Things I’ve been thinking about recently

A place for me to talk about some of my recent mathematical musings.


[11-27-23] More general structure than expected?

As mentioned in my previous post, we can construct product structures via the use of Gromov-Witten invariants. However, note the following theorem, due to (at least in part, I believe) Gromov:

Theorem. Symplectic manifolds always have almost-complex structures which are compatible with the symplectic structure. Further, there exists an infinite-dimensional space of compatible almost-complex structures. This space is contractible however, and leads to the fact that all of these almost-complex structures are in fact homotopy equivalent.

So, in the case of manifolds, up to homotopy, the crucial data which allows for the application of Gromov-Witten theory to deform cohomology products does not come from symplectic structure, rather the almost-complex structure on the manifold. This extends to Lagrangians: it is known that a Lagrangian submanifold will be totally-real with respect to the almost-complex structure on the manifold. This motivates the following:

If we consider a symplectic orbifold \(\mathcal{X}\) and a Lagrangian suborbifold \(\mathcal{L}\subset\mathcal{X}\), then the data required to extract the exotic product described in the previous post on \(H^\bullet(I_{\mathcal{X}}\mathcal{L})\) is dependent on some almost-complex/totally-real structure instead of symplectic/Lagrangian structure.

[11-22-23] Chen-Ruan product analogue for “Lagrangian suborbifolds”

Consider a symplectic manifold \((X,\omega)\) whose cohomology \(H^\bullet(X)\) is equipped with the Poincaré pairing \(\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle\). Gromov-Witten theory is a powerful tool in symplectic geometry which connects to mathematical physics, namely Type IIA string theory. The main point of study are the Gromov-Witten invariants, which "count" genus \(g\) pseudo-holomorphic curves with \(n\) marked points, mapping into \(X\). That is, we consider stable maps \(f: \mathbb{C} P^1\to X\). It turns out that the set of these functions forms a moduli space, which allows us to define the Gromov-Witten invariants:

Definition. Consider the stable maps \(\mathbb{C} P^1\to X\) of genus \(g\), where \(\mathbb{C}P^1\) has \(n\) marked points. Then we can form a moduli space \(\mathcal{M}_{g,n}(X)\) of such curves. Note that for our use, we only consider genus 0 curves with 3 marked points; that is, \(\mathcal{M}_{0,3}(X)\). We define the evaluation maps on the moduli space, \(\text{ev}_i:\mathcal{M}_{0,3}(X)\to X\), by sending a stable map to the value of the stable map at a marked point, \([f:(\mathbb{C}P^1,x_1,x_2,x_3)\to X]\mapsto f(x_i)\).

This moduli space and its evaluation maps allow us to define the Gromov-Witten invariants. Consider three cohomology classes \(\alpha,\beta,\gamma\) on \(X\). Then the Gromov-Witten invariants are given as $$ GW_{0,3}(X)=\int_{\mathcal{M}_{0,3}(X)} \text{ev}_1^*\alpha\wedge\text{ev}_2^*\beta\wedge\text{ev}_3^*\gamma. $$

Interestingly, if we identify the Poincaré pairing with the Gromov-Witten invariants of \(X\), $$ \langle\alpha\star\beta,\gamma\rangle=GW_{0,3}(X), $$ it turns out that the product \(\star\) which satisfies this equality is the quantum product on the quantum ring \(H^\bullet(X)[[q]]\). If we now restrict to just constant curves by setting \(q=0\), this quantum product reduces to the standard cup product on \(H^\bullet(X)\). We can do the same construction for a Lagrangian submanifold \(L\subset X\), but we instead consider a "disk" with three marked points instead of a projective sphere \(\mathbb{C}P^1\) as the source for the pseudo-holomorphic curves.

I spent the majority of the Summer of 2023 working with orbifolds; an extension of the ideas mentioned above would be to a symplectic orbifold \(\mathcal{X}\). It turns out that when similar processes as above are performed on \(\mathcal{X}\), we require the use of the cohomology of the inertia orbifold \(I\mathcal{X}\). Amazingly, when we identify $$ \langle\alpha\star\beta,\gamma\rangle=GW_{0,3}(\mathcal{X}) $$ and restrict to \(q=0\), we retrieve the Chen-Ruan product on \(H^\bullet(I\mathcal{X})[[q]]\)! This is a remarkable result, as this product structure is not immediately observable when one studies the cohomology of orbifolds.

We also would like to study a Lagrangian suborbifold \(\mathcal{L}\subset\mathcal{X}\) as modeled in the manifold case. However, the notion of a "Lagrangian suborbifold" is not well defined. However, in a 2023 preprint of Chen, Ono, and Wang, the idea of the dihedral twisted sector \(I_{\mathcal{X}}\mathcal{L}\) is introduced -- as the notation may suggest, this acts as a sort of Lagrangian "relative" to \(\mathcal{X}\).

So, we conjecture that another exotic cohomology product could be constructed on \(I_{\mathcal{X}}\mathcal{L}\) by restricting \(H^\bullet(I_\mathcal{X}\mathcal{L})[[q]]\) to \(q=0\).

In an alternative approach towards such a result, techniques from this paper suggest the need to construct a double inertia orbifold \(II_{\mathcal{X}}\mathcal{L}\) and an obstruction class in its \(K\)-theory. This would provide an explicit description of this conjectured product structure on the cohomology of the dihedral twisted sector.

carson connard

incoming mathematics ph.d. student at the university of washington


math currently on my mind

By Carson Connard, 2023-11-27