Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $X$ be a Kaehler manifold. The torsion free part of the singular cohomology $H^n(X,\mathbb{C})$ has a Hodge decomposition $$ H^n(X,\mathbb{C})=\bigoplus_{p+q=n}H^{p,q}(X), $$ where $H^{p,q}(X)$ can either be viewed as the space of de Rham classes of bidegree $(p,q)$ or as the Dolbeault cohomology $H^{q}(X,\Omega^p)$. For any subvariety $Z\subset X$, the fundamental class $[Z] \in H^{2k}(X,\mathbb{C})$ for some $k$.

Since $[Z] \in H^{2k}(X,\mathbb{Z})$, it defines a real class, but how can one prove that it lies in $H^{k,k}(X)$? Why not $[Z] \in H^{k-1,k+1}(X,\mathbb{Z})\oplus H^{k+1,k-1}(X,\mathbb{Z})$?

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 5 down vote accepted

This is because $Z$ is a complex subvariety of $X$. I think the easiest way to see it is to use local coordinates. First assume $Z$ is smooth to simplify things a little and let $p = \dim_{\mathbb C} Z$.

Let $u$ be some closed $2p$-form on $X$ and let $x$ be a point on $Z$. We can find holomorphic local coordinates $(z_1,\dots,z_n)$ on $X$ such that $Z$ is described by the set $\{ z \mid z_{p+1} = \dots = z_n = 0\}$ in these coordinates. Now write $u = \sum_{a+b = 2p} u_{ab}$ as a decomposition of $(a,b)$-forms. Locally, we have $$ u_{ab} = \sum_{I,J} u_{ab,IJ} d z_I \wedge d\overline z_J, $$ where $I,J$ are multi-indices such that $|I| = a$ and $|J| = b$. But now linear algebra shows that for $dz_I$ to be nonzero once restriced to $Z$, we must have $a = |I| \leq p$. Similarly, we get $b = |J| \leq p$, so $a = b = p$.

For non-smooth $Z$, one can show that the integral over $Z$ of $u$ is equal to the integral over the nonsingular part of $Z$ only. This takes a little work, but is done in one of the first chapters of Demailly's book "Complex analytic and differential geometry". Since the nonsingular part is dense in $Z$ this implies the result.

Now, if $Z$ is just an arbitrary closed smooth subvariety of $X$, there is no reason that it should define a $(p,p)$-class, and indeed it doesn't in general.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks for the answer. It is not so trivial after all. –  M. K. Nov 17 '12 at 17:22
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.