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.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am puzzled by the fact that the two differential forms $$\begin{array}{cc} dz=dx+i dy , & d\overline{z}=dx-i dy \end{array} $$ are $\mathbb{C}$-linearly independent, even if the underlying manifold $\mathbb{C}$ has complex dimension $1$. Of course there is nothing wrong: the second "differential form" is not $\mathbb{C}$-linear. Hence, it is not a true complex differential form. However it is not real valued, so it is not a real differential form either. So what it is?

Question. Can you clarify the nature of the objects $dz, d\overline{z}$ above? Which abstract notion, relative to complex manifolds, includes and generalizes them?

share|cite|improve this question

A complex structure $J$ on a real vector space $V$ is a endomorphism $J: V \longrightarrow V$ that squares to minus the identity: $J^2 = -\text{Id}_{V}$. Such a complex structure allows us to define scalar multiplication of elements $v \in V$ by complex numbers $a + bi$: $$(a + bi)\cdot v = av + b Jv.$$ But since $V$ is a real vector space, in order to actually use this scalar multiplication by complex numbers and consider $V$ as a complex vector space, we need to extend our field of scalars from $\Bbb R$ to $\Bbb C$ via complexification and consider $V \otimes_{\Bbb R} \Bbb C$. This will be where the "extra" forms come from.

Note that a complex structure $J$ has eigenvalues $\pm i$. Then we have a direct sum decomposition $$V \otimes_{\Bbb R} \Bbb C = V^{1,0} \oplus V^{0,1},$$ where $V^{1,0}$ is the $+i$-eigenspace of $J$ and $V^{0,1}$ is the $-i$-eigenspace of $J$. For $v \in V \otimes_{\Bbb R} \Bbb C$, $v - iJv \in V^{1,0}$ and $v + iJv \in V^{0,1}$.

The above relates to your question as follows. $\Bbb C$ is a real vector space of dimension $2$, with basis $\{1,i\}$ and complex structure $J = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & -1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}$. The dual space $\Bbb C^\ast$ is also real of dimension $2$ with a complex structure $J$ as above and basis $\{dx, dy\}$. By the above, we have a direct sum decomposition $$\Bbb C^\ast \otimes_{\Bbb R} \Bbb C = (\Bbb C^\ast)^{1,0} \oplus (\Bbb C^\ast)^{0,1}.$$ We see that $$dz = dx + i\, dy$$ is a generator for $(\Bbb C^\ast)^{1,0}$ and $$d\bar{z} = dx - i\, dy$$ is a generator for $(\Bbb C^\ast)^{0,1}$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Dear Henry, the statement " $\Bbb C$ is a real vector space of dimension $2$, with basis $\{x,y\}$" does not make sense: a basis of $\mathbb C$ consists of two complex numbers and $x,y$ are not complex numbers (they are real linear forms). The basis you want is $(1,i)$. Also, $dz = dx + i\, dy$ and $d\bar{z} = dx + i\, dy$; in other words the signs of the imaginary parts are wrong. – Georges Elencwajg May 17 '14 at 7:07
Your question helped me immensely in focusing on the right mathematical framework. However, I still have a small doubt. Once you have the complxified space $V\otimes_{\mathbb{R}}\mathbb{C}$, you can act on it both by multiplication by $i$, both by applying $J$. Are those two operations the same thing? Precisely, is it true that $$i(\mathbb{v}\otimes z)=J(\mathbb{v}\otimes z)?$$ – Giuseppe Negro May 18 '14 at 23:07
(PS: I wrote "question" where, of course, I meant "answer") – Giuseppe Negro May 18 '14 at 23:55
@GiuseppeNegro They are different. We can complexify any real vector space $V$ my taking $V \otimes_{\Bbb R} \Bbb C$, and complexification makes no reference to a complex structure on $J$. For example, $J(dz - d\bar{z}) = i(dz + d\bar{z}) = 2\, dx \neq i(dz - d\bar{z}) = -2\, dy$, so we explicitly see that $J$ is not the same as multiplication by $i$. – Henry T. Horton May 19 '14 at 21:13
It is a bit confusing indeed. Anyway, I found this Wikipedia page:… which says something about the construction you suggested. I am leaving it here for future reference – Giuseppe Negro May 20 '14 at 11:42

The underlying real vector space is 2 dimensional, spanned by $dx, dy$. We can complexify the space by taking the tensor product with $\mathbb{C}$ but it remains 2 dimensional. Then we are just choosing a different basis. Of course $d\overline{z}$ is not holomorphic but is real differentiable. That is one way of looking at it. All complex analysis can be reduced to real analysis using harmonic functions and Cauchy-Riemann.

share|cite|improve this answer
So according to this interpretation the objects $dz$ and $d\overline{z}$ are real-linear, complex-valued differential forms, if I understand well. But then, what do you mean by "complexify the space"? Can you give some more detail on this, please? – Giuseppe Negro May 17 '14 at 1:12
Ja I mean $V\otimes \mathbb{C}$. – Rene Schipperus May 17 '14 at 1:31
Maybe it helps not to think of them as forms but just as elements of a vector space, where we are now allowing complex coefficients, but they remain independent. – Rene Schipperus May 17 '14 at 1:33
Here's a thing that I fail to understand. You say "the underlying real vector space is 2 dimensional", so we are considering $\mathbb{R}^2$. Then we complexify it, that is, we take $\mathbb{R}^2\otimes_{\mathbb{R}} \mathbb{C}$. Now, shouldn't this last space be $2\times 2=4$ dimensional? – Giuseppe Negro May 18 '14 at 10:46
You have to be careful about what the base field is. Yes it is 4 dimensional over $\mathbb{R}$ but only 2 dimensional over $\mathbb{C}$ – Rene Schipperus May 20 '14 at 0:24

Your Answer


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.