Lefschetz operator











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
2












Let $omega=sum_{i=1}^n dx_iwedge dy_iinbigwedge^2mathbb{R}^{2n}$ be a standard symplectic form. The following result is due to Lefschetz:




For $kleq n$, the Lefschetz operator
$L^{n-k}:bigwedge^kmathbb{R}^{2n}to
bigwedge^{2n-k}mathbb{R}^{2n}$
defined by $$
L^{n-k}alpha=alphawedgeunderbrace{omegawedgeldotswedgeomega}_{n-k}=alphawedgeomega^{n-k}
$$
is an isomorphism.




This follows from Proposition 1.2.30 in Huybrechts' Complex Geometry. The proof is slick and it uses representation theory.




Question: What are other standard references for this result? I want to quote it properly and I would like to see a reference to a
proof by brute force. A proof by brute force is not difficult but ugly
and perhaps in some reference I can find an elegant presentation of
such a proof.




This result seems so fundamental that it should be available in many textbooks, but I am not aware of any except the one by Huybrechts.










share|cite|improve this question


















  • 1




    Another older reference for this result is André Weil Introductions à l'étude des variétés kählériennes, Herman 1958. (The corollary on page 28 is the reuslt you mentioned.The proof is the standard proof using representations of $sl_2$.
    – Liviu Nicolaescu
    7 hours ago

















up vote
4
down vote

favorite
2












Let $omega=sum_{i=1}^n dx_iwedge dy_iinbigwedge^2mathbb{R}^{2n}$ be a standard symplectic form. The following result is due to Lefschetz:




For $kleq n$, the Lefschetz operator
$L^{n-k}:bigwedge^kmathbb{R}^{2n}to
bigwedge^{2n-k}mathbb{R}^{2n}$
defined by $$
L^{n-k}alpha=alphawedgeunderbrace{omegawedgeldotswedgeomega}_{n-k}=alphawedgeomega^{n-k}
$$
is an isomorphism.




This follows from Proposition 1.2.30 in Huybrechts' Complex Geometry. The proof is slick and it uses representation theory.




Question: What are other standard references for this result? I want to quote it properly and I would like to see a reference to a
proof by brute force. A proof by brute force is not difficult but ugly
and perhaps in some reference I can find an elegant presentation of
such a proof.




This result seems so fundamental that it should be available in many textbooks, but I am not aware of any except the one by Huybrechts.










share|cite|improve this question


















  • 1




    Another older reference for this result is André Weil Introductions à l'étude des variétés kählériennes, Herman 1958. (The corollary on page 28 is the reuslt you mentioned.The proof is the standard proof using representations of $sl_2$.
    – Liviu Nicolaescu
    7 hours ago















up vote
4
down vote

favorite
2









up vote
4
down vote

favorite
2






2





Let $omega=sum_{i=1}^n dx_iwedge dy_iinbigwedge^2mathbb{R}^{2n}$ be a standard symplectic form. The following result is due to Lefschetz:




For $kleq n$, the Lefschetz operator
$L^{n-k}:bigwedge^kmathbb{R}^{2n}to
bigwedge^{2n-k}mathbb{R}^{2n}$
defined by $$
L^{n-k}alpha=alphawedgeunderbrace{omegawedgeldotswedgeomega}_{n-k}=alphawedgeomega^{n-k}
$$
is an isomorphism.




This follows from Proposition 1.2.30 in Huybrechts' Complex Geometry. The proof is slick and it uses representation theory.




Question: What are other standard references for this result? I want to quote it properly and I would like to see a reference to a
proof by brute force. A proof by brute force is not difficult but ugly
and perhaps in some reference I can find an elegant presentation of
such a proof.




This result seems so fundamental that it should be available in many textbooks, but I am not aware of any except the one by Huybrechts.










share|cite|improve this question













Let $omega=sum_{i=1}^n dx_iwedge dy_iinbigwedge^2mathbb{R}^{2n}$ be a standard symplectic form. The following result is due to Lefschetz:




For $kleq n$, the Lefschetz operator
$L^{n-k}:bigwedge^kmathbb{R}^{2n}to
bigwedge^{2n-k}mathbb{R}^{2n}$
defined by $$
L^{n-k}alpha=alphawedgeunderbrace{omegawedgeldotswedgeomega}_{n-k}=alphawedgeomega^{n-k}
$$
is an isomorphism.




This follows from Proposition 1.2.30 in Huybrechts' Complex Geometry. The proof is slick and it uses representation theory.




Question: What are other standard references for this result? I want to quote it properly and I would like to see a reference to a
proof by brute force. A proof by brute force is not difficult but ugly
and perhaps in some reference I can find an elegant presentation of
such a proof.




This result seems so fundamental that it should be available in many textbooks, but I am not aware of any except the one by Huybrechts.







linear-algebra sg.symplectic-geometry






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 10 hours ago









Piotr Hajlasz

5,67632153




5,67632153








  • 1




    Another older reference for this result is André Weil Introductions à l'étude des variétés kählériennes, Herman 1958. (The corollary on page 28 is the reuslt you mentioned.The proof is the standard proof using representations of $sl_2$.
    – Liviu Nicolaescu
    7 hours ago
















  • 1




    Another older reference for this result is André Weil Introductions à l'étude des variétés kählériennes, Herman 1958. (The corollary on page 28 is the reuslt you mentioned.The proof is the standard proof using representations of $sl_2$.
    – Liviu Nicolaescu
    7 hours ago










1




1




Another older reference for this result is André Weil Introductions à l'étude des variétés kählériennes, Herman 1958. (The corollary on page 28 is the reuslt you mentioned.The proof is the standard proof using representations of $sl_2$.
– Liviu Nicolaescu
7 hours ago






Another older reference for this result is André Weil Introductions à l'étude des variétés kählériennes, Herman 1958. (The corollary on page 28 is the reuslt you mentioned.The proof is the standard proof using representations of $sl_2$.
– Liviu Nicolaescu
7 hours ago












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
6
down vote



accepted










There is an elementary proof in our 2003 book Exterior Differential Systems and Euler-Lagrange Partial Differential Equations (Bryant, et al, University of Chicago Press). It does not use any representation theory and is not 'brute force'; it only takes a couple of paragraphs using elementary facts about exterior algebra. See Proposition 1.1a, with the proof on page 13.



I learned that proof from Eugenio Calabi more than 30 years ago, and he told me that he had found it sometime back in the 50s.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you so much! That is exactly what I was looking for.
    – Piotr Hajlasz
    3 hours ago






  • 2




    Wow. That's the easiest shortest brute force proof I've ever seen. It can be found on arxiv: arxiv.org/abs/math/0207039
    – Deane Yang
    3 hours ago













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: "504"
};
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',
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%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f316505%2flefschetz-operator%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
6
down vote



accepted










There is an elementary proof in our 2003 book Exterior Differential Systems and Euler-Lagrange Partial Differential Equations (Bryant, et al, University of Chicago Press). It does not use any representation theory and is not 'brute force'; it only takes a couple of paragraphs using elementary facts about exterior algebra. See Proposition 1.1a, with the proof on page 13.



I learned that proof from Eugenio Calabi more than 30 years ago, and he told me that he had found it sometime back in the 50s.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you so much! That is exactly what I was looking for.
    – Piotr Hajlasz
    3 hours ago






  • 2




    Wow. That's the easiest shortest brute force proof I've ever seen. It can be found on arxiv: arxiv.org/abs/math/0207039
    – Deane Yang
    3 hours ago

















up vote
6
down vote



accepted










There is an elementary proof in our 2003 book Exterior Differential Systems and Euler-Lagrange Partial Differential Equations (Bryant, et al, University of Chicago Press). It does not use any representation theory and is not 'brute force'; it only takes a couple of paragraphs using elementary facts about exterior algebra. See Proposition 1.1a, with the proof on page 13.



I learned that proof from Eugenio Calabi more than 30 years ago, and he told me that he had found it sometime back in the 50s.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • Thank you so much! That is exactly what I was looking for.
    – Piotr Hajlasz
    3 hours ago






  • 2




    Wow. That's the easiest shortest brute force proof I've ever seen. It can be found on arxiv: arxiv.org/abs/math/0207039
    – Deane Yang
    3 hours ago















up vote
6
down vote



accepted







up vote
6
down vote



accepted






There is an elementary proof in our 2003 book Exterior Differential Systems and Euler-Lagrange Partial Differential Equations (Bryant, et al, University of Chicago Press). It does not use any representation theory and is not 'brute force'; it only takes a couple of paragraphs using elementary facts about exterior algebra. See Proposition 1.1a, with the proof on page 13.



I learned that proof from Eugenio Calabi more than 30 years ago, and he told me that he had found it sometime back in the 50s.






share|cite|improve this answer












There is an elementary proof in our 2003 book Exterior Differential Systems and Euler-Lagrange Partial Differential Equations (Bryant, et al, University of Chicago Press). It does not use any representation theory and is not 'brute force'; it only takes a couple of paragraphs using elementary facts about exterior algebra. See Proposition 1.1a, with the proof on page 13.



I learned that proof from Eugenio Calabi more than 30 years ago, and he told me that he had found it sometime back in the 50s.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 4 hours ago









Robert Bryant

72.1k5211310




72.1k5211310












  • Thank you so much! That is exactly what I was looking for.
    – Piotr Hajlasz
    3 hours ago






  • 2




    Wow. That's the easiest shortest brute force proof I've ever seen. It can be found on arxiv: arxiv.org/abs/math/0207039
    – Deane Yang
    3 hours ago




















  • Thank you so much! That is exactly what I was looking for.
    – Piotr Hajlasz
    3 hours ago






  • 2




    Wow. That's the easiest shortest brute force proof I've ever seen. It can be found on arxiv: arxiv.org/abs/math/0207039
    – Deane Yang
    3 hours ago


















Thank you so much! That is exactly what I was looking for.
– Piotr Hajlasz
3 hours ago




Thank you so much! That is exactly what I was looking for.
– Piotr Hajlasz
3 hours ago




2




2




Wow. That's the easiest shortest brute force proof I've ever seen. It can be found on arxiv: arxiv.org/abs/math/0207039
– Deane Yang
3 hours ago






Wow. That's the easiest shortest brute force proof I've ever seen. It can be found on arxiv: arxiv.org/abs/math/0207039
– Deane Yang
3 hours ago




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


  • 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.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • 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.


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%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f316505%2flefschetz-operator%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

Costa Masnaga

Fotorealismo

Sidney Franklin