Symplectisation as a functor between appropriate categoriesflexibility of almost contact ``Reeb'' vector fieldsWhen does a hypersurface have contact-type?'Contactization' and SymplectizationSpaces of symplectic embeddings: Bundle? Smoothness?Is there a Legendrian Neighbourhood Theorem also for non-cooriented contact manifolds?Boundary geometry of a contact manifoldWhat is the mirror of symplectic field theory?Gluing symplectic manifoldsThe isotopy class of a Boothby-Wang contact structurePhysical intuition behind prequantization spaces
Symplectisation as a functor between appropriate categories
flexibility of almost contact ``Reeb'' vector fieldsWhen does a hypersurface have contact-type?'Contactization' and SymplectizationSpaces of symplectic embeddings: Bundle? Smoothness?Is there a Legendrian Neighbourhood Theorem also for non-cooriented contact manifolds?Boundary geometry of a contact manifoldWhat is the mirror of symplectic field theory?Gluing symplectic manifoldsThe isotopy class of a Boothby-Wang contact structurePhysical intuition behind prequantization spaces
$begingroup$
Let $(M,xi)$ be a transversally orientable contact manifold, that is, there exists a form $alpha in Omega^1(M)$ such that $xi = ker alpha$. Then we can associate to $(M,xi)$ its symplectisation $(mathbbR times M,d(e^talpha))$, a symplectic manifold. I wondered, if there is a categorical setting for this process. I mean, naively, we could consider symplectisation as a map on objects $$S colon mathsfTOCont to mathsfSymp$$ where $mathsfTOCont$ denotes the category of transversally orientable contact manifolds as objects and maps $F in C^infty(M,widetildeM)$ such that there exists a nowhere vanishing function $f in C^infty(M)$ with $F^* widetildealpha = falpha$ as morphisms $F colon (M,xi = ker alpha) to (widetildeM,widetildexi = ker widetildealpha)$. Likewise, $mathsfSymp$ denotes the category with objects symplectic manifolds and morphisms $F colon (M,omega) to (widetildeM,widetildeomega)$ such that $F in C^infty(M,widetildeM)$ with $F^*widetildeomega = omega$.
Now the problem I am facing is the following: I would define $S$ on morphisms
$$S(F) colon (mathbbR times M,d(e^talpha)) to (mathbbR times widetildeM,d(e^twidetildealpha))$$ by
$$S(F) := operatornameid_mathbbR times F.$$ But then, if $F^* widetildealpha = falpha$, we compute $$S(F)^* d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^tfalpha),$$ that is, $S(F)$ is not a morphism in $mathsfSymp$. If $f > 0$, we could use the definition
$$S(F)(t,x) := (t - log(f(x)),F(x))$$ and things would work out fine. However, this would impose a restriction on orientation.
I think everything boils down to the fact that if $(M,xi = ker alpha)$ is a contact manifold, then also $xi = ker falpha$ for every nowhere vanishing smooth function $f$. But I guess the symplectisations are not symplectomorphic in general in this case, that is, a single t.o. contact manifolds admits different non-symplectomorphic symplectisations. Is that right? Do you have any idea how to turn symplectisation into a functor between appropriate categories?
dg.differential-geometry ct.category-theory sg.symplectic-geometry contact-geometry
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $(M,xi)$ be a transversally orientable contact manifold, that is, there exists a form $alpha in Omega^1(M)$ such that $xi = ker alpha$. Then we can associate to $(M,xi)$ its symplectisation $(mathbbR times M,d(e^talpha))$, a symplectic manifold. I wondered, if there is a categorical setting for this process. I mean, naively, we could consider symplectisation as a map on objects $$S colon mathsfTOCont to mathsfSymp$$ where $mathsfTOCont$ denotes the category of transversally orientable contact manifolds as objects and maps $F in C^infty(M,widetildeM)$ such that there exists a nowhere vanishing function $f in C^infty(M)$ with $F^* widetildealpha = falpha$ as morphisms $F colon (M,xi = ker alpha) to (widetildeM,widetildexi = ker widetildealpha)$. Likewise, $mathsfSymp$ denotes the category with objects symplectic manifolds and morphisms $F colon (M,omega) to (widetildeM,widetildeomega)$ such that $F in C^infty(M,widetildeM)$ with $F^*widetildeomega = omega$.
Now the problem I am facing is the following: I would define $S$ on morphisms
$$S(F) colon (mathbbR times M,d(e^talpha)) to (mathbbR times widetildeM,d(e^twidetildealpha))$$ by
$$S(F) := operatornameid_mathbbR times F.$$ But then, if $F^* widetildealpha = falpha$, we compute $$S(F)^* d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^tfalpha),$$ that is, $S(F)$ is not a morphism in $mathsfSymp$. If $f > 0$, we could use the definition
$$S(F)(t,x) := (t - log(f(x)),F(x))$$ and things would work out fine. However, this would impose a restriction on orientation.
I think everything boils down to the fact that if $(M,xi = ker alpha)$ is a contact manifold, then also $xi = ker falpha$ for every nowhere vanishing smooth function $f$. But I guess the symplectisations are not symplectomorphic in general in this case, that is, a single t.o. contact manifolds admits different non-symplectomorphic symplectisations. Is that right? Do you have any idea how to turn symplectisation into a functor between appropriate categories?
dg.differential-geometry ct.category-theory sg.symplectic-geometry contact-geometry
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $(M,xi)$ be a transversally orientable contact manifold, that is, there exists a form $alpha in Omega^1(M)$ such that $xi = ker alpha$. Then we can associate to $(M,xi)$ its symplectisation $(mathbbR times M,d(e^talpha))$, a symplectic manifold. I wondered, if there is a categorical setting for this process. I mean, naively, we could consider symplectisation as a map on objects $$S colon mathsfTOCont to mathsfSymp$$ where $mathsfTOCont$ denotes the category of transversally orientable contact manifolds as objects and maps $F in C^infty(M,widetildeM)$ such that there exists a nowhere vanishing function $f in C^infty(M)$ with $F^* widetildealpha = falpha$ as morphisms $F colon (M,xi = ker alpha) to (widetildeM,widetildexi = ker widetildealpha)$. Likewise, $mathsfSymp$ denotes the category with objects symplectic manifolds and morphisms $F colon (M,omega) to (widetildeM,widetildeomega)$ such that $F in C^infty(M,widetildeM)$ with $F^*widetildeomega = omega$.
Now the problem I am facing is the following: I would define $S$ on morphisms
$$S(F) colon (mathbbR times M,d(e^talpha)) to (mathbbR times widetildeM,d(e^twidetildealpha))$$ by
$$S(F) := operatornameid_mathbbR times F.$$ But then, if $F^* widetildealpha = falpha$, we compute $$S(F)^* d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^tfalpha),$$ that is, $S(F)$ is not a morphism in $mathsfSymp$. If $f > 0$, we could use the definition
$$S(F)(t,x) := (t - log(f(x)),F(x))$$ and things would work out fine. However, this would impose a restriction on orientation.
I think everything boils down to the fact that if $(M,xi = ker alpha)$ is a contact manifold, then also $xi = ker falpha$ for every nowhere vanishing smooth function $f$. But I guess the symplectisations are not symplectomorphic in general in this case, that is, a single t.o. contact manifolds admits different non-symplectomorphic symplectisations. Is that right? Do you have any idea how to turn symplectisation into a functor between appropriate categories?
dg.differential-geometry ct.category-theory sg.symplectic-geometry contact-geometry
$endgroup$
Let $(M,xi)$ be a transversally orientable contact manifold, that is, there exists a form $alpha in Omega^1(M)$ such that $xi = ker alpha$. Then we can associate to $(M,xi)$ its symplectisation $(mathbbR times M,d(e^talpha))$, a symplectic manifold. I wondered, if there is a categorical setting for this process. I mean, naively, we could consider symplectisation as a map on objects $$S colon mathsfTOCont to mathsfSymp$$ where $mathsfTOCont$ denotes the category of transversally orientable contact manifolds as objects and maps $F in C^infty(M,widetildeM)$ such that there exists a nowhere vanishing function $f in C^infty(M)$ with $F^* widetildealpha = falpha$ as morphisms $F colon (M,xi = ker alpha) to (widetildeM,widetildexi = ker widetildealpha)$. Likewise, $mathsfSymp$ denotes the category with objects symplectic manifolds and morphisms $F colon (M,omega) to (widetildeM,widetildeomega)$ such that $F in C^infty(M,widetildeM)$ with $F^*widetildeomega = omega$.
Now the problem I am facing is the following: I would define $S$ on morphisms
$$S(F) colon (mathbbR times M,d(e^talpha)) to (mathbbR times widetildeM,d(e^twidetildealpha))$$ by
$$S(F) := operatornameid_mathbbR times F.$$ But then, if $F^* widetildealpha = falpha$, we compute $$S(F)^* d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^tfalpha),$$ that is, $S(F)$ is not a morphism in $mathsfSymp$. If $f > 0$, we could use the definition
$$S(F)(t,x) := (t - log(f(x)),F(x))$$ and things would work out fine. However, this would impose a restriction on orientation.
I think everything boils down to the fact that if $(M,xi = ker alpha)$ is a contact manifold, then also $xi = ker falpha$ for every nowhere vanishing smooth function $f$. But I guess the symplectisations are not symplectomorphic in general in this case, that is, a single t.o. contact manifolds admits different non-symplectomorphic symplectisations. Is that right? Do you have any idea how to turn symplectisation into a functor between appropriate categories?
dg.differential-geometry ct.category-theory sg.symplectic-geometry contact-geometry
dg.differential-geometry ct.category-theory sg.symplectic-geometry contact-geometry
edited 6 hours ago
YCor
30.4k4 gold badges91 silver badges146 bronze badges
30.4k4 gold badges91 silver badges146 bronze badges
asked 8 hours ago
TheGeekGreekTheGeekGreek
1368 bronze badges
1368 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
first of all I think your $S(F)$ can be modified into
beginalign*
S(F)(t,x)=(t-log(|f(x)|), F(x))
endalign*
since $f$ is non-vanishing, this is always smooth. Nevertheless, there is a more conceptual way to see the symplectization:
the symplectization $S$ is a functor from contact manifolds into homogeneous symplectic manifolds. The latter is the category of pairs $(P,omega)$ consisting of a $mathbbR^times$-principal bundle
$P$ and a symplectic structure $omegain Omega^2(P)$, such that
beginalign*
h_r^*omega=romega
endalign*
for the principal action $hcolon mathbbR^timestimes Pto P$.
The morphisms are equivariant symplectomorphisms. This functor is even an equivalence of categories and
does not work just for co-orientable contact structures. Everything what I said is (more or less) done in https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.05405.
HD
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think it's friendlier to link to the abstract instead of (or as well as) the PDF. People are sometimes on slow connections and they may wish to see what the paper is about before downloading.
$endgroup$
– José Figueroa-O'Farrill
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I also thought about modifying the $S(F)$ in the way you did, but unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, it doesn't work since $$S(F)^*d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^t operatornamesgn(f) alpha) neq d(e^talpha)$$ in general. Thank you for the suggested paper! I will check it out.
$endgroup$
– TheGeekGreek
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JoséFigueroa-O'Farrill thanks for the suggestion, I already edited my post.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek I think you made a mistake. Note that you have $dlog(|f|)=fracdff$ for all non-vanishing functions $f$.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek You are right. I see now, where the sign issue arises. Take a contact manifold $(M,alpha)$, then $d(talpha)$ is a symplectic structure on $MtimesmathbbR^times $. For a contactopmorphism $Fcolon Mtotilde M$ ($F^*tildealpha=f alpha$ ), then the map $S(F)(x,t)=(F(x),fractf)$ is a symplectomorphism. "Your" symplectization basically chooses the open subset with positive reals, but a morphism with with negative $f$ doesn't preserve this choice.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
3 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Your Answer
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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
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
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f337138%2fsymplectisation-as-a-functor-between-appropriate-categories%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
$begingroup$
first of all I think your $S(F)$ can be modified into
beginalign*
S(F)(t,x)=(t-log(|f(x)|), F(x))
endalign*
since $f$ is non-vanishing, this is always smooth. Nevertheless, there is a more conceptual way to see the symplectization:
the symplectization $S$ is a functor from contact manifolds into homogeneous symplectic manifolds. The latter is the category of pairs $(P,omega)$ consisting of a $mathbbR^times$-principal bundle
$P$ and a symplectic structure $omegain Omega^2(P)$, such that
beginalign*
h_r^*omega=romega
endalign*
for the principal action $hcolon mathbbR^timestimes Pto P$.
The morphisms are equivariant symplectomorphisms. This functor is even an equivalence of categories and
does not work just for co-orientable contact structures. Everything what I said is (more or less) done in https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.05405.
HD
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think it's friendlier to link to the abstract instead of (or as well as) the PDF. People are sometimes on slow connections and they may wish to see what the paper is about before downloading.
$endgroup$
– José Figueroa-O'Farrill
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I also thought about modifying the $S(F)$ in the way you did, but unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, it doesn't work since $$S(F)^*d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^t operatornamesgn(f) alpha) neq d(e^talpha)$$ in general. Thank you for the suggested paper! I will check it out.
$endgroup$
– TheGeekGreek
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JoséFigueroa-O'Farrill thanks for the suggestion, I already edited my post.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek I think you made a mistake. Note that you have $dlog(|f|)=fracdff$ for all non-vanishing functions $f$.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek You are right. I see now, where the sign issue arises. Take a contact manifold $(M,alpha)$, then $d(talpha)$ is a symplectic structure on $MtimesmathbbR^times $. For a contactopmorphism $Fcolon Mtotilde M$ ($F^*tildealpha=f alpha$ ), then the map $S(F)(x,t)=(F(x),fractf)$ is a symplectomorphism. "Your" symplectization basically chooses the open subset with positive reals, but a morphism with with negative $f$ doesn't preserve this choice.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
3 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
first of all I think your $S(F)$ can be modified into
beginalign*
S(F)(t,x)=(t-log(|f(x)|), F(x))
endalign*
since $f$ is non-vanishing, this is always smooth. Nevertheless, there is a more conceptual way to see the symplectization:
the symplectization $S$ is a functor from contact manifolds into homogeneous symplectic manifolds. The latter is the category of pairs $(P,omega)$ consisting of a $mathbbR^times$-principal bundle
$P$ and a symplectic structure $omegain Omega^2(P)$, such that
beginalign*
h_r^*omega=romega
endalign*
for the principal action $hcolon mathbbR^timestimes Pto P$.
The morphisms are equivariant symplectomorphisms. This functor is even an equivalence of categories and
does not work just for co-orientable contact structures. Everything what I said is (more or less) done in https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.05405.
HD
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I think it's friendlier to link to the abstract instead of (or as well as) the PDF. People are sometimes on slow connections and they may wish to see what the paper is about before downloading.
$endgroup$
– José Figueroa-O'Farrill
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I also thought about modifying the $S(F)$ in the way you did, but unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, it doesn't work since $$S(F)^*d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^t operatornamesgn(f) alpha) neq d(e^talpha)$$ in general. Thank you for the suggested paper! I will check it out.
$endgroup$
– TheGeekGreek
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JoséFigueroa-O'Farrill thanks for the suggestion, I already edited my post.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek I think you made a mistake. Note that you have $dlog(|f|)=fracdff$ for all non-vanishing functions $f$.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek You are right. I see now, where the sign issue arises. Take a contact manifold $(M,alpha)$, then $d(talpha)$ is a symplectic structure on $MtimesmathbbR^times $. For a contactopmorphism $Fcolon Mtotilde M$ ($F^*tildealpha=f alpha$ ), then the map $S(F)(x,t)=(F(x),fractf)$ is a symplectomorphism. "Your" symplectization basically chooses the open subset with positive reals, but a morphism with with negative $f$ doesn't preserve this choice.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
3 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
first of all I think your $S(F)$ can be modified into
beginalign*
S(F)(t,x)=(t-log(|f(x)|), F(x))
endalign*
since $f$ is non-vanishing, this is always smooth. Nevertheless, there is a more conceptual way to see the symplectization:
the symplectization $S$ is a functor from contact manifolds into homogeneous symplectic manifolds. The latter is the category of pairs $(P,omega)$ consisting of a $mathbbR^times$-principal bundle
$P$ and a symplectic structure $omegain Omega^2(P)$, such that
beginalign*
h_r^*omega=romega
endalign*
for the principal action $hcolon mathbbR^timestimes Pto P$.
The morphisms are equivariant symplectomorphisms. This functor is even an equivalence of categories and
does not work just for co-orientable contact structures. Everything what I said is (more or less) done in https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.05405.
HD
$endgroup$
first of all I think your $S(F)$ can be modified into
beginalign*
S(F)(t,x)=(t-log(|f(x)|), F(x))
endalign*
since $f$ is non-vanishing, this is always smooth. Nevertheless, there is a more conceptual way to see the symplectization:
the symplectization $S$ is a functor from contact manifolds into homogeneous symplectic manifolds. The latter is the category of pairs $(P,omega)$ consisting of a $mathbbR^times$-principal bundle
$P$ and a symplectic structure $omegain Omega^2(P)$, such that
beginalign*
h_r^*omega=romega
endalign*
for the principal action $hcolon mathbbR^timestimes Pto P$.
The morphisms are equivariant symplectomorphisms. This functor is even an equivalence of categories and
does not work just for co-orientable contact structures. Everything what I said is (more or less) done in https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.05405.
HD
edited 5 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
Heinz DoofenschmirtzHeinz Doofenschmirtz
1085 bronze badges
1085 bronze badges
$begingroup$
I think it's friendlier to link to the abstract instead of (or as well as) the PDF. People are sometimes on slow connections and they may wish to see what the paper is about before downloading.
$endgroup$
– José Figueroa-O'Farrill
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I also thought about modifying the $S(F)$ in the way you did, but unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, it doesn't work since $$S(F)^*d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^t operatornamesgn(f) alpha) neq d(e^talpha)$$ in general. Thank you for the suggested paper! I will check it out.
$endgroup$
– TheGeekGreek
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JoséFigueroa-O'Farrill thanks for the suggestion, I already edited my post.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek I think you made a mistake. Note that you have $dlog(|f|)=fracdff$ for all non-vanishing functions $f$.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek You are right. I see now, where the sign issue arises. Take a contact manifold $(M,alpha)$, then $d(talpha)$ is a symplectic structure on $MtimesmathbbR^times $. For a contactopmorphism $Fcolon Mtotilde M$ ($F^*tildealpha=f alpha$ ), then the map $S(F)(x,t)=(F(x),fractf)$ is a symplectomorphism. "Your" symplectization basically chooses the open subset with positive reals, but a morphism with with negative $f$ doesn't preserve this choice.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
3 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
I think it's friendlier to link to the abstract instead of (or as well as) the PDF. People are sometimes on slow connections and they may wish to see what the paper is about before downloading.
$endgroup$
– José Figueroa-O'Farrill
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I also thought about modifying the $S(F)$ in the way you did, but unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, it doesn't work since $$S(F)^*d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^t operatornamesgn(f) alpha) neq d(e^talpha)$$ in general. Thank you for the suggested paper! I will check it out.
$endgroup$
– TheGeekGreek
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JoséFigueroa-O'Farrill thanks for the suggestion, I already edited my post.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek I think you made a mistake. Note that you have $dlog(|f|)=fracdff$ for all non-vanishing functions $f$.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek You are right. I see now, where the sign issue arises. Take a contact manifold $(M,alpha)$, then $d(talpha)$ is a symplectic structure on $MtimesmathbbR^times $. For a contactopmorphism $Fcolon Mtotilde M$ ($F^*tildealpha=f alpha$ ), then the map $S(F)(x,t)=(F(x),fractf)$ is a symplectomorphism. "Your" symplectization basically chooses the open subset with positive reals, but a morphism with with negative $f$ doesn't preserve this choice.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think it's friendlier to link to the abstract instead of (or as well as) the PDF. People are sometimes on slow connections and they may wish to see what the paper is about before downloading.
$endgroup$
– José Figueroa-O'Farrill
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think it's friendlier to link to the abstract instead of (or as well as) the PDF. People are sometimes on slow connections and they may wish to see what the paper is about before downloading.
$endgroup$
– José Figueroa-O'Farrill
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I also thought about modifying the $S(F)$ in the way you did, but unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, it doesn't work since $$S(F)^*d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^t operatornamesgn(f) alpha) neq d(e^talpha)$$ in general. Thank you for the suggested paper! I will check it out.
$endgroup$
– TheGeekGreek
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
I also thought about modifying the $S(F)$ in the way you did, but unfortunately, at least as far as I can tell, it doesn't work since $$S(F)^*d(e^twidetildealpha) = d(e^t operatornamesgn(f) alpha) neq d(e^talpha)$$ in general. Thank you for the suggested paper! I will check it out.
$endgroup$
– TheGeekGreek
5 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JoséFigueroa-O'Farrill thanks for the suggestion, I already edited my post.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@JoséFigueroa-O'Farrill thanks for the suggestion, I already edited my post.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek I think you made a mistake. Note that you have $dlog(|f|)=fracdff$ for all non-vanishing functions $f$.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek I think you made a mistake. Note that you have $dlog(|f|)=fracdff$ for all non-vanishing functions $f$.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
4 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek You are right. I see now, where the sign issue arises. Take a contact manifold $(M,alpha)$, then $d(talpha)$ is a symplectic structure on $MtimesmathbbR^times $. For a contactopmorphism $Fcolon Mtotilde M$ ($F^*tildealpha=f alpha$ ), then the map $S(F)(x,t)=(F(x),fractf)$ is a symplectomorphism. "Your" symplectization basically chooses the open subset with positive reals, but a morphism with with negative $f$ doesn't preserve this choice.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@TheGeekGreek You are right. I see now, where the sign issue arises. Take a contact manifold $(M,alpha)$, then $d(talpha)$ is a symplectic structure on $MtimesmathbbR^times $. For a contactopmorphism $Fcolon Mtotilde M$ ($F^*tildealpha=f alpha$ ), then the map $S(F)(x,t)=(F(x),fractf)$ is a symplectomorphism. "Your" symplectization basically chooses the open subset with positive reals, but a morphism with with negative $f$ doesn't preserve this choice.
$endgroup$
– Heinz Doofenschmirtz
3 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f337138%2fsymplectisation-as-a-functor-between-appropriate-categories%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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