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

8,67012250




8,67012250










asked Dec 9 '18 at 15:03









Layer CakeLayer Cake

292111




292111








  • 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

How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

Image
3 Recently upgrade to 18.10 from 18.04, and using the terminal is becoming annoying: the new alert sound is a drip ( /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg ), and the previous one is still located at ( /usr/share/sounds/ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg ). My issue is that at the gnome-terminal, when autocompleting or pressing left BOTH sounds are reproduced, at the same time. I want to just have ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg active, not both . At the moment I have been only able to reduce the volume of the alerts (but still both are played), or turn the alerts down (but I dislike both "solutions"). gnome-terminal 18.10 teminal-bell share | improve this question
Read more

Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

Image
up vote 5 down vote favorite 2 I would like to make it so that the vertical space below the title of each chapter is the same when using the Bjornstrup package (i.e. so that the descenders do not affect the spacing - as shown by the red arrow in the picture below). I think I'm fairly happy with the spacing around "A chapter", so I'd really like titles without descenders (e.g. "Contents") to have the same vertical spacing as "A chapter" below the title. I would also like to remove the large "0" in the contents title. Any help appreciated, as always. documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{book} % Packages[![enter image description here][1]][1] usepackage[left=3.5cm, right=3.5cm, top=4.3cm, bottom=4.25cm]{geometry} usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} usepackage{libertine} usepackage[libertine]{newtx
Read more

Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?

Image
0 I want to add Tabulator js to my java project. I added tabulator.min.js, tabulator.min.css to resources folder. After that added to my html page these dependencies as recommending in readme.md. <link rel="stylesheet" th:href="@{/css/tabulator.min.css}"> <script type="text/javascript" th:src="@{/js/tabulator.min.js}"></script> Now my tables view all elements, that I have in the html page, but not correct. In the documentation of Tabulator is example how to create header and table, var table = new Tabulator("#example-table", { columns:[ {title:"Name", field:"name", sorter:"string", width:200, editor:true}, {title:"Age", field:"age", sorter:"
Read more