What Is the Difference Between Ricci-Named Objects in Kahler Geometry?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter OB1
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Form Manifolds
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion clarifies the distinctions between various Ricci-named objects in Kahler geometry, specifically the Ricci curvature tensor, Ricci scalar, Ricci form, and their relationships. The Ricci curvature tensor is obtained by contracting the holomorphic indices of the Riemann tensor, while the Ricci scalar is derived from the Ricci tensor. The Ricci form, a differential 2-form, is related to the Ricci tensor through the complex structure J. In Ricci-flat manifolds, the Ricci tensor, Ricci form, and Ricci scalar all vanish, establishing a clear connection between these concepts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Ricci curvature tensor and Ricci scalar in differential geometry
  • Familiarity with Kahler manifolds and their properties
  • Knowledge of differential forms and their representation
  • Concept of Calabi-Yau manifolds and Ricci-flatness
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Ricci curvature tensor in complex geometry
  • Explore the relationship between Ricci forms and complex structures in Kahler geometry
  • Investigate the implications of Ricci-flatness in Calabi-Yau manifolds
  • Learn about the applications of differential forms in mathematical physics
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and students specializing in differential geometry, particularly those focusing on complex and Kahler geometry, as well as researchers interested in Calabi-Yau manifolds and their applications in string theory.

OB1
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I am confused about the different Ricci-named objects in complex and specifically Kahler geometry: We have the Ricci curvature tensor, which we get by contracting the holomorphic indices of the Riemann tensor. We have the Ricci scalar Ric, which we get by contracting the Ricci tensor. Then there is a Ricci form, and I don't see how it is at all different from the Ricci tensor (apart from it not having any indices - how can it be a 2-form without having indices?), and finally the *other* Ricci scalar R, which we get by contracting the Ricci form.
Finally, we have the Calabi-Yau manifold, which we get by taking a "Ricci-flat" Kahler manifold. and I can't figure out for the life of me is which of these Ricci-named objects vanishes for a Ricci-flat manifold. Help in unraveling this ridiculous confusion is much appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ricci flat manifolds are manifolds for which the ricci tensor vanishes. The Ricci tensor is symmetric, but by introducing multiplication by i we can get an alternating form on a Kahler manifold.

For Calabi-Yau, you should just take Ricci-flatness to mean the usual thing, but of course if one vanishes, the other does as well.
 
Well, the Ricci curvature tensor R is symmetric and it is an object with 2 lower indices, but these indices are used to represent R with respect to a coordinate. As it has two lower indices it is cotensor of rank 2, so we need to feed it with 2 vectors.

We can represent R without coordinates (thus without any indices), and then we can feed it with 2 vectors, say V and W. Then R(V,W) gives us a scalar. Now R being symmetric just means that R(V,W) = R(W,V).

The Ricci-form, say F, is related to R and the complex structure J defined on the manifold:

F(V,W) := R(J V,W)

That's all. Now it is antisymmetric, thus it is a differential form. In this notation the Ricci form F indeed has no indices, but it CAN be represented with respect to a coordinate. Then it is again a symbol with 2 lower indices.

Ricci-flatness means R = 0. Then automatically F and the Ricci scalar (say r) are zero also.

Representing V and W in terms of a complex basis of the tangent space reveals that it is equivalent to multiplying with i. If V is a holomorphic vector, and if W is an antiholomorphic vector, then:

F(V,W) = R(J V,W) = R(i V,W) = i R(V,W) = i R(W,V) = R(i W,V) = R(-J W,V) = -F(W,V)


For a nice analogy, see the Kahler form: A Hermitian metric g defines a Kahler form w(V,W) = g(J V,W).


So, to answer this question:

OB1 said:
(apart from it not having any indices - how can it be a 2-form without having indices?)

Every tensor, cotensor, mixed tensor and n-form can be represented with respect to a basis of the tangent (& cotangent) space. In that case it has 'indices'. But, they can also be represented in a coordinate-free way.

It's a pity mathematics is represented in a bit obscure manner in many texts & lectures about physics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K