Yau's result for the Ricci curvature on Kahler manifold

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Yau's result concerning the Ricci curvature on Kähler manifolds, particularly in relation to the Calabi conjecture. Participants explore the implications of this result, its uniqueness compared to Riemannian geometry, and the behavior of the Ricci tensor under conformal transformations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Dave notes the relation derived by Yau, expressing curiosity about the simplicity of computing Ricci curvature for Kähler manifolds compared to Riemannian manifolds.
  • He questions the differences between Kähler and Riemannian manifolds that allow for this simplicity.
  • Dave proposes a parallel between Yau's result and a potential inverse problem in Riemannian geometry regarding the existence and uniqueness of a Riemannian metric corresponding to a given Ricci tensor.
  • Another participant references Peter Bergmann's work, discussing the grouping of curvature components and the differing behaviors of the Ricci and Weyl tensors under transformations.
  • Dave expresses interest in how the Ricci tensor changes under conformal transformations, seeking clarification on this aspect.
  • A participant explains that Kähler manifolds are hermitian with a closed Kähler form, suggesting that the metric can be derived from a Kähler potential.
  • Heberto recommends a book by Arthur Besse that details how curvature tensors change under conformal transformations and discusses the Calabi-Yau problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion contains multiple viewpoints regarding the implications of Yau's result and the behavior of curvature tensors under transformations. There is no consensus on the uniqueness of the Riemannian metric corresponding to a given Ricci tensor or the specifics of how the Ricci tensor changes under conformal transformations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying levels of understanding and familiarity with the subject matter, indicating a range of assumptions and interpretations regarding Kähler manifolds and curvature tensors.

schieghoven
Messages
84
Reaction score
1
Hi,

I've been reading through Yau's proof of the Calabi conjecture (1) and I was quite intrigued by the relation
<br /> R_{i\bar{j}} = - \frac{\partial^2}{\partial z^i \partial \bar{z}^j } [\log \det (g_{s\bar{t}}) ]<br />
derived therein. g_{s \bar{t} } is a Kahler metric on a Kahler manifold (I'm not entirely sure what that entails... I'm working on the assumption that it's like a complex version of a Riemannian metric.) R_{i\bar{j}} is the Ricci curvature of said metric. I find it remarkable that the Ricci curvature is so readily computed for these Kahler manifolds. I've never seen a comparably simple relation in Riemannian geometry - I don't think there is one, right? Why would this be? What's different between Kahler manifolds and Riemannian manifolds that makes this result possible in the Kahler case?

I'm also wondering to what extent Yau's result can cross over to Riemannian geometry. If I understand the paper correctly, Yau has basically solved the inverse problem of finding the Kahler metric that corresponds to a given Ricci form. In Riemannian geometry, we might pose a similar question: if R_ij is a symmetric matrix (that satisfies some criterion following from the Bianchi identities), is it the Ricci tensor for some Riemannian metric g'? Is g' unique?

To me this is a tantalising question, because at least at some level, Einstein's equations for GR are posing a very similar problem, of finding the Riemannian metric that solves for a given stress-energy field.

(1) Yau, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 31 (1978) 339

Thanks,

Dave
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I likely know less than you on this subject but it turns out Peter Bergmann had some comments in THE RIDDLE OF GRAVITATION which I just read a few days ago:

The twenty components of the (Riemann-Christoff) curvature (tensor) in a four dimensional space can be grouped into two sets of ten components each, in a manner that is independent of any choice of coordinate system. One of these two sets involves the turning of vectors in the course of parallel transport...this set is usually referred to as the Ricci tensor...in a slight rearrangement the Ricci tensor may be called the Einstein vector. The..other ten components form..Weyl's tensor...the totality of of all components of curvature is called the Riemann-Christoff curvature tensor...

The author makes it sound like dealing with ten at a time is a lot simpler than dealing with twenty, especially making transformations from one coordinate system to another as the two tensors behave very differently...

hope this helps a little.
 
Cheers, thanks for the tip, you may well be right that the Weyl tensor and conformal transformations come into it somehow. Perhaps if I start writing things out it'll be clearer. Does anybody know offhand how the Ricci tensor changes under a conformal transformation?

Regards

Dave
 
Kähler manifolds are hermitian manifolds with closed Kählerform. The Kählerform looks like the metrik tensor but is antisymmetric. if you impose that the exterior derivative of the kählerform vanishes you find that the metric can locally be expressed by the Kählerpotential. So if you got a Kählerpotential, the metric follows and with this the connection and the riemann tensor. i think this is basically the idea. you can take a look at nakahara...

hope this gave you an idea
 
Last edited:
More from Peter Bergmann:

A Minkowski continuim may be conformally transformed to a curved continuium...one aspect remains unchanged by conformal transformations...that is the space like,time like or lightlike caharacter of each interval and direction...Weyl discovered that, under a conformal transformation, the Ricci tensor and the Weyl tensor behave very differently...The Ricci tensor changes in a very complicated way (which includes the possibility that it may vanish before the conformal transformation but be non zero after the transformation; the Weyl tensor remains unchanged.

I have no idea what that means, but it doesn't sound encouraging! good luck...
 
Hi, I am a mathematician and I know a little bit about what you are talking about. An excellent book, is Einstein manifolds by Arthur Besse, this is a must. In this book, he explicitly computes how the full curvature tensor, the Ricci tensor, the Weyl tensor, change under a conformal change in the metric. He also talks about the Calabi-Yau problem.

Regards

Heberto

schieghoven said:
Cheers, thanks for the tip, you may well be right that the Weyl tensor and conformal transformations come into it somehow. Perhaps if I start writing things out it'll be clearer. Does anybody know offhand how the Ricci tensor changes under a conformal transformation?

Regards

Dave
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K