Let $X$ be a complex manifold and denote the space of all $(p, q)$-forms on $X$ by $\mathcal{E}^{p,q}(X)$. Forgetting about the complex structure, we can consider the real differential $k$-forms on the underlying smooth manifold; let the space of all such forms be denoted by $\mathcal{E}^k(X)$.

We have the following decomposition:

$$\mathcal{E}^k(X)\otimes_{\mathbb{R}}\mathbb{C} = \bigoplus_{p+q=k}\mathcal{E}^{p,q}(X).$$

One thing this decomposition tells us is that it is easy to tell if a $(p, q)$-form is a $k$-form (check whether $p + q = k$). What about the converse?

Given a (complexified) $k$-form on a complex manifold, is there a way to determine if it is a $(p, q)$-form (for a particular $p$ and $q$ with $p + q = k$)?

Of course, this can be done by writing the form locally, but I would prefer a more global approach.

My motivation for asking this question is that there is an easy test to tell whether a complexified $1$-form is a $(1, 0)$-form or a $(0, 1)$-form which I outline below.

Let $J$ be the almost complex structure induced by the complex structure (extended to the complexified tangent bundle). Then there is an induced map $J'$ on the complexified cotangent bundle with $J'\circ J' = -\mathrm{id}$ - explicitly, this map is given by $J'(\alpha)(v) = \alpha(J(v))$. A complexified $1$-form $\beta$ is a $(1, 0)$-form if $J'(\beta) = i\beta$, and similarly $\beta$ is a $(0, 1)$-form if $J'(\beta) = -i\beta$.


This is secretly a linear algebra question. First, let me set up some notation. Let $\mu$ be a complex-valued $k$-form on a real vector space $E$, but where $E$ is equipped with a complex structure $J$. (Worded differently: $E$ is a complex vector space, but we are seeing it as a vector space over $\mathbb{R}$ and then seeing the multiplication by $i$ as an endomorphism.) Then, the complex numbers act as linear maps on $E$ by saying that $(a+ib)\star v = a v + bJv$.

Now, $\mathbb{C}$ also acts on $k$ forms in the following way: Let $z$ be a complex number. Then I define $z\star \mu = \mu(z \cdot, z \cdot, \dots, z\cdot)$. I.e. $z \star \mu$ eats $k$-vectors, multiplies each one by $z$ and then feeds that to $\mu$.

My claim is that the $(p,q)$ forms are precisely those for which $z \star \mu = z^p \bar{z}^q \mu$.

The proof of this claim follows since $\mathcal{E}^{p,q}$ is the span of the wedges of $p$ many $(1,0)$ forms with $q$ many $(0,1)$ forms. This property I described is clearly linear and holds true for the $1$-forms by the observation you made.

Then, on your complex manifold, you replace this property for all $z \in \mathbb{C}$ by looking instead at all functions $f \colon X \to \mathbb{C}$, and asking that $f \star \mu = f^p \bar{f}^q \mu$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Sam. Seems so obvious now. $\endgroup$ – Michael Albanese Sep 16 '12 at 13:12
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @MichaelAlbanese: that's how it always is with these things... impossible before you see it the right way and obvious afterwards. $\endgroup$ – Sam Lisi Sep 17 '12 at 9:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A corollary is that $\mu$ is a $(p,q)$ form iff $i\star\mu = i^{p-q}\mu$, which is easier to use in proofs. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Plácido Jul 13 at 21:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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