**.**
Look at the almost
Abelian Lie algebra defined by
[TABLE]
for a1,a2,a3∈R, where a1.17 in
place 1 means that de1=a1e17 with respect to the basis
e1,…,e7 of g∗, etc. Consider the cocalibrated
G2-structure φ∈Λ3g∗ with closed Hodge dual
⋆φφ=1425+1436+2536+1237−1567+2467−3457, where
1425:=e1425:=e1∧e4∧e2∧e5,
etc.
Case aai: Taking a=span(e1,e4), ω0=(e36−e25)⊗e1 and ν(e1)=−a1e1, ν(e4)=a1e4 and ν(ei)=0 for i∈{2,3,5,6}, the shear gives a cocalibrated G2-structure on
[TABLE]
Case b: Assume that a3=−2a1.
Then, taking a=span(e1,e2,e3,e5),
ω0=−e46⊗e1 and ν(e4)=−e5, ν(ei)=0
for all i∈{1,2,3,5,6}, the shear gives a cocalibrated
G2-structure on
[TABLE]
Case c: Taking a=span(e1,e4,e5,e6), ω0=−ce23⊗e1 for some
c∈R and ν(e1)=(a2+a3−a1)e1, ν(e4)=(a1−a2−a3−2c)e4, ν(ei)=2cei for i=5,6 and ν(ej)=0 for j=2,3 and setting b=a2+a3, the
shear gives a cocalibrated G2-structure on
[TABLE]
For Case aaii we need to start with a
different Lie algebra. We take
[TABLE]
and the cocalibrated G2-structure φ∈Λ3g∗ given by the same formula as above. Moreover, let
a=span(e3,e6), ω0=−(e12+e45)⊗e3−(e15+e24)⊗e6 and ν∈g∗⊗a defined
by ν(e3)=−be3+2ae6, ν(e6)=−2ae3+be6. Then
f.(e12+e45)=2a(e15+e24) and f.(e15+e24)=−2a(e12+e45), so the shear gives a cocalibrated
G2-structure on
[TABLE]
4.3.2. Calibrated G2-structures
Given a G2-structure φ on an almost Abelian Lie algebra
g and unit-length α∈g∗ in the annihilator of u, there is
also an almost Hermitian structure (σ,ρ) on the codimension
one Abelian ideal u related to φ via φ=σ∧α+ρ, cf. [MC06]. The calibrated case
is when dφ=0. In this situation f=ad(X)∣u∈sl(u,ρ):={g∈End(u)∣g.ρ=0}≅sl(3,C) and so tr(f)=0 and [f,J]=0,
cf. [Fre13]. We aim at a partial classification of left-invariant
shear data (inc,ida,ω) as in
Proposition 4.2 for which the shear of φ
is again calibrated.
When U is a subspace of u, we write projU for the
orthogonal projection u→U.
Proposition 4.6**.**
Let (g,u,φ) be a
seven-dimensional almost Abelian Lie algebra with a calibrated
G2-structure. Fix an f-invariant subspace a of u and
let ω=ω0+α∧ν∈Λ2g∗⊗a be as in Proposition 4.2.
\edefitn(a)
If ker(ω0) is J-invariant and
of dimension 2, then (inc,ida,ω) shears
(g,φ) to a calibrated structure if and only if dim(a)=2 and for some Y∈a∖{0} either
f∣a=0, ω0=(aY┘ρ+bJY┘ρ)⊗Y+(cY┘ρ−aJY┘ρ)⊗JY for (a,b,c)∈R3∖{0} with
a2+bc=0 and
[TABLE]
with ν~(Y)=cY−aJY, ν~(JY)=−aY−bJY, ν~(a⊥)={0}.
2. \edefitn(b)
If dim(a)=4 and a=ker(ω0) is J-invariant, then (inc,ida,ω)
shears (g,φ) to a calibrated structure if and only if
ω0=ω~⊗Y for a Y∈a with ∥Y∥=1 and ω~∈Λ2u∗ decomposable, and
[TABLE]
where ν~ is given by
[TABLE]
with U=span(Y,JY)⊥∩a, λ=tr(f∣a)+g(f(Y),Y) and μ=g(f(Y),JY).
3. \edefitn(c)
If dim(a)=4 and a=ker(ω0) is not J-invariant, then (inc,ida,ω)
shears (g,φ) to a calibrated structure if and only if
ω0=ω~⊗Y for a unit length Y∈a∩Ja with Y┘ρ∣Λ2a=0 and decomposable
ω~∈μJY┘ρ+[[Λ1,1u∗]], such that μ∈R is non-zero, f(Y)=λY
for λ∈R fulfilling 4λJY┘ρ∣Λ2U=−J∗ω~∣Λ2U and
[TABLE]
for ν~=diag(−2λ,−4λ,2λ,0) with respect to u=span(Y)⊕span(JY)⊕U⊕JU, U=span(Y,JY)⊥∩a.
Proof.
a First observe that we always have
imω0⊂a⊂kerω0. Consider the case
dim(a)=2. Choose Y1∈ker(ω0)=a and set Y2=JY1. We may then write ω0=∑i=12ωi⊗Yi for two-forms ω1,ω2, where ω2=0 in the
case dim(imω0)=1. The second equation
in (4.3) reads
[TABLE]
As ν(u)⊂a and ρ(Z,JZ,⋅)=0 for all Z∈u,
inserting Y3−i into equation (4.5) gives ωi∈{ω~1,ω~2}
for ω~i:=Yi┘ρ, i=1,2. Hence, we may write ωi=∑j=12aijω~j for some A=(aij)∈M2(R). Equation (4.5) then gives ν(Yj)=∑i=12cijYi with C=(cij)=ATD for D=(01−10).
Since ω~i∧ω~j=δijω~12 for all
i,j=1,2, the first equation in (4.3) reads
[TABLE]
So trA=0, giving A∈sl(2,R).
If dim(a)=1, then ω2=0 and ω1=a11ω~1. But (4.6) gives a11=0
and so ω0=0, which is a contradiction. Thus dim(a)=2.
As a is f-invariant and [f,J]=0, we have f(Yj)=∑i=12bijYi with B=(bij)=(b11−b12b12b11)∈M1(C)⊂M2(R), i.e. b21=−b12 and b22=b11.
Since f.ρ=0, we also get f.ω~j=∑i=12bijω~i. Now the first equation in (4.2) is
equivalent to ABT=−(B+C)A=−BA−ATDA=−BA−det(A)D, which is
[TABLE]
The first two equations are solved if and only if
a12+a21=0=a11 or B=0. In the first case, we must
have a12=0, as A=0, and the last equation implies
a12=2b11=tr(f∣a). In the second case, we have
f∣a=0 and the last equation gives us a112+a12a21=−det(A)=0. This gives the two cases claimed.
b & c First note that
dimkerω0=dima=4, implies that dimimω0⩽dimΛ2(kerω0⊥)=1. We thus have
ω0=ω~⊗Y for some non-zero decomposable
two-form ω~ and a Y∈a with ∥Y∥=1. Now
the first equation in (4.3) reads Y┘ρ∧ω~=0 and the second equation in (4.3)
reads JYb∧ω~=ν.ρ. Moreover, using
f.ω0=tr(f∣a)ω0 we see that the first equation
in (4.2) is equivalent to ν(Y)=−f(Y)−tr(f∣a)Y.
b Here, Y┘ρ∧ω~=Y┘(ρ∧ω~)=0 holds as a=ker(ω~) is J-invariant, i.e. ω~ is a
(1,1)-form. So we only have to check that the given ν~
is a solution of JYb∧ω~=ν~.ρ. To
simplify the notation, we set
[TABLE]
for W∈a⊥. For such W, we have
JW∈a⊥ too, so ν~(W)∈U⊂u.
Moreover, as ρ is zero when evaluated on any pair A,JA and as f.ρ=0,
straightforward computations give us that ν~.ρ is zero on Λ3a+Λ2a∧a⊥+U∧Λ2a⊥. As
ν~(JW)=−Jν~(W) for W∈a⊥, we
obtain (ν~.ρ)(Z,W,JW)=2ρ(Z,JW,ν~(W)).
Thus
[TABLE]
for all W∈a⊥ and all Z∈span(Y,JY). For Z=Y, this equals zero since ρ(Y,JW,⋅)=Jρ(JY,JW,⋅); for Z=JY, we obtain
[TABLE]
as required.
c Inserting JY into Y┘ρ∧ω~=0, we get JY┘ω~=0, as Y┘ρ has rank four. So JY∈ker(ω0)=a and the
equation may be considered as one on the four-dimensional space
span(Y,JY)⊥. But then ω~ solves
Y┘ρ∧ω~=0 if and only if ω~∈[[Λ1,1(span(Y,JY)⊥)∗]]⊕span(JY┘ρ). As a=ker(ω~) is not
J-invariant, the span(JY┘ρ)-part of ω~ must
be non-zero as claimed.
Assume now that JYb∧ω~=ν.ρ holds.
Inserting both Y and JY into this equation one obtains
ρ(f(Y),JY,⋅)−ρ(Y,ν(JY),⋅)=0 and so
ρ(Y,ν(JY)+Jf(Y),⋅)=0. Thus ν(JY)=−Jf(Y) up to terms
in span(Y,JY). However, the hypotheses give JU∩a={0},
so f(Y),ν(JY)∈span(Y,JY).
Inserting Z∈U and JZ∈/a in to the same equation, we
get ν(JZ)=Jν(Z) up to terms in span(Z,JZ). So there are
λ1,λ2∈R such that ν(Z)−λ1Z,ν(JZ)−λ2Z∈span(Y,JY) for all Z∈U. Take now Z,W∈U such that Y,Z,W is a C-basis of u. Then ρ(Y,Z,W)=0 from Y┘ρ∧ω~=0. So we have Y┘ρ∣Λ2a=0 and must have ρ(JY,Z,W)=0. Hence,
[TABLE]
implies ν(Y)∈span(Y). So f(Y)=λY
for some λ∈R. As
[TABLE]
we must have tr(f∣a)=λ. Thus
ν(Y)=−2λY.
Similarly, (ν.ρ)(Y,Z,JW)=0 yields λ1=2λ
and ν.ρ(JY,Z,W)=0 implies that ν(JY)=aY−4λJY for
some a∈R. The equality 0=(ν.ρ)(Y,JZ,JW) gives us λ2=0 and then the equality 0=(ν.ρ)(JY,Z,JW) gives us a=0.
Finally, inserting JY,JZ,JW into JYb∧ω~=ν.ρ, we get 4λρ(JY,Z,W)=−ω~(JZ,JW).
This gives that the difference ν^ between two solutions
of JYb∧ω~=ν.ρ are those
ν^∈End(u) with ν^∣span(Y,JY)=0,
ν^(u)⊂span(Y,JY) and ν^∈sl(u,ρ),
which here is equivalent to [ν^,J]=0, as claimed. Conversely, the above computations
show that ν~ as in the statement fulfils
JYb∧ω~=ν~.ρ, completing the proof.
∎
Let us give explicit examples for all the cases in
Proposition 4.6.
Example 4.7**.**
Start with the almost Abelian Lie algebra
defined by
[TABLE]
for a,b,c∈R with a+b+c=0 and consider
the calibrated G2-structure φ=127+347+567+135−146−236−245.
Case aai: Taking a=span(e1,e2), \omega_{0}=2a\bigl{(}(e^{36}+e^{45})\otimes e_{1}+(e^{35}-e^{46})\otimes e_{2}\bigr{)} and ν∈End(u) defined
by ν∣a=−2aida, ν(ei)=0 for i=3,4,5,6, we
may shear φ to a calibrated G2-structure on
[TABLE]
Case aaii: We assume now that
a=0 and take a=span(e1,e2), a1,a2,a3∈R with
a12+a2a3=0,
[TABLE]
and ν∈u∗⊗a defined by ν(e1)=a3e1+a1e2, ν(e2)=a1e1−a2e2 and ν(ei)=0
for all i=3,…,6. With this data, we may shear φ to a
calibrated G2-structure on
[TABLE]
Case b: Taking a=span(e1,e2,e3,e4),
ω0=−e56⊗e1 and ν∈End(u) given by
ν∣span(e1,e2)=−(3a+2b)idspan(e1,e2),
ν∣span(e3,e4)=(3a+2b)idspan(e3,e4), ν(e5)=21e3 and ν(e6)=−21e4, we may shear φ to
a calibrated G2-structure on
[TABLE]
Case c: Taking a=span(e1,e2,e4,e5),
ω0=4ae36⊗e1 and ν∈End(u) with
ν(e1)=−2ae1, ν(e2)=−4ae2, ν∣span(e4,e5)=2aidspan(e4,e5) and ν∣span(e3,e6)=0, we may shear
φ to a calibrated G2-structure on
[TABLE]
Note that in cases b and c of
Proposition 4.6, the shear Lie algebra is of the form
(h3⊕R3)⋊R, where h3 is the
three-dimensional Heisenberg algebra. We thus obtain calibrated
G2-structures on such Lie algebras as the shears of calibrated
G2-structures on almost Abelian Lie algebras. In fact, we get all
possible calibrated G2-structures on that class of Lie algebras this way:
Corollary 4.8**.**
Let g be a seven-dimensional Lie algebra with
a codimension one nilpotent ideal u≅h3⊕R3. Let
φ∈Λ3g∗ be a G2-structure. Fix X⊥u with ∥X∥=1.
Write h=ad(X)∣u∈der(u) and
(g,J,σ,ρ) for the special almost Hermitian structure
on u induced by φ. Set
[TABLE]
Then φ∈Λ3g∗ is calibrated if and only if
J[u,u]⊂z(u) and either
\edefitn(i)
z(u)* is J-invariant and there
are λ,μ∈R and linear maps hij:Uj→Ui
with [hij,J]=0 such that*
[TABLE]
on u=U1⊕U2⊕U3, where U3:=z(u)⊥ and h:U3→U2 is given by
[TABLE]
for all Z∈U3, or
2. \edefitn(ii)
z(u)* is not J-invariant,
ρ is zero on [u,u]∧Λ2z(u) and there
is an h1∈sl(u,ρ) with U1⊂kerh1 and
h1(z(u))⊂z(u) such that*
[TABLE]
on u=[u,u]⊕J[u,u]⊕U2⊕JU2 with λ∈R specified by −8λρ(Z1,Z2,⋅)♯=J[JZ1,JZ2] for any basis Z1,Z2
of U2.
Proof.
The derivations h of u on the shear obtained from
Proposition 4.6b and
c are exactly those given in
Corollary 4.8i and ii:
this may be seen by straightforward computations using h=f+ν~+ν^ and [W1,W2]=ω~(W1,W2)Y,
for any W1,W2∈z(u)⊥, and for ii,
ρ(Z1,Z2,⋅)♯∈span(JY) in
Proposition 4.6c. So the
direction “⇐” follows.
For the converse direction, we show that we can shear, with
left-invariant data (inc,ida,ω0), any calibrated
G2-structure φ on an almost nilpotent Lie algebra of the
form (h3⊕R3)⋊R to one on an almost Abelian Lie
algebra. As a left-invariant shear can be inverted by Theorem 3.14, we may
obtain φ as the shear of a calibrated G2-structure on an
almost Abelian Lie algebra. Now
Proposition 4.6b and
c contain all possible calibrated shears of
calibrated almost Abelian Lie algebras to Lie algebras of the form (h3⊕R3)⋊R
provided we have a=ker(ω0). However, if a⊂ker(ω0), we may simply enlarge a
to the f-invariant subspace ker(ω0) and the direction “⇒” then follows.
So let φ be calibrated and note that z(u) is an
h-invariant subspace of u. For the shear, we take a=z(u) and ω=ω0+α∧ν with ω0∈Λ2u∗⊗a, ν∈u∗⊗a⊂End(u) and α∈g∗ uniquely defined by
α(X)=1 and α(u)={0}. To shear to an almost
Abelian Lie algebra, we must take ω0=−[proju(⋅),proju(⋅)]. Then im(ω0)=[u,u]. Similarly to the proof of
Proposition 4.2 and using that a is
central, we get γ=α⊗h∣a and η=γ−ω∣a⊗g=α⊗(h+ν)∣a.
Furthermore, the Jacobi identity gives us dω0∣Λ3u=0, so dω0=α∧h.ω0. Hence,
(inc,ida,ω) defines left-invariant shear data on G if
and only if
[TABLE]
giving h.ω0−duν+(h+ν)∘ω0=0, where du is the differential of u. However, h is
a derivation, so
[TABLE]
for all Z1,Z2∈u. Thus
(inc,ida,ω) always defines left-invariant shear data on
G.
i Here, we set ν∣a=0 and ν(Z)=2∥ρ([Z,JZ],Z,⋅)∥2∥[Z,JZ]∥2ρ([Z,JZ],Z,⋅)♯ for any
Z∈a⊥⊂u. The shear is again calibrated if and
only if (4.3) holds. The first equation in
(4.3) is equivalent to the vanishing of the
anti-symmetrisation of ρ([⋅,⋅],⋅,⋅), and so is
satisfied since [u,u]⊂z(u) and z(u) is
four-dimensional and J-invariant. The second equation in
(4.3) is given by γ=ν.ρ with
γ(X,Y,Z)=∑cyclicg([X,Y],JZ) for X,Y,Z∈u. As ν(u)⊂z(u)∩([u,u]⊕J[u,u])⊥, both sides of the equation are zero on
Λ2z(u)∧u+Λ3([u,u]⊕J[u,u])⊥. Finally, a straightforward computation yields
[TABLE]
for any Y∈[u,u]⊕J[u,u] and
any Z∈z(u)⊥. For Y∈[u,u], the right-hand
side is zero and for Y∈J[u,u], one has JY∈span([Z,JZ])
and so ν.ρ(Y,Z,JZ)=g([Z,JZ],JY)=γ(Y,Z,JZ) as we
wanted. Hence, the shear is calibrated.
ii Inserting into 0=dφ two non-zero
elements of z(u)⊥⊂u and two elements of
z(u), we obtain ρ∣[u,u]∧Λ2z(u)=0. This implies J[u,u]⊂z(u) as
otherwise we may take Y∈[u,u], Z1∈z(u)∩Jz(u) and Z2∈z(u) such that Y,Z1,Z2 is a C-basis of u and so
must have 0=ρ(Y,Z1,Z2) or 0=ρ(Y,JZ1,Z2), a
contradiction. After these preliminary considerations,
set U:=z(u)∩([u,u]⊕J[u,u])⊥, define
λ∈R via the formula 4λρ(Z1,Z2,⋅)♯=−J[Z1,Z2], where Z1,Z2 is any basis of JU,
and define ν∈u∗⊗a by ν(Y)=−2λY,
ν(JY)=−4λJY for all Y∈[u,u], ν(Z)=2λZ for all Z∈U and ν∣JU=0. Firstly,
ρ∣[u,u]∧Λ2z(u)=0 implies that the
anti-symmetrisation of ρ([⋅,⋅],⋅,⋅) vanishes.
Furthermore, both ν.ρ and γ as above, are zero on
Λ3z(u)+(JY⊥∩z(u))∧Λ2u. Finally, for Y∈[u,u] and Z1,Z2∈JU we get
[TABLE]
as required.
∎
4.3.3. Almost semi-Kähler structures
An almost Hermitian structure (g,J,σ) on a 2n-dimensional
manifold is called almost semi-Kähler if d(σn−1)=0. Suppose (g,J,σ) is an almost semi-Kähler structure on a
2n-dimensional almost Abelian Lie algebra (g,u). Fix a unit
vector X∈u⊥⊂g and let α∈u∘⊂g∗ be the element with α(X)=1. Then σ=(JX)b∧α+σ1 for some σ1 with kernel
span(X,JX). Thus
[TABLE]
and the almost semi-Kähler condition is equivalent
to f.σ1n−1=0 for f=ad(X)∣u. Since
σ1n−1 defines a volume form on U:=span(X,JX)⊥, this is the same as f(JX)=tr(f)JX.
The first equation in (4.3) is always satisfied, as
σ1n−1∧ω0 is an n-form with values in a
on the (n−1)-dimensional vector space u.
Let us consider the case im(ω0)=span(JX)⊂ker(ω0)=a with a an f-invariant subspace
of u. Then ω0=ω~⊗JX for a non-zero
ω~∈Λ2u∗ and the first equation in
(4.2) is equivalent to f.ω~=λω~ and ν(JX)=−(λ+tr(f))JX, for some
λ∈R. The second equation in (4.3) reads
ω~∧σ1n−2=ν.σ1∧σ1n−2. This is fulfilled if and only if
ω~−ν.σ1∈[Λ01,1U∗]⊕[[Λ2,0U∗]]. Hence, if, e.g., ω~∈[Λ01,1U∗]⊕[[Λ2,0U∗]] is such that f.ω~=λω~ for some λ∈R, then one obtains left-invariant shear data with the
shear being again almost semi-Kähler by taking
ν∈End(u) with ν∣U=0 and ν(JX)=−(λ+tr(f))JX.
Example 4.9**.**
To get an explicit
example, take the Lie algebra
[TABLE]
Then g admits an almost semi-Kähler structure
with σ=12+34+56. One choice of shear is via ω0=−e13⊗e5, ν=(a1+a3−a5)e5⊗e5, giving an
almost semi-Kähler structure on
[TABLE]
For other choices, take ω~ to be
e14, e23 or e24.
Another example may be obtained if a1=a2=−a3. Then (g,σ)
is even semi-Kähler, i.e. J is integrable.
Moreover, if we shear (g,σ) with
ω0=−(e13+e24)⊗e5, ν=−a5e5⊗e5,
we get a semi-Kähler structure on
[TABLE]
by the above and Proposition 3.13 as e13+e24 is
a (1,1)-form on (g,J).
Bibliography23
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[ACD 01] D. V. Alekseevsky, V. Cortés, and C. Devchand, Special complex manifolds , J. Geom. Phys. 42 (2001), no. 1–2, 85–105.
2[BDV 09] M. L. Barberis, I. G. Dotti, and M. Verbitsky, Canonical bundles of complex nilmanifolds, with applications to hypercomplex geometry , Math. Res. Lett. 16 (2009), no. 2, 331–347.
3[Bry 06] R. L. Bryant, Some remarks on G 2 subscript G 2 \mathrm{G}_{2} -structures , Proceedings of the Gökova Geometry-Topology Conference 2005 (S. Akbulut, T. Önder, and R. J. Stern, eds.), Gökova Geometry-Topology Conferences, International Press of Boston, Inc., 2006, pp. 75–109.
4[CF 11] D. Conti and M. Fernández, Nilmanifolds with a calibrated G 2 subscript G 2 \mathrm{G}_{2} -structure , Differential Geom. Appl. 29 (2011), no. 4, 493–506.
5[CFS 11] D. Conti, M. Fernández, and J. A. Santisteban, Solvable lie algebras are not that hypo , Transform. Groups 16 (2011), no. 1, 51–69.
6[CI 07] R. Cleyton and S. Ivanov, On the geometry of closed G 2 subscript G 2 \mathrm{G}_{2} -structures. , Commun. Math. Phys. 270, No. 1, 53–67 (2007). 270 (2007), no. 1, 53–67.
7[Fre 12] M. Freibert, Cocalibrated structures on Lie algebras with a codimension one Abelian ideal , Ann. Global Anal. Geom. 42 (2012), no. 4, 537–563.
8[Fre 13] by same author, Calibrated and parallel structures on almost Abelian Lie algebras , preprint arxiv:1307.2542[math.DG] , July 2013.