6
$\begingroup$

I'm aware that similar questions have been asked here and here but neither of these seems to have settled my issue. I have the following three definitions of a holomorphic vector bundle (in all cases $M$ is a complex manifold and a complex vector bundle means a smooth vector bundle whose fibres are complex vector spaces):

A holomorphic vector bundle $\pi:E\rightarrow M$ is a complex vector bundle together with the structure of a complex manifold on $E$ for which there exist trivialisations \begin{equation} \phi_U:\pi^{-1}(U)\rightarrow U\times\mathbb{C}^k \end{equation} which are biholomorphic maps of complex manifolds.


A holomorphic vector bundle $\pi:E\rightarrow M$ is a complex vector bundle for which the transition functions $g_{\alpha\beta}:U_\alpha\cap U_\beta \rightarrow GL_k(\mathbb{C})$ are holomorphic maps of complex manifolds.


A holomorphic vector bundle $\pi:E\rightarrow M$ is a complex vector bundle together with the structure of a complex manifold on $E$ for which the projection $\pi:E\rightarrow M$ is a holomorphic map of complex manifolds.


The wikipedia article here seems to merge all three definitions into one! Whereas Griffiths' and Harris' book goes with the first definition. I am unsure how to see whether these definitions are equivalent, or whether this is actually the case.

Moreover, I am actually trying to prove that the holomorphic tangent bundle $T^{1,0}M$ is indeed a holomorphic vector bundle - although I have no idea where to start with this, with any of the three definitions... any help on either of these problems would be much appreciated!

$\endgroup$
0
1
$\begingroup$

Consider $E$'s transition functions as a smooth manifold, induced by its transition functions as a complex vector bundle:

$$\tau_{UV}(p, v) = \phi_V \circ \phi_U^{-1}(p, v) = (p, g_{UV}(p) \cdot v)$$

where $p \in U \cap V$ and $v \in \mathbb C^k$. By definition,

  • $\pi : E \to M$ is a holomorphic vector bundle in the first sense if the $\phi_U$'s are biholomorphisms.

  • $\pi : E \to M$ is a holomorphic vector bundle in the second sense if the $g_{UV}$'s are holomorphic maps.

  • $\pi : E \to M$ is a holomorphic vector bundle in the third sense if the $\tau_{UV}$'s are biholomorphisms.


Let $\mathscr U$ be the open cover of $M$ on which the local trivializations are defined. (WLOG we may assume that each distinguished open $U \in \mathscr U$ is biholomorphic to an open subset of $\mathbb C^n$.) Since $\mathscr F = \{ \phi_U \}_{U \in \mathscr U}$ is a smooth atlas on $M$, the following statements are equivalent:

  • $\mathscr F$ is a holomorphic atlas on $M$.

  • $\mathscr F$'s charts $\phi_U$ are biholomorphisms.

  • $\mathscr F$'s transition functions $\tau_{UV}$ are biholomorphisms.

Hence the first and third definitions are equivalent.


Since $\tau_{UV}$ is already a diffeomorphism, the following statements are equivalent

  • $\tau_{UV}$ is a biholomorphism.

  • $\tau_{UV}$ is a holomorphic map.

  • $g_{UV}$ is a holomorphic map.

Hence the second and third definitions are equivalent.

$\endgroup$

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.