Complex manifolds. Given a nonempty open subset U \subset \mathbb{C}^{n}, let \mathscr{O}_{U}(V) := \{f : V \rightarrow \mathbb{C} : f\text{ holomorphic}\}, for any nonempty open V \subset U. Note that this is a \mathbb{C}-algebra. We define \mathscr{O}_{U}(\emptyset) = 0, the zero \mathbb{C}-algebra. Note that these form a sheaf \mathscr{O}_{U}, where we could use the actual restrictions to define restriction maps. (The key here is that holomorphicity can be checked open-locally.)
Remark. I think we have \mathscr{O}_{\emptyset} = 0, in any reasonable definition. In any case, let's declare this.
A complex manifold is a pair (X, \mathscr{O}_{X}) such that
- X is a topological space that is Hausdorff and second countable, and
- \mathscr{O}_{X} \hookrightarrow \mathscr{C}_{X, \mathbb{C}}, the sheaf of \mathbb{C}-algebras given by \mathbb{C}-valued continuous functions, is a subsheaf over X with is an open cover X = \bigcup_{i \in I}U_{i} such that for each i \in I, we have some open subset V_{i} \subset \mathbb{C}^{n} with an isomorphism of ringed spaces (U_{i} \mathscr{O}_{U_{i}}) \simeq (V_{i} \mathscr{O}_{V_{i}}).
Remark. The last condition is more concrete than the way it may look. It is saying that we have a homeomorphism \varphi : U_{i} \overset{\sim}{\longrightarrow} V_{i} \subset \mathbb{C}^{n} with a sheaf isomoprhism \varphi_{*}\mathscr{O}_{U_{i}} \overset{\sim}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{V_{i}} over V_{i}. Thus, for any open W \subset V_{i}, we have a \mathbb{C}-algebra isomorphism \mathscr{O}_{V_{i}}(W) \overset{\sim}{\longrightarrow} \mathscr{O}_{U_{i}}(\phi^{-1}(W)), so each element in the right-hand side corresponds to a holomorphic function W \rightarrow \mathbb{C}, and we can treat it as if it is the composition \varphi^{-1}(W) \simeq W \rightarrow \mathbb{C}, which we declare to be holomorphic on \varphi^{-1}(W). This way, we obtain some concrete description of \mathscr{O}_{X}. By definition, global sections of \mathscr{O}_{X} are called holomorphic functions on X, but we also have a concrete meaning namely, each f \in \Gamma(X, \mathscr{O}_{X}) can be realized as a continuous map f : X \rightarrow \mathbb{C} such that for every p \in X, there is an open neighborhood U \ni p in X, with open embedding U \hookrightarrow \mathbb{C}^{n} such that f : U \rightarrow \mathbb{C} is holomormophic. (The gluing procedure in \textbf{Top} will do the job, and the same holds for any open subset of X in place of the whole X.)
A holomorphic map (X, \mathscr{O}_{X}) \rightarrow (Y, \mathscr{O}_{Y}) is a continuous map \phi : X \rightarrow Y together with a sheaf map \mathscr{O}_{Y} \rightarrow \phi_{*}\mathscr{O}_{X} given as follows: for any open V \subset Y, we have a \mathbb{C}-algebra map \Gamma(V, \mathscr{O}_{Y}) \rightarrow \Gamma (\phi^{-1}(V), \mathscr{O}_{X}) given by g \mapsto g \circ \phi.
Remark. If X \subset \mathbb{C}^{n} and Y \subset \mathbb{C}^{m} are open subsets, the above coincides with our previous definition of holomorphic maps.
Remark. Note that a complex manifold (X, \mathscr{O}_{X}) is a locally ringed space. To see this fix p \in X and consider the stalk \mathscr{O}_{X, p} at p. Since any germ not vanishing at p does not vanish nearby p, we see that \mathfrak{m}_{X,p} = \{f \in \mathscr{O}_{X,p} : f(p) = 0\} is the unique maximal ideal of \mathscr{O}_{X, p}, so \mathscr{O}_{X,p} is a local ring.
Given any holomorphic map \phi : X \rightarrow Y, for any p \in X, we get an induced \mathbb{C}-algebra map on stalks \mathscr{O}_{Y,\phi(p)} \rightarrow \mathscr{O}_{X,p} given by g \mapsto g \circ \phi. Hence, we have \mathfrak{m}_{p} \rightarrow \mathfrak{m}_{\phi(p)} under this map, so the map on the stalks is a local map. Thus, a holomorphic map of complex manifolds is a morphism of locally ringed spaces.
Personal question. In the case of varieties, any morphism \phi : X \rightarrow Y of locally ringed spaces gives the map \mathscr{O}_{Y} \rightarrow \phi_{*}\mathscr{O}_{X} by the post composition g \mapsto g \circ \phi. I have a feeling that this is a very special feature of varieties, but I cannot tell whether there is a counterexample for real/complex manifolds. Are there?
Remark. For any n-dimensional manifold, it is not difficult to see that any of its stalk is isomorphic to the subalgebra of the formal power series ring \mathbb{C}[[z_{1}, \dots, z_{n}]] consisting of convergent power series at (0, \dots, 0).
Atlas definition. One can define complex manifolds using atlases. That is, an n-dimensional complex manifold X is a Hausdorff and 2nd countable topological space with an open cover X = \bigcup_{i \in I}U_{i} equipped with homemomorphisms \varphi_{i} : U_{i} \overset{\sim}{\longrightarrow} V_{i} \overset{\text{open}}{\hookrightarrow} \mathbb{C}^{n} such that for all i, j \in I, the map \varphi_{j} \circ \varphi_{i}^{-1} : \varphi_{i}(U_{i} \cap U_{j}) \rightarrow \varphi_{j}(U_{i} \cap U_{j}) is a biholomorphic map. (Just perform gluing of sheaves \mathscr{O}_{U_{i}} according to \varphi_{i}.)
Based on the atlas definition, since holomorphic maps between the open subsets of Euclidean spaces are smooth, any complex manifold X of dimension n has an underlying real smooth manifold structure X_{\mathbb{R}} of dimension 2n. We also have the inclusion of two different sheaves \mathscr{O}_{X} \hookrightarrow \mathscr{C}^{\infty}_{X, \mathbb{C}} for X, and we will use both in a tidy way to understand X better.
Personal remark. We did discuss the Maximum Modulus Theorem, but I decided not to include it in these notes because we are not using the theorem here.
Remark. If X \subset \mathbb{C}^{n} and Y \subset \mathbb{C}^{m} are open subsets, the above coincides with our previous definition of holomorphic maps.
Remark. Note that a complex manifold (X, \mathscr{O}_{X}) is a locally ringed space. To see this fix p \in X and consider the stalk \mathscr{O}_{X, p} at p. Since any germ not vanishing at p does not vanish nearby p, we see that \mathfrak{m}_{X,p} = \{f \in \mathscr{O}_{X,p} : f(p) = 0\} is the unique maximal ideal of \mathscr{O}_{X, p}, so \mathscr{O}_{X,p} is a local ring.
Given any holomorphic map \phi : X \rightarrow Y, for any p \in X, we get an induced \mathbb{C}-algebra map on stalks \mathscr{O}_{Y,\phi(p)} \rightarrow \mathscr{O}_{X,p} given by g \mapsto g \circ \phi. Hence, we have \mathfrak{m}_{p} \rightarrow \mathfrak{m}_{\phi(p)} under this map, so the map on the stalks is a local map. Thus, a holomorphic map of complex manifolds is a morphism of locally ringed spaces.
Personal question. In the case of varieties, any morphism \phi : X \rightarrow Y of locally ringed spaces gives the map \mathscr{O}_{Y} \rightarrow \phi_{*}\mathscr{O}_{X} by the post composition g \mapsto g \circ \phi. I have a feeling that this is a very special feature of varieties, but I cannot tell whether there is a counterexample for real/complex manifolds. Are there?
Remark. For any n-dimensional manifold, it is not difficult to see that any of its stalk is isomorphic to the subalgebra of the formal power series ring \mathbb{C}[[z_{1}, \dots, z_{n}]] consisting of convergent power series at (0, \dots, 0).
Atlas definition. One can define complex manifolds using atlases. That is, an n-dimensional complex manifold X is a Hausdorff and 2nd countable topological space with an open cover X = \bigcup_{i \in I}U_{i} equipped with homemomorphisms \varphi_{i} : U_{i} \overset{\sim}{\longrightarrow} V_{i} \overset{\text{open}}{\hookrightarrow} \mathbb{C}^{n} such that for all i, j \in I, the map \varphi_{j} \circ \varphi_{i}^{-1} : \varphi_{i}(U_{i} \cap U_{j}) \rightarrow \varphi_{j}(U_{i} \cap U_{j}) is a biholomorphic map. (Just perform gluing of sheaves \mathscr{O}_{U_{i}} according to \varphi_{i}.)
Based on the atlas definition, since holomorphic maps between the open subsets of Euclidean spaces are smooth, any complex manifold X of dimension n has an underlying real smooth manifold structure X_{\mathbb{R}} of dimension 2n. We also have the inclusion of two different sheaves \mathscr{O}_{X} \hookrightarrow \mathscr{C}^{\infty}_{X, \mathbb{C}} for X, and we will use both in a tidy way to understand X better.
Personal remark. We did discuss the Maximum Modulus Theorem, but I decided not to include it in these notes because we are not using the theorem here.
No comments:
Post a Comment