I was in Stony Brook last week, visiting Moira Chas and Dennis Sullivan, and have been away from blogging for a while; this week I plan to write a few posts about some of the things I discussed with Moira and Dennis. This is an introductory post about the Goldman bracket, an extraordinary mathematical object made out of the combinatorics of immersed curves on surfaces. I don’t have anything original to say about this object, but for my own benefit I thought I would try to explain what it is, and why Goldman was interested in it.
In his study of symplectic structures on character varieties , where
is the fundamental group of a closed oriented surface and
is a Lie group satisfying certain (quite general) conditions, Bill Goldman discovered a remarkable Lie algebra structure on the free abelian group generated by conjugacy classes in
. Let
denote the set of homotopy classes of closed oriented curves on
, where
is itself a compact oriented surface, and let
denote the free abelian group with generating set
. If
are immersed oriented closed curves which intersect transversely (i.e. in double points), define the formal sum
In this formula, are
thought of as based loops at the point
,
represents their product in
, and
represents the resulting conjugacy class in
. Moreover,
is the oriented intersection number of
and
at
.
This operation turns out to depend only on the free homotopy classes of and
, and extends by linearity to a bilinear map
. Goldman shows that this bracket makes
into a Lie algebra over
, and that there are natural Lie algebra homomorphisms from
to the Lie algebra of functions on
with its Poisson bracket.
The connection with character varieties can be summarized as follows. Let be a (smooth) class function (i.e. a function which is constant on conjugacy classes) on a Lie group
. Define the variation function
by the formula
where is some (fixed)
-invariant orthogonal structure on the Lie algebra
(for example, if
is reductive (eg if
is semisimple), one can take
). The tangent space to the character variety
at
is the first cohomology group of
with coefficients in
, thought of as a
module with the
action, and then as a
module by the representation
. Cup product and the pairing
determine a pairing
where the last equality uses the fact that is a closed surface group; this pairing defines the symplectic structure on
.
Every element determines a function
by sending a (conjugacy class of) representation
to
. Note that
only depends on the conjugacy class of
in
. It is natural to ask: what is the Hamiltonian flow on
generated by the function
? It turns out that when
is a simple closed curve, it is very easy to describe this Hamiltonian flow. If
is nonseparating, then define a flow
by
when
is represented by a curve disjoint from
, and
if
intersects
exactly once with a positive orientation (there is a similar formula when
is separating). In other words, the representation is constant on the fundamental group of the surface “cut open” along the curve
, and only deforms in the way the two conjugacy classes of
in the cut open surface are identified in
.
In the important motivating case that , so that one component of
is the Teichmüller space of hyperbolic structures on the surface
, one can take
, and then
is just the length of the geodesic in the free homotopy class of
, in the hyperbolic structure on
associated to a representation. In this case, the symplectic structure on the character variety restricts to the Weil-Petersson symplectic structure on Teichmüller space, and the Hamiltonian flow associated to the length function
is a family of Fenchel-Nielsen twists, i.e. the deformations of the hyperbolic structure obtained by cutting along the geodesic
, rotating through some angle, and regluing. This latter observation recovers a famous theorem of Wolpert, connected in an obvious way to his formula for the symplectic form
where
is angle and
is length, and the sum is taken over a maximal system of disjoint essential simple curves
for the surface
.
The combinatorial nature of the Goldman bracket suggests that it might have applications in combinatorial group theory. Turaev discovered a Lie cobracket on , and showed that together with the Goldman bracket, one obtains a Lie bialgebra. Motivated by Stallings’ reformulation of the Poincaré conjecture in terms of group theory, Turaev asked whether a free homotopy class contains a power of a simple curve if and only if the cobracket of the class is zero. The answer to this question is negative, as shown by Chas; on the other hand, Chas and Krongold showed that a class
is simple if and only if
is zero. Nevertheless, the full geometric meaning of the Goldman bracket remains mysterious, and a topic worthy of investigation.
There’s an interesting earlier (ie 1978) paper of
of a surface (with
Turaev entitled “Intersections of loops in
two-dimensional manifolds”. In that paper, he gives
an intersection pairing on
one boundary component; the basepoint is on the boundary) that
is superficially very similar to the Goldman bracket,
but actually has rather different, intriguing properties.
It is a pairing
.
. Let
be the quotient of
by the kth term
. For
,
and this is just the algebraic intersection
we have
equal to the
with values in
Unlike the Goldman bracket, its values depend strongly on
the basepoint. However, it interacts very well with
the group-theory of the surface group. In particular,
it is actually a biderivation in an appropriate sense. Even
more interestingly, I noticed when I read Turaev’s paper that
it interacts well with the derived series of
of its derived series, so $\latex S_k$ is a k-step solvable
group. Then Turaev’s bracket descends to a pairing
we have
pairing. For the higher terms, however, we get something new. In
particular, for
first homology group of the surface, so we get an “intersection pairing”
on the two-step solvable truncation of
the group ring of its first homology group!
I’ve always thought that this should have nice applications
(maybe to understanding the “solvable” version of the Johnson
filtration of the mapping class group), but I haven’t yet managed
to find any…
Let’s try that again and see if I can get the formulas to parse.
There’s an interesting earlier (ie 1978) paper of
of a surface (with
Turaev entitled “Intersections of loops in
two-dimensional manifolds”. In that paper, he gives
an intersection pairing on
one boundary component; the basepoint is on the boundary) that
is superficially very similar to the Goldman bracket,
but actually has rather different, intriguing properties.
It is a pairing
.
. Let
be the quotient of
by the kth term
is a k-step solvable
. For
,
and this is just the algebraic intersection
we have
equal to the
with values in
Unlike the Goldman bracket, its values depend strongly on
the basepoint. However, it interacts very well with
the group-theory of the surface group. In particular,
it is actually a biderivation in an appropriate sense. Even
more interestingly, I noticed when I read Turaev’s paper that
it interacts well with the derived series of
of its derived series, so
group. Then Turaev’s bracket descends to a pairing
we have
pairing. For the higher terms, however, we get something new. In
particular, for
first homology group of the surface, so we get an “intersection pairing”
on the two-step solvable truncation of
the group ring of its first homology group!
I’ve always thought that this should have nice applications
(maybe to understanding the “solvable” version of the Johnson
filtration of the mapping class group), but I haven’t yet managed
to find any…
Hi Andy – thanks for the comment and the reference! I was not aware of this paper (I guess it is this one), although I knew in a general way that Turaev has done several interesting things with the combinatorics of immersed curves on surfaces. An endlessly mysterious and fascinating subject!
Hi Danny,
I’ve been reading about the Goldman form a little bit recently and I found this blog post, which was very nice to read. I had what I assume is a stupid question: In a couple of his papers Goldman restricts to working with closed surfaces of genus g > 1. Do you know why he doesn’t include the torus? My impression is that it has something to do with
being abelian, but I don’t know what. Do you know if he has this restriction because the symplectic form (or corresponding Poisson bracket) don’t exist, or because the character variety isn’t as well-behaved?
A paper that I thought was interesting that uses this Poisson bracket is http://www.ams.org/mathscinet/search/publdoc.html?pg1=MR&s1=1691437&loc=fromreflist
of a surface” has a natural geometric interpretation.
A one-sentence summary is that the “deformation quantization of the ring of functions on the character variety of
Peter
p.s. I was a student in your class on complex curves a few years back (winter of 04-05?), which was a nice class :-)
Hi Peter – as you say, the issue is with pi_1 being abelian, so there are no “interesting” representations. Although even in this case, if one thinks of H^1 as the “character variety” of representations of pi_1 to R, there is a symplectic form on this space coming from the intersection pairing. At least I think this is why Goldman ignores this case . . .
best,
Danny
(ps I haven’t updated my blog in a long time; I keep intending to get around to it though)