ε-quadratic form

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In mathematics, specifically the theory of quadratic forms, an ε-quadratic form is a generalization of quadratic forms to skew-symmetric settings and to *-rings; \epsilon = \pm 1, accordingly for symmetric or skew-symmetric. They are also called ( − )n-quadratic forms, particularly in the context of surgery theory.

There is the related notion of ε-symmetric forms, which generalizes symmetric forms, skew-symmetric forms, Hermitian forms, and skew-Hermitian forms.

The theory is 2-local: away from 2, ε-quadratic forms are equivalent to ε-symmetric forms: half the symmetrization map (below) gives an explicit isomorphism.

Contents

[edit] Definition

ε-symmetric forms and ε-quadratic forms are defined thus[1].

Given a module M over a *-ring R, let B(M) be the space of bilinear forms on M, and let T\colon B(M) \to B(M) be the "conjugate transpose" involution B(u,v) \mapsto B(v,u)^*. Let \epsilon=\pm 1; then εT is also an involution. Define the ε-symmetric forms as the invariants of εT, and the ε-quadratic forms are the coinvariants.

As a short exact sequence,

Q^\epsilon \to B(M) \stackrel{1-\epsilon T}{\longrightarrow} B(M) \to Q_\epsilon

As kernel (algebra) and cokernel,

Q^\epsilon := \mbox{ker}\,(1-\epsilon T)
Q_\epsilon := \mbox{coker}\,(1-\epsilon T)

The notation Qε,Qε follows the standard notation MG,MG for the invariants and coinvariants for a group action, here of the order 2 group (an involution).

[edit] Generalization from *

If the * is trivial, then \epsilon=\pm 1, and "away from 2" means that 2 is invertible: \frac{1}{2} \in R.

More generally, one can take for \epsilon \in R any element such that ε * ε = 1.\epsilon=\pm 1 always satisfy this, but so does any element of norm 1, such as complex numbers of unit norm.

Similarly, in the presence of a non-trivial *, ε-symmetric forms are equivalent ε-quadratic forms if there is an element \lambda \in R such that λ * + λ = 1. If * is trivial, this is equivalent to 2λ = 1 or \lambda = \frac{1}{2}.

For instance, in the ring R=\mathbf{Z}\left[\textstyle{\frac{1+i}{2}}\right] (the integral lattice for the quadratic form 2x2 − 2x + 1), with complex conjugation, \lambda=\textstyle{\frac{1+i}{2}} is such an element, though \frac{1}{2} \not\in R.

[edit] Intuition

In terms of matrices, (we take V to be 2-dimensional):

  • matrices \begin{pmatrix}a & b\\c & d\end{pmatrix} correspond to bilinear forms
  • the subspace of symmetric matrices \begin{pmatrix}a & b\\b & c\end{pmatrix} correspond to symmetric forms
  • the bilinear form \begin{pmatrix}a & b\\c & d\end{pmatrix} yields the quadratic form ax2 + bxy + cyx + dy2 = ax2 + (b + c)xy + dy2, which is a quotient map with kernel \begin{pmatrix}0 & b\\-b & 0\end{pmatrix}.

[edit] Refinements

An intuitive way to understand an ε-quadratic form is to think of it as a quadratic refinement of its associated ε-symmetric form.

For instance, in defining a Clifford algebra over a general field or ring, one quotients the tensor algebra by relations coming from the symmetric form and the quadratic form: vw + wv = 2B(v,w) and v2 = Q(v). If 2 is invertible, this second relation follows from the first (as the quadratic form can be recovered from the associated bilinear form), but at 2 this additional refinement is necessary.

[edit] Example

Given an oriented surface Σ embedded in \mathbf{R}^3, the middle homology group H1(Σ) carries not only a skew-symmetric form (via intersection), but also a skew-quadratic form, which can be seen as a quadratic refinement, via self-linking.

For the standard embedded torus, the skew-symmetric form is given by \begin{pmatrix}0 & 1\\-1 & 0\end{pmatrix} (with respect to the standard symplectic basis), and the skew-quadratic refinement is given by xy with respect to this basis: Q(1,0) = Q(0,1) = 0: the basis curves don't self-link; and Q(1,1) = 1: a (1,1) self-links, as in the Hopf fibration. (This form has Arf invariant 0.)

[edit] Applications

A key application is in algebraic surgery theory, where even L-groups are defined as Witt groups of ε-quadratic forms, by Andrew Ranicki. Mischenko had previously used ε-symmetric forms, which are not the correct theory for application to surgery.

[edit] References

  1. ^ Foundations of algebraic surgery, by Andrew Ranicki, p. 6