The idea behind Delzant construction of a toric manifold from a convex polytope












1












$begingroup$


I am trying to understand how to visualize a symplectic toric manifold from its moment polytope, following chapter 29.4 in "Lectures on Symplectic Geometry" by Ana Cannas da Silva: https://people.math.ethz.ch/~acannas/Papers/lsg.pdf.



The explanation on page 188 is what interests me most (and what I understand the least). Here is a copy of that part of the text:




We can visualize $(M_Δ, ω_Δ, mathbb{T}^n, mu)$
from $Δ$ as follows. First take the product $mathbb T^n times Δ$. Let $p$ lie in the interior of $mathbb T^n times Δ$. The tangent space at $p$ is $mathbb R^n × (mathbb R^n)^∗$. Define $ω_p$ by:
$$ω_p(v, ξ) = ξ(v) = −ω_p(ξ, v),quad text{and}quad ω_p(v, v′) = ω(ξ, ξ′) = 0$$
for all $v, v′ in mathbb R^n$ and $ξ, ξ′ in (mathbb R^n)^∗$. Then $ω$ is a closed nondegenerate $2$-form on the interior of $mathbb T^n times Δ$.
At the corner there are directions missing in $(mathbb R^n)^∗$, so $ω$ is
a degenerate pairing. Hence, we need to eliminate the corresponding directions in
$mathbb R^n$. To do this, we collapse the orbits corresponding to subgroups of $mathbb T^n$ generated
by directions orthogonal to the annihilator of that face.




My questions are:




  1. Is the idea of this construction just to build any symplectic toric manifold so that $Δ$ is the orbit space? If this is the case, I suppose we could conclude that this manifold we built must be $M_Δ$ by uniqueness in the Delzant correspondence?


  2. Does this construction have anything to do with the construction of $M_Δ$ from the proof of the theorem in chapters 29.1-29.3? That construction is briefly described in this question Delzant theorem for polyhedra, and I understand it step by step, but I don't see whether it has anything to do with the visualisation above.



I also don't understand the boldface sentences in the text:




  1. The definition of $omega$? How can we plug in two vectors from $mathbb R^n$, when the second argument of the function must be from the dual? I.e. why is it skew symmetric?


  2. There are directions missing at the corners? Can you help me visualise this in the case $n=1$ and $Δ=[-1,1]$?


  3. How do we see what are the orbits that we need to collapse? And why is the quotient a manifold? Is there some argument here that I'm missing? Normally, one has to be careful to obtain a manifold by passing to the quotient. In the actual proof mentioned in $2)$, symplectic reduction is used to justify that the quotient there is indeed a symplectic manifold. Is this where a connection to that construction comes in?



Answers to any of the questions would be much appreciated!






differential-geometry symplectic-geometry polytopes toric-geometry







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Q1.1 Yes, for maximal effective Hamiltonian toric actions on a symplectic manifolds, the moment map polytope turns out to be in bijection with the orbit space. Q1.2 Yes, but the Delzant correspondence is established by understanding this 'visualization' of symplectic toric manifold. Q3. If must view $mathbb{R}^n times Delta subset mathbb{R}^n times mathbb{R^n}^* cong T^*mathbb{R}^n$ equipped with its standard symplectic form $omega((v_1, xi_1), (v_2, xi_2)) = xi_1(v_2) - xi_2(v_1)$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jordan Payette
    Dec 11 '18 at 21:54






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Q4. I'd prefer to speak of the boundary $mathbb{R}^n times partial Delta$ instead of corners. The boundary of the image of the moment map exists because, on this boundary, the inward-outward direction(s) is (are) no longer in the image of the differential of the moment map; these are the missing directions. As for questions 2 and 5, you are on the right track, but they would require a detailed answer (and some time...) and not mere comments.
    $endgroup$
    – Jordan Payette
    Dec 11 '18 at 22:01


















1












$begingroup$


I am trying to understand how to visualize a symplectic toric manifold from its moment polytope, following chapter 29.4 in "Lectures on Symplectic Geometry" by Ana Cannas da Silva: https://people.math.ethz.ch/~acannas/Papers/lsg.pdf.



The explanation on page 188 is what interests me most (and what I understand the least). Here is a copy of that part of the text:




We can visualize $(M_Δ, ω_Δ, mathbb{T}^n, mu)$
from $Δ$ as follows. First take the product $mathbb T^n times Δ$. Let $p$ lie in the interior of $mathbb T^n times Δ$. The tangent space at $p$ is $mathbb R^n × (mathbb R^n)^∗$. Define $ω_p$ by:
$$ω_p(v, ξ) = ξ(v) = −ω_p(ξ, v),quad text{and}quad ω_p(v, v′) = ω(ξ, ξ′) = 0$$
for all $v, v′ in mathbb R^n$ and $ξ, ξ′ in (mathbb R^n)^∗$. Then $ω$ is a closed nondegenerate $2$-form on the interior of $mathbb T^n times Δ$.
At the corner there are directions missing in $(mathbb R^n)^∗$, so $ω$ is
a degenerate pairing. Hence, we need to eliminate the corresponding directions in
$mathbb R^n$. To do this, we collapse the orbits corresponding to subgroups of $mathbb T^n$ generated
by directions orthogonal to the annihilator of that face.




My questions are:




  1. Is the idea of this construction just to build any symplectic toric manifold so that $Δ$ is the orbit space? If this is the case, I suppose we could conclude that this manifold we built must be $M_Δ$ by uniqueness in the Delzant correspondence?


  2. Does this construction have anything to do with the construction of $M_Δ$ from the proof of the theorem in chapters 29.1-29.3? That construction is briefly described in this question Delzant theorem for polyhedra, and I understand it step by step, but I don't see whether it has anything to do with the visualisation above.



I also don't understand the boldface sentences in the text:




  1. The definition of $omega$? How can we plug in two vectors from $mathbb R^n$, when the second argument of the function must be from the dual? I.e. why is it skew symmetric?


  2. There are directions missing at the corners? Can you help me visualise this in the case $n=1$ and $Δ=[-1,1]$?


  3. How do we see what are the orbits that we need to collapse? And why is the quotient a manifold? Is there some argument here that I'm missing? Normally, one has to be careful to obtain a manifold by passing to the quotient. In the actual proof mentioned in $2)$, symplectic reduction is used to justify that the quotient there is indeed a symplectic manifold. Is this where a connection to that construction comes in?



Answers to any of the questions would be much appreciated!






differential-geometry symplectic-geometry polytopes toric-geometry







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Q1.1 Yes, for maximal effective Hamiltonian toric actions on a symplectic manifolds, the moment map polytope turns out to be in bijection with the orbit space. Q1.2 Yes, but the Delzant correspondence is established by understanding this 'visualization' of symplectic toric manifold. Q3. If must view $mathbb{R}^n times Delta subset mathbb{R}^n times mathbb{R^n}^* cong T^*mathbb{R}^n$ equipped with its standard symplectic form $omega((v_1, xi_1), (v_2, xi_2)) = xi_1(v_2) - xi_2(v_1)$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jordan Payette
    Dec 11 '18 at 21:54






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Q4. I'd prefer to speak of the boundary $mathbb{R}^n times partial Delta$ instead of corners. The boundary of the image of the moment map exists because, on this boundary, the inward-outward direction(s) is (are) no longer in the image of the differential of the moment map; these are the missing directions. As for questions 2 and 5, you are on the right track, but they would require a detailed answer (and some time...) and not mere comments.
    $endgroup$
    – Jordan Payette
    Dec 11 '18 at 22:01
















1












1








1





$begingroup$


I am trying to understand how to visualize a symplectic toric manifold from its moment polytope, following chapter 29.4 in "Lectures on Symplectic Geometry" by Ana Cannas da Silva: https://people.math.ethz.ch/~acannas/Papers/lsg.pdf.



The explanation on page 188 is what interests me most (and what I understand the least). Here is a copy of that part of the text:




We can visualize $(M_Δ, ω_Δ, mathbb{T}^n, mu)$
from $Δ$ as follows. First take the product $mathbb T^n times Δ$. Let $p$ lie in the interior of $mathbb T^n times Δ$. The tangent space at $p$ is $mathbb R^n × (mathbb R^n)^∗$. Define $ω_p$ by:
$$ω_p(v, ξ) = ξ(v) = −ω_p(ξ, v),quad text{and}quad ω_p(v, v′) = ω(ξ, ξ′) = 0$$
for all $v, v′ in mathbb R^n$ and $ξ, ξ′ in (mathbb R^n)^∗$. Then $ω$ is a closed nondegenerate $2$-form on the interior of $mathbb T^n times Δ$.
At the corner there are directions missing in $(mathbb R^n)^∗$, so $ω$ is
a degenerate pairing. Hence, we need to eliminate the corresponding directions in
$mathbb R^n$. To do this, we collapse the orbits corresponding to subgroups of $mathbb T^n$ generated
by directions orthogonal to the annihilator of that face.




My questions are:




  1. Is the idea of this construction just to build any symplectic toric manifold so that $Δ$ is the orbit space? If this is the case, I suppose we could conclude that this manifold we built must be $M_Δ$ by uniqueness in the Delzant correspondence?


  2. Does this construction have anything to do with the construction of $M_Δ$ from the proof of the theorem in chapters 29.1-29.3? That construction is briefly described in this question Delzant theorem for polyhedra, and I understand it step by step, but I don't see whether it has anything to do with the visualisation above.



I also don't understand the boldface sentences in the text:




  1. The definition of $omega$? How can we plug in two vectors from $mathbb R^n$, when the second argument of the function must be from the dual? I.e. why is it skew symmetric?


  2. There are directions missing at the corners? Can you help me visualise this in the case $n=1$ and $Δ=[-1,1]$?


  3. How do we see what are the orbits that we need to collapse? And why is the quotient a manifold? Is there some argument here that I'm missing? Normally, one has to be careful to obtain a manifold by passing to the quotient. In the actual proof mentioned in $2)$, symplectic reduction is used to justify that the quotient there is indeed a symplectic manifold. Is this where a connection to that construction comes in?



Answers to any of the questions would be much appreciated!






differential-geometry symplectic-geometry polytopes toric-geometry







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I am trying to understand how to visualize a symplectic toric manifold from its moment polytope, following chapter 29.4 in "Lectures on Symplectic Geometry" by Ana Cannas da Silva: https://people.math.ethz.ch/~acannas/Papers/lsg.pdf.



The explanation on page 188 is what interests me most (and what I understand the least). Here is a copy of that part of the text:




We can visualize $(M_Δ, ω_Δ, mathbb{T}^n, mu)$
from $Δ$ as follows. First take the product $mathbb T^n times Δ$. Let $p$ lie in the interior of $mathbb T^n times Δ$. The tangent space at $p$ is $mathbb R^n × (mathbb R^n)^∗$. Define $ω_p$ by:
$$ω_p(v, ξ) = ξ(v) = −ω_p(ξ, v),quad text{and}quad ω_p(v, v′) = ω(ξ, ξ′) = 0$$
for all $v, v′ in mathbb R^n$ and $ξ, ξ′ in (mathbb R^n)^∗$. Then $ω$ is a closed nondegenerate $2$-form on the interior of $mathbb T^n times Δ$.
At the corner there are directions missing in $(mathbb R^n)^∗$, so $ω$ is
a degenerate pairing. Hence, we need to eliminate the corresponding directions in
$mathbb R^n$. To do this, we collapse the orbits corresponding to subgroups of $mathbb T^n$ generated
by directions orthogonal to the annihilator of that face.




My questions are:




  1. Is the idea of this construction just to build any symplectic toric manifold so that $Δ$ is the orbit space? If this is the case, I suppose we could conclude that this manifold we built must be $M_Δ$ by uniqueness in the Delzant correspondence?


  2. Does this construction have anything to do with the construction of $M_Δ$ from the proof of the theorem in chapters 29.1-29.3? That construction is briefly described in this question Delzant theorem for polyhedra, and I understand it step by step, but I don't see whether it has anything to do with the visualisation above.



I also don't understand the boldface sentences in the text:




  1. The definition of $omega$? How can we plug in two vectors from $mathbb R^n$, when the second argument of the function must be from the dual? I.e. why is it skew symmetric?


  2. There are directions missing at the corners? Can you help me visualise this in the case $n=1$ and $Δ=[-1,1]$?


  3. How do we see what are the orbits that we need to collapse? And why is the quotient a manifold? Is there some argument here that I'm missing? Normally, one has to be careful to obtain a manifold by passing to the quotient. In the actual proof mentioned in $2)$, symplectic reduction is used to justify that the quotient there is indeed a symplectic manifold. Is this where a connection to that construction comes in?



Answers to any of the questions would be much appreciated!






differential-geometry symplectic-geometry polytopes toric-geometry




differential-geometry symplectic-geometry polytopes toric-geometry






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 10 '18 at 13:12









s.harp

8,44312249




8,44312249










asked Dec 9 '18 at 15:03









Layer CakeLayer Cake

253110




253110








  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Q1.1 Yes, for maximal effective Hamiltonian toric actions on a symplectic manifolds, the moment map polytope turns out to be in bijection with the orbit space. Q1.2 Yes, but the Delzant correspondence is established by understanding this 'visualization' of symplectic toric manifold. Q3. If must view $mathbb{R}^n times Delta subset mathbb{R}^n times mathbb{R^n}^* cong T^*mathbb{R}^n$ equipped with its standard symplectic form $omega((v_1, xi_1), (v_2, xi_2)) = xi_1(v_2) - xi_2(v_1)$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jordan Payette
    Dec 11 '18 at 21:54






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Q4. I'd prefer to speak of the boundary $mathbb{R}^n times partial Delta$ instead of corners. The boundary of the image of the moment map exists because, on this boundary, the inward-outward direction(s) is (are) no longer in the image of the differential of the moment map; these are the missing directions. As for questions 2 and 5, you are on the right track, but they would require a detailed answer (and some time...) and not mere comments.
    $endgroup$
    – Jordan Payette
    Dec 11 '18 at 22:01
















  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Q1.1 Yes, for maximal effective Hamiltonian toric actions on a symplectic manifolds, the moment map polytope turns out to be in bijection with the orbit space. Q1.2 Yes, but the Delzant correspondence is established by understanding this 'visualization' of symplectic toric manifold. Q3. If must view $mathbb{R}^n times Delta subset mathbb{R}^n times mathbb{R^n}^* cong T^*mathbb{R}^n$ equipped with its standard symplectic form $omega((v_1, xi_1), (v_2, xi_2)) = xi_1(v_2) - xi_2(v_1)$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jordan Payette
    Dec 11 '18 at 21:54






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Q4. I'd prefer to speak of the boundary $mathbb{R}^n times partial Delta$ instead of corners. The boundary of the image of the moment map exists because, on this boundary, the inward-outward direction(s) is (are) no longer in the image of the differential of the moment map; these are the missing directions. As for questions 2 and 5, you are on the right track, but they would require a detailed answer (and some time...) and not mere comments.
    $endgroup$
    – Jordan Payette
    Dec 11 '18 at 22:01










3




3




$begingroup$
Q1.1 Yes, for maximal effective Hamiltonian toric actions on a symplectic manifolds, the moment map polytope turns out to be in bijection with the orbit space. Q1.2 Yes, but the Delzant correspondence is established by understanding this 'visualization' of symplectic toric manifold. Q3. If must view $mathbb{R}^n times Delta subset mathbb{R}^n times mathbb{R^n}^* cong T^*mathbb{R}^n$ equipped with its standard symplectic form $omega((v_1, xi_1), (v_2, xi_2)) = xi_1(v_2) - xi_2(v_1)$.
$endgroup$
– Jordan Payette
Dec 11 '18 at 21:54




$begingroup$
Q1.1 Yes, for maximal effective Hamiltonian toric actions on a symplectic manifolds, the moment map polytope turns out to be in bijection with the orbit space. Q1.2 Yes, but the Delzant correspondence is established by understanding this 'visualization' of symplectic toric manifold. Q3. If must view $mathbb{R}^n times Delta subset mathbb{R}^n times mathbb{R^n}^* cong T^*mathbb{R}^n$ equipped with its standard symplectic form $omega((v_1, xi_1), (v_2, xi_2)) = xi_1(v_2) - xi_2(v_1)$.
$endgroup$
– Jordan Payette
Dec 11 '18 at 21:54




2




2




$begingroup$
Q4. I'd prefer to speak of the boundary $mathbb{R}^n times partial Delta$ instead of corners. The boundary of the image of the moment map exists because, on this boundary, the inward-outward direction(s) is (are) no longer in the image of the differential of the moment map; these are the missing directions. As for questions 2 and 5, you are on the right track, but they would require a detailed answer (and some time...) and not mere comments.
$endgroup$
– Jordan Payette
Dec 11 '18 at 22:01






$begingroup$
Q4. I'd prefer to speak of the boundary $mathbb{R}^n times partial Delta$ instead of corners. The boundary of the image of the moment map exists because, on this boundary, the inward-outward direction(s) is (are) no longer in the image of the differential of the moment map; these are the missing directions. As for questions 2 and 5, you are on the right track, but they would require a detailed answer (and some time...) and not mere comments.
$endgroup$
– Jordan Payette
Dec 11 '18 at 22:01












0






active

oldest

votes











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3032472%2fthe-idea-behind-delzant-construction-of-a-toric-manifold-from-a-convex-polytope%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























0






active

oldest

votes








0






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes
















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3032472%2fthe-idea-behind-delzant-construction-of-a-toric-manifold-from-a-convex-polytope%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Probability when a professor distributes a quiz and homework assignment to a class of n students.

Image
0 0 $begingroup$ Need help with this problem. Suppose our lazy professor collects a quiz and a homework assignment from a class of n students one day, then distributes both the quizzes and the homework assignments back to the class in a random fashion for grading. Each student receives one quiz and one homework assignment to grade. (a) What is the probability that every student receives someone else's quiz to grade, and someone else's homework to grade? (b) What is the probability that no student receives both their own quiz and their own homework assignment to grade? In this case, some students may receive their own quiz, and others may receive their own homework assignment. (c) Compute the limiting probability as n approaches infinity in each case. ...
Read more

Aardman Animations

Image
Aardman Animations, Ltd. Aardman Animations Tipo privada Atividade Animação em stop-motion , Animação em CGI Fundação 1972 Fundador(es) Peter Lord David Sproxton Sede Bristol, Inglaterra  Reino Unido Proprietário(s) Dreamworks Pessoas-chave Peter Lord David Sproxton Nick Park Divisões Aardman Features Aardman Digital Aardman Commercials Aardman Broadcast Aardman International Aardman Rights Aardman Effects Aardman 3-D Systems Aardman Nathan Love AardBoiled Website oficial aardman.com ...
Read more

Are they similar matrix

Image
0 $begingroup$ Do $begin{bmatrix} 0&i&0\0&0&1\0&0&0 end{bmatrix} $ and $begin{bmatrix} 0&0&0\-i&0&0\0&1&0 end{bmatrix} $ are similar.Is this True/false Clearly both are nilpotent and one is conjucate transpose of other but how to know if they are similar.i'm stuck. Please help me linear-algebra vector-spaces eigenvalues-eigenvectors generalizedeigenvector share | cite | improve this question edited Dec 10 '18 at 6:38 Vasanth Kris asked Dec 10 '18 at 6:19 ...
Read more