Gauge 4
Gauge 4
FLORIN BELGUN
1. Fiber bundles
With this convention, the transition functions {gU V | U, V ∈ U} satisfy the following
properties:
(1) gU U : U → G is the constant map gU U = e ∈ G (e is the neutral element in G)
(2) gU V (x) is the inverse element in G of gV U (x)
(3) gU V · gV W = gU W on U ∩ V ∩ W , where the dot denotes the multiplication in G
of the values of the transition functions.
A collection of G-valued functions as above is called a 1-cocycle with values in G (the
terminology comes from sheaf theory).
1
2 FLORIN BELGUN
If we consider the general setting of a fiber bundle with group G and fiber F , we con-
clude that the relevant objects / properties of a fiber in such a fiber bundle correspond
to objects / properties of F that are invariant under the action ρ of G. We will come
back to this principle.
π
Definition 1.5. A (local) section in a fiber bundle E → M is a map σ : M → E
(σ : U → E, for U ⊂ M open in the local case) such that π ◦ σ is the identity of M ,
resp. of U .
Remark 1.6. For every local trivialization (U, ψU ), the inclusions σf : U → U × F
π
(f ∈ F ), defined by σf (x) := ψ −1 (x, f ), ∀x ∈ U , induce local sections in E → M .
π
Proposition 1.7. If the fiber F is contractible, then any fiber bundle E → M with fiber
F admits global sections.
Proposition 1.8. If the base manifold M is contractible, then there exists a global
trivialization ψ : E → M .
The proofs of these propositions can be found in the classical book by N. Steenrod
The topology of fiber bundles, where, in order to decide if a certain bundle admits or
not global sections, the obstruction theory is developped.
π
from a fiber bundle E 0 → M , that the constructed fiber bundle E is isomorphic to E 0 .
For this, we define first when two bundles are isomorphic:
π
Definition 2.1. Let Ei →i M , i = 1, 2 be two fiber bundles on M with structure group
G, and fiber F , (corresponding to the action ρ : G × F → F ). An isomorphism of fiber
bundles between E1 and E2 is a diffeomorphism Φ : E1 → E2 such that
(1) π2 ◦ Φ = π1 (Φ maps the fiber of E1 at x ∈ M to the fiber of E2 at x)
(2) for a covering U of M , fine enough such that ∀U ∈ U, there exist local trivial-
izations ψU1 of E1 , resp. ψU2 of E2 over U , the map
ψU2 ◦ Φ ◦ (ψU1 )−1 : U × F → U × F2
can be expressed, in terms of a smooth map gU : U → G as
(x, f ) 7→ (x, ρ(gU (x), f ))
Proposition 2.2. Two fiber bundles E1 , E2 with group G and fibre F are isomorphic iff,
for a fine enough covering U of M , the 1-cocycles {gUi V }U,V ∈U , i = 1, 2 are cobordant,
i.e. there exists a family gU : U → G of smooth maps such that
gU2 V = gU · gU1 V · gV−1 on U ∩ V, ∀U, V ∈ U.
We introduce now some operations with fiber bundles; the first one is the pull-back,
that constructs, starting from a fiber bundle E → M as above, a fiber bundle with the
same structure group and the same fiber over another manifold:
π
Definition 2.6. If E → M is a fiber bundle with group G and fiber F (G acting by ρ
on F ), and f : N → M is a smooth map, one defines the pull-back f ∗ E of E to N the
following fiber bundle with group G and fiber F on N :
(1) E 0 := f ∗ E := {(x, y) ∈ N × E | f (x) = π(y)};
(2) π 0 : E 0 → N , π 0 (x, y) := π(y)(= f (x)), ∀(x, y) ∈ E 0 ; also denote by f¯ : E 0 → E,
f¯(x, y) := y, ∀(x, y) ∈ E 0 , the induced bundle map;
(3) the local trivializations are defined on the covering f −1 (U) := {f −1 (U ) | U ∈ U}
as
−1
ψ 0 −1 (x, y) := (x, pr2 (ψU (y))), ∀(x, y) ∈ π 0 (f −1 (U )) = f¯−1 (π −1 (U )).
f (U )
π0 π
? f- ?
N M
Exercise 2.7. It is clear that over a point (seen as a manifold • of dimension 0),
there exists only one (trivial) bundle with group G and fiber F , namely F → •. Show
that a bundle E → M as above is trivial iff it is isomorphic with the pull-back of any
G, F -bundle through a constant map.
π
In the special case when f itself is the projection of a fibre bundle E2 →2 M (and
π
where we denote our initial fiber bundle on M as E1 →1 M ), we get that π2∗ E1 = π1∗ E2
and π10 = π̄2 and π20 = π̄1 are both fiber bundle projections. Moreover, if we denote by
E1 ×M E2 := π2∗ E1 = π1∗ E2 the fibered product of E1 and E2 , then the diagonal map
π := π1 ◦ π20 = π2 ◦ π10 is a fiber bundle projection, too.
π20 -
E1 ×M E2 E1
π
π10 1
-
? π2 - ?
E2 M
The gauge group is then G := G1 × G2 and the fiber is F := F1 × F2 (corresponding
to the representation ρ : G × F → F , ρ((g1 , g2 ), (f1 , f2 )) := (ρ1 (g1 , f1 ), ρ2 (g2 , f2 )),
∀(g1 , g2 ) ∈ G, (f1 , f2 ) ∈ F .
π
In the particular case where both fiber bundles Ei →i M are vector bundles, the
fibered product E1 ×M E2 has as fiber at x ∈ M the direct sum of the fibres (E1 )x and
(E2 )x . For that reason, it is usually denoted by E1 ⊕ E2 and is usually referred to as the
Whitney sum of the vector bundles E1 and E2 . Note that, by construction, the gauge
group of E1 ⊕ E2 = E1 ×M E2 is naturally a subgroup of GL(n1 , R) × GL(n2 , R) (in case
the ranks of Ei are ni and Gi act effectively of Rni , i = 1, 2). To determine whether a
given vector bundle E can be decomposed as a Whitney sum is a non-trivial topological
problem, and it amounts to reduce the structure (gauge) group of E to a subgroup of
such a product. More about gauge reduction in the next section.
π
Exercise 2.8. (1) Show that every (local) section of E → M induces a (local)
π0
section of f ∗ E → M ;
(2) Show that a (local) section in E1 ×M E2 → M is equivalent to a pair of (local)
sections in E1 → M , resp. E2 → M ;
π0
(3) Show that if f : U ,→ M is the inclusion of an open subset of M , then f ∗ E → M
is the restriction to U , resp. π −1 (U ) of the bundle projection π : E → M . f ∗ E
is sometimes denoted by E|U .
GAUGE THEORY 5
The importance of principal bundles is that, among all bundles with the same gauge
group and (up to co-boundaries) same 1-cocycle of transition maps (these bundles are
called associated to each other), it is the only one on which G acts (on the right) and such
that all other associated bundles can be retrieved from it by the following procedure:
π
Proposition 3.3. Let P → M be a G-principal bundle over M and ρ : G × F → F a
left action of G on a manifold F . Then the following manifold is the total space of a
fiber bundle over M with group G and fiber F (for the action ρ), associated to P :
E := P ×ρ F := P × F/ ∼, (p, f ) ∼ (p · g, ρ(g −1 , f )), ∀(p, f ) ∈ P × F, ∀g ∈ G.
The dot denotes the right multiplication of g ∈ G with the element p ∈ P . The projection
πE : E → M is defined, for an equivalence class [p, f ] ∈ E, by πE ([p, f ]) := π(p).
Because the equivalence relation above is induced by the right free action of G on
P × F:
(P × F ) × G 3 ((p, f ), g) 7→ (p · g, ρ(g −1 ) ∈ P × F,
the proposition above is a direct consequence of the following Theorem.
Definition 3.4. A continuous map f : A → B between topological spaces is called
proper iff f −1 (K) is compact in A, for any K ⊂ B compact.
A Lie group (right) action η : P × G → P on a smooth manifold P is said to be
proper iff the continuous map fη : P × P → P × P , defined by
fη (p, g) := (p, η(p, g)), ∀(p, g) ∈ P × G,
is proper.
Theorem 3.5. Let P be a smooth manifold and let G be a Lie group acting smoothly,
freely and properly on P . Then the orbit space of G can be given the structure of a
smooth manifold M , such that the canonical projection π : P → M is a submersion
and, moreover, a G-principal bundle.
6 FLORIN BELGUN
π
Remark 3.6. We have seen that in each trivialization domain U , a fiber bundle E → M
admits, for each y ∈ π −1 (U ), a section σy : U → π −1 (U ) passing through y.
π
Conversely, every local section σ : U → π −1 (U ) in a principal bundle P → M defines
a local trivialization of the bundle over U : indeed, the map Fσ : U × G → π −1 (U ),
Fσ (x, g) := σ(x) · g is a diffeomorphism, and for each local trivialization ψV : π −1 (V ) →
V × G, we have on (U ∩ V ) × G:
ψV (Fσ (x, g)) = ψV (σ(x) · g) = (x, gV σ (x) · g),
where gV σ (x) is the component in G of ψV (σ(x)).
For principal bundles, a (local) trivialization and a (local) section are thus equivalent
notions.
Sections in an associated bundle can also be described using the corresponding prin-
cipal bundle:
π
Proposition 3.7. Let P → M be a principal G-bundle, ρ : G × F → F a smooth action
of G on F and E := P ×ρ F the associated bundle to ρ. There is a 1–1 correspondence
between (local) sections σ : U → πE−1 U in E and G-equivariant maps f : π −1 (U ) → F
(if U = M , then σ : M → E and f : P → F ), i.e. smooth maps that satisfy the
equivariance property:
f (p · g) = ρ(g −1 , f (p)), ∀p ∈ P, g ∈ G.
In case F is a vector space V and ρ : G×V → V is a linear representation (one can see
ρ as a group homomorphism from G to GL(V )), one considers E-valued differential forms
on M as sections in the vector bundle Λ∗ M ⊗ E (as a vector bundle, it is constructed
by taking fiberwise tensor products of Λ∗ M and E: it is equally the associated bundle
to the GL(M ) ×M P with structure group GL(n, R) × G, where GL(M ) is the bundle
of frames on M (dim M = n) and P is the associated principal bundle to E, by the
tensor product representation λ ⊗ ρ : GL(Rn ) × G → GL(Λ∗ (Rn )∗ ⊗ V )). Such E-valued
differential forms can be characterized in terms of the associated principal bundle in an
analogous way as the sections are equivalent to G-equivariant maps on P :
π
Proposition 3.8. Let P → M be a principal G-bundle and ρ : G → GL(V ) be a linear
representation of G. Denote by E := P ×ρ V the associated vector bundle. A k-form on
M with values in E is equivalent to a V -valued k-form α on P such that
(1) Rg∗ α = ρg−1 (α), ∀g ∈ G
(2) The vertical distribution (the vertical tangent space, or the tangent space to the
fibers) T ∨ P := ker π∗ lies in the kernel of α, i.e. α(X, . . . ) = 0, ∀X ∈ T ∨ P .
Here Rg : P → P is the right action of g ∈ G on P and ρg−1 : V → V is the (left) linear
action of g −1 on V .
Given a fiber bundle with group G, one is usually interested in reducing the gauge
group to a subgroup H of G, in that one attemps to find a sub-atlas of local trivializa-
tions for which the transition functions take value in H. In case H = {e}, this amounts
to finding a global trivialization of E. The concept of gauge reduction can be defined in
full generality and characterized as follows:
GAUGE THEORY 7
π
Definition 3.9. Let E → M be a fiber bundle with gauge group G and fiber F for
ρ : G×F → F the corresponding action. Let ϕ : H → G be a Lie group homomorphism.
We say that the gauge group of E reduces to H iff there exists a sub-atlas of local
trivializations of E such that the corresponding transition functions gU V : U ∩ V → G
factorize through ϕ, i.e. they can be expressed as gU V = ϕ ◦ hU V , where hU V is a
1-cocycle on M with values in H.
For E = P a principal G-bundle, this means that P is isomorphic to P red ×ϕ̄ G, where
red
P is a principal H-bundle (defined by the 1-cocycle {hU V } above) and ϕ̄ : H ×G → G
is the action of H by left multiplication (via ϕ) on G: ϕ̄(h, g) := ϕ(h)·g, ∀h ∈ H, g ∈ G.
Proposition 3.10. A reduction to H (for the group homomorphism ϕ : H → G) of
the gauge group of the G-bundle P is equivalent to a G-equivariant (ϕ-equivariant) map
F : P red → P from a principal H-bundle P red to P , i.e. F (p · h) = F (p) · ϕ(h),
∀p ∈ P red , h ∈ H. If ϕ is injective, such a reduction is also equivalent to a section in
the bundle P/ϕ(H) ' P ×L G/ϕ(H), where G acts on the right coset space G/ϕ(H) by
multiplication on the left.
A standard case of gauge reduction from GL(n, R) to O(n) and SO(n) of the tangent
bundle of an n-dimensional manifold M is given by the choice of a Riemannian metric,
resp. a metric plus an orientation. In view of the previous proposition, the reduction
from GL(n, R) to O(n) is equivalent to a section in the bundle of symmetric, positive
definite bilinear forms on T M , whose fiber is the space of positive definite symmetric
matrices. This, in turn, is shown to be a contractible space by the standard Gramm-
Schmidt orthogonalization procedure, and by the obstruction theory, a fiber bundle with
contractible fiber always admits global sections. Thus, the existence of a Riemannian
metric on any manifold is a special case of a more general phenomenon: reducing the
gauge group of a G-bundle to its maximal compact subgroup:
Theorem 3.11 (Cartan-Iwasawa-Malcev). Let G be a Lie group with finitely many
connected components. Then every compact subgroup of G is contained in a maximal
compact subgroup of G. Moreover, all such maximal compact subgroups H are conjugated
inside G, have as many connected components as G has, and the coset space G/H is
contractible.
We conclude that, from a topological viewpoint, the study of principal bundles can
be restricted to the case when the structure (gauge) group is compact.
Exercise 3.12. Define or(M ) := GL(M )/GL+ (n, R) to be the bundle of orientations
on M . Show that or(M ) → M is a two-fold covering, and also a Z2 -principal bundle.
Show that a connected manifold M is orientable iff or(M ) is not connected.
π
Exercise 3.13. Generalize the previous exercise as follows: Let P → M be a G-
principal bundle over a connected manifold M with G a discrete group (a Lie group of
dimension 0). Show that P admits a reduction to a subgroup of G iff the total space P
is non connected.
π π0
Example 3.14. Let P → M be a principal G-bundle. Then π ∗ P → P , as a G-principal
bundle over P , is trivial: Indeed, the diagonal map D : P → P × P induces a global
section in π ∗ P = P ×M P ⊂ P × P .
The virtual reduction will turn out to be a useful tool for computations with charac-
teristic classes, see below.
If the reduced gauge group H is not specified, it is difficult to find out whether
the gauge group G of a bundle E admits reductions (exept for the reduction to the
maximal subgroup, as seen above). If H is expected to be a closed subgroup of G, then
the reduction to H amounts to fixing some extra structure on E, which is therefore a
structure on the standard fiber F extended to the whole space E. When E is a vector
bundle, this structure may be given by a tensor, i.e. a section in some tensor power of
E. To extend such a tensor Tx ∈ ⊗∗ E from a point x ∈ M to a curve on M through x,
and then further to a neighborhood of x and even to the whole manifold M , it would be
useful to have fixed a way to lift curves (a lift of a map f : N → M is a map f˜ : N → E
such that π ◦ f˜ = f ), resp. to know that the endpoint of a lifted curve starting at x
and located in a small neighborhood of x ∈ M or, more generally, for arbitrary curves,
depends only on the endpoint of the curve on M .
The idea of curve lifting leads to the concept of a connection (it connects the fibers
by horizontal – i.e., non-vertical – curves) in a fiber bundle; the independence of the
endpoint of the chosen curve turns out to be a property of the curvature and holonomy
of the connection (for local lifts) and of its monodromy (for global lifts)
Recall that a Lie group is parallelizable. More precisely, the left invariant vector fields
on G canonically identify the tangent space Tg G in a point g ∈ G to g = Te G. This
identification is in fact a 1-form on G with values in its Lie algebra g:
Definition 4.1. The Maurer-Cartan form ω M C ∈ Λ1 G⊗g on the Lie group G associates
to every vector X ∈ Tg G the element (Lg−1 )∗,g (X) ∈ Te G = g. (recall that Lh : G → G
is the left multiplication with h)
Here, the left hand side is the pull-back through the diffeomorphism Rg of ω M C
and the right hand side is the composition of the linear maps Adg−1 : g → g with
ω M C : T G → g.
Because ω M C is left-invariant, it can be defined on the fibers of a G-principal bundle
π
P → M , using the trivializations (that identify the fibers with G), and the induced
forms on Px do not depend on the chosen trivialization, since the transition maps act
on G by left multiplication, which leaves ω M C invariant.
Remark 4.3. The same argument can be used to show that the left-invariant vector
fields on G induce vertical tangent fields (i.e., vector fields that are sections of the
vertical tangent space T ∨ P = ker(π∗ )), associated to every element of the Lie algebra
g. These vector fields will be called fundamental, and we denote by X̄ the fundamental
vector field on P corresponding to the element X ∈ g. The flow of X̄, at time t, is the
right multiplication on P with exp(tX) ∈ G.
Equivalently, X̄ can be defined by the formula
d d
X̄p := t=0 Rexp(tX) p = |t=0 (p · exp(tX)) , ∀p ∈ P.
dt dt
Because ω M C is invariant to the left action of G on itself, the 1-forms ωφM C : T Px → g
defined by the local trivializations φ : Px → G are, in fact, independent of the choice of
the trivialization φ, and thus there exists a well-defined map ω M C,P : T ∨ P → g, such
that
ω M C,P (X̄) = X, ∀X ∈ g.
ω M C,P is not a 1-form on P (with values in g), but, since the right multiplications
Rg : P → P , g ∈ G, preserve the vertical distribution, one can consider the pull-back
of ω M C,P through Rg . We have then
Lemma 4.4. (Rg )∗ ω M C,P = Adg−1 (ω M C,P ), ∀g ∈ G.
Proof. It is enough to prove the identity above for the case when P is trivial; in fact it
is enough to show
(Rg )∗ ω M C = Adg−1 (ω M C ),
for the Maurer-Cartan form of G. For this, apply both sides of the identity to a left-
invariant vector field X on G. On the right hand side we obtain
Adg−1 Xe ,
and on the left hand side we obtain
ω M C ((Rg )∗ X).
We need thus to show that the vector field Y := (Rg )∗ X is also left-invariant and that
Ye = Adg−1 Xe . The flow of Y is
−1
φYt = Rg ◦ φX
t ◦ (Rg ) = Rg ◦ Rexp(tXe ) ◦ Rg−1 = Rg−1 exp(tXe )g ,
which is exactly the flow of Adg−1 Xe .
Definition 4.5. A connection in the G-principal bundle P → M is a G-invariant
horizontal distribution on P , i.e. a subbundle H of the tangent bundle of P , such that
(Rg )∗ H = H, ∀g ∈ G.
10 FLORIN BELGUN
where the second term is the fundamental vector field that corresponds to the ele-
ment in g (identified with TgU V (x) G by the corresonding left multiplication) defined by
(gU V )∗,x (X).
The equation (2) follows by applying ω H to the equation above.
Remark 4.7. We can retrieve the connection form ω out of a family (U, ωU ) as above:
Indeed, it is enough to specify the kernel H of ω along the values of a local section σU ;
then, we define H on π −1 (U ) by using the G-invariance. To define H, it is necessary
and sufficient to define the horizontal lift of every vector X on the basis M :
Proposition 4.8. Let x ∈ U ⊂ M and σU the corresponding local section in P over U .
We define
X̃ := (Rg )∗ (σU )∗,x (X) − ωU (X)σ(x) ∈ TσU (x)·g P, ∀X ∈ Tx M, ∀g ∈ G (4)
Proof. It suffices to check that X̃σV (x) , computed in the gauge σV , coincides with the
value at σV (x) = σU (x) · gU V (x) of the horizontal lift computet in the gauge σU . From
(3) it follows that the difference of the first (the non-vertical) terms in the expressions
of X̃ in these two gauges, cf. (4), is vertical and coincides with the value at σV (x) of
the fundamental vector field
ωV (X) − ωU (X),
which is the difference of the vertical (correction) terms in the expressions of X̃, cf.
(4), in the gauges σV , resp. σU . X̃ is thus well-defined independently of the choice of
trivialization.
H is thus well-defined as well. By definition (4), H is G-invariant, so it is a connection
on P .
Two objects are considered to be gauge equivalent iff there is a gauge transformation
that sends one object into another. A condition is called gauge invariant if it is satisfied
by a whole class of gauge equivalent objects.
Example 4.10. The zero set of a section in a vector bundle is a gauge invariant ob-
ject/condition: if a section s in E vanishes on the set A ⊂ M , then every section of E
which is gauge-equivalent to s vanishes on A.
The property (6) is called the Leibniz rule, and is equivalent to the fact that the
symbol of D, seen as a first order linear differential operator, is the identity (see below).
Proposition 4.14. Let P → M be a G-principal bundle and ρ : G → GL(V ) a linear
representation of G. Then every connection H on P induces a covariant derivative DH
on the vector bundle E := P ×ρ V .
Conversely, let D be a covariant derivative on the (real or complex) vector bundle
E → M , and denote by GL(E) := Hom× (V, E), for V the trivial bundle with fiber
isomorphic to the fibers of E, the set of (real or complex) isomorphisms (or invertible
homomorphisms) between V and E, in other words the bundle of frames of E. Then D
induces a connection H D on this principal GL(V )-bundle.
The Leibniz rule follows immediately from the one for dw.
Conversely, suppose D is a covariant derivative on a vector bundle E.
Lemma 4.15. Let E → M be vector bundle with a covariant derivative D and e ∈ Ex ,
x ∈ M . Then there exists a section s of E such that
(1) s(x) = e and
(2) (Ds)x = 0.
Let s1 , ..., sn be local sections in E around x such that si (x) = ei , ∀i ∈ {1, ..., n} (these
sections can be extended toP global sections of E using a cut-off function on M ). Then
the local section s := S − ni=1 xi si (also extended to a global section using a cut-off
0
We conclude that, for every point f ∈ GL(E)x , there exists a local frame σ : U →
GL(E) such that σ(x) = f and, ∀v ∈ V , σ(v), as a local section in E, satisfies
D(σ(v))x = 0. Then we define the following horizontal distribution H E ⊂ T GL(E)
by the condition:
HfE := {σ∗,x (X) | X ∈ Tx M, σ ∈ C∞ (E) : σ(x) = f and (D(σ(q))x = 0, ∀q ∈ V }.
If σ is a local section in GL(E) such that D(σ(q))x = 0, ∀q ∈ V , then clearly σ ◦ g has
the same property, ∀g ∈ GL(V ). Since GL(E) 3 f → f ◦ g ∈ GL(E) is the right action
of GL(V ) on GL(E), the horizontal distribution H E is GL(V )-invariant, and thus a
connection on GL(E).
Remark 4.16. The covariant derivative of a section s : M → E at x does not depend
on the values of s outside an open set U 3 x (for every such an open set; this means
that (Ds)x depends only on the germ at x of the section s): indeed, if s0 − s is a section
of E that vanishes on a neighborhood U of x, then s0 − s = f (s0 − s), where f : M → R
is a function that vanishes on a open set U0 ⊂ U , still containing x, and being equal
to 1 on M r U . Then (D(s0 − s))x = dfx ⊗ (s0 − s)(x) + f (x)(D(s0 − s))x = 0. This
argument allows us to consider the covariant derivatives of local sections in E, because
the extension of a local section to a global one does not influence the values of its
covariant derivative on the original definition domain of the section.
Like for the connections in principal bundles, we can pull-back covariant derivatives
on f ∗ E, for f : N → M a smooth map and E → M a vector bundle with a covariant
derivative D.
We can also construct covariant derivatives on tensor bundles of E, i.e. on canonical
subbundles in ⊗E, like Λ∗ E, End(E) ' E ∗ ⊗ E, starting from a covariant derivative on
E.
More generally, if E1 , E2 are vector bundles over M with covariant derivatives D1 , D2 ,
then we can define the covariant derivative D1 + D2 on E1 ⊕ E2 (we differentiate the
components) and D := 1E1 ⊗ D2 + D1 ⊗ 1E2 on E1 ⊗ E2 by the formula:
D(s1 ⊗ s2 ) := D1 s1 ⊗ s2 + s1 ⊗ D2 s2 , ∀si ∈ C∞ (Ei ), i = 1, 2.
Indeed, the decomposable sections of type s1 ⊗s2 linearly span the space of all sections of
E1 ⊗ E2 and D can be extended by linearity to define a covariant derivative on E1 ⊗ E2 .
We have seen that, for every element of a fiber bundle with connection, there exists
a local section in this bundle, extending this element, that is parallel at that point.
Asking that the section is parallel on a neighborhood is, on the other hand, much more
restrictive. The obstruction to the existence of such a parallel extension is the curvature
5. Curvature of a connection
Lemma 5.1. Let ω M C be the Maurer-Cartan form of a Lie group G. Then the following
structure equation holds:
dω M C (X, Y ) + [ω M C (X), ω M C (Y )] = 0, ∀X, Y ∈ g.
With this notation, [ω(X), ω(Y )] = 12 (ω ∧ ω)(X, Y ), thus the structure equation for
the Maurer-Cartan form can be written:
1
dω M C + ω M C ∧ ω M C = 0. (8)
2
16 FLORIN BELGUN
Proof. From (8), Ω(X̄, Ȳ ) = 0 for X̄, Ȳ fundamental vector fields. Let us consider now
one fundamental vector field X̄, X ∈ g, and a horizontal vector field Ỹ , Y vector field
on M . Then the quadratic term in ω vanishes on the pair (X̄, Ỹ ), thus
Ω(X̄, Ỹ ) = dω(X̄, Ỹ ) = X̄.(ω(Ỹ )) − Ỹ .(ω(X̄)) − ω([X̄, Ỹ ]).
the first two terms vanish, and the last term, ω applied to the Lie bracket of the
fundamental field X̄ and the horizontal vector field X̃ vanishes as well, because the flow
of X̄ acts by right multiplication on P , and thus sends Ỹ into itself, thus [X̄, Ỹ ] = 0.
So Ω vanishes on T ∨ P . Moreover, it is G-equivariant.
Lemma 5.6. Let α be a k-form on P with values in V , for ρ : G → GL(V ) a linear
representation, such that
(1) α(X, ...) = 0, ∀X ∈ T ∨ P , and
(2) Rg∗ α = ρ(g −1 )(α), ∀g ∈ G.
Proof. The proof is similar to the case of degree 0 (that a G-equivariant function frm P
to V is equivalent to a section in the corresponding associated bundle): Let X1 , ..., Xk ∈
Tx M and p ∈ Px . Take any lifts Y1 , ..., Yk ∈ Tp P and compute α(Y1 , ..., Yk ) (the result
does not depend on the chosen lifts because T ∨ P ⊂ ker α). This defines an element
[p, α(Y1 , ..., Yk )] ∈ P ×ρ V , and, if we consider p0 := p · g ∈ Px , g ∈ G, then if we
consider Yi0 := (Rg )∗ Yi , i ∈ {1, ..., k}, as lifts of X1 , ..., Xk in p0 , then we immediately
get [p0 , α(X10 , ..., Xk0 )] = [p, α(Y1 , ..., Yk )] using the G-equivariance of the k-form α.
where the hat ˆ indicates a missing term. The proof of the following proposition is
straightforward (by induction):
Proposition 5.8. Let α ∈ C ∞ (Λk (E)) and β ∈ C ∞ (Λl M ). Then
d∇ (β ∧ α) = dβ ∧ α + (−1)l β ∧ d∇ α.
Moreover, this property together with the fact that d∇ = ∇ on C∞ (E) uniquely deter-
mines the operator d∇ : C ∞ (Λ∗ (E)) −→ C ∞ (Λ∗ (E)).
Remark 5.9. If ∇ is a trivial connection (for example, given by a (local) frame), then
d∇ is the usual exterior derivative of forms with values in a (fixed) vector space, therefore
(d∇ )2 = 0.
In general, (d∇ )2 6= 0.
Definition 5.10. Let ∇ be a connection on a vector bundle E → M . Its curvature
tensor R∇ is a 2–form with values in End(E), defined by K ∇ s := (d∇ )2 s, more precisely
∇
KX,Y s = ∇X ∇Y s − ∇Y ∇X s − ∇[X,Y ] s, X, Y ∈ T M, s ∈ C ∞ (E).
Remark 5.11. Even if (d∇ )2 is not zero, it is a zero-order differential operator (i.e. a
tensor) - see below.
Using Proposition 5.8 and the fact that the space of sections (sheaf) C ∞ (Λ∗ (E)) is
isomorphic to the tensor product C ∞ (Λ∗ M ) ⊗ C ∞ (E) (the tensor product is over the
ring C ∞ (M ) of real/complex–valued functions on M ), we get
Proposition 5.12. Let α ∈ C ∞ (Λ∗ (E)). Then (d∇ )2 α = K ∇ ∧ α.
Here we have used the following notation: for a k-form α with values in E, and a
l-form η with values in End(E), we define their exterior product by taking the tensor
product of the following maps:
∧
Λk M ⊗ Λl M → Λk+l M
η ⊗ ξ 7→ η ∧ ξ,
E ⊗ End(E) → E
s ⊗ A 7→ A(s).
If we consider two forms with values in End(E), A ∈ C∞ (Λk (End(E))) and B ∈
C∞ (Λl (End(E))), we consider their wedge product
A ∧ B ∈ Ωk+l (End(E))
18 FLORIN BELGUN
by tensoring the wedge product of forms on M with the commutator (linear) map:
End(E) ⊗ End(E) → End(E)
A⊗B 7→ AB − BA.
We have the following differential Bianchi identity (sometimes called the second
Bianchi identity in the case of connections on the tangent bundle):
Proposition 5.13. The curvature tensor K ∇ ∈ C∞ (Λ2 (End(E))) of a connection ∇
on E → M is d∇ -closed.
The differential Bianchi identity has the following formulation in terms of connection
1-forms:
Proposition 5.14. Let ω be a connection 1-form on the G-principal bundle P → M
and Ω = dω + 21 ω ∧ ω its curvature form. Then
dΩ + ω ∧ Ω = 0.
The proof follows directly by differentiating the formula defining Ω and using that
ω ∧ (ω ∧ ω) = 0 (from the Jacobi identity on g).
We need to show that the curvature tensor K is canonically determined by the cur-
vature form Ω:
Proposition 5.15. Let P → M be a G principal bundle with a connection form ω, its
curvature form Ω and let ∇ω : C∞ (E) → C∞ (Λ1 M ⊗ E) be the covariant derivative
associated to ω for an associated vector bundle E := P ×ρ V → M , for ρ : G → GL(V )
a linear representation of G on V .
Then ∀X, Y ∈ Tx M , the curvature tensor
KX,Y [p, v] = [p, ρ̄(Ω(X̃, Ỹ ))(v)], ∀[p, v] ∈ Ex .
Remark 5.16. If P ⊂ Aut(E) (and G ⊂ GL(V )), we can simply write K = Ω.
However, it is not true that every Lie group G can be emedded in a linear group (the
universal covering of SL(2, R) is such an counterexample). For a general Lie group G,
ω
we need to distinguish between K = (d∇ )2 and Ω. Indeed, the bundle Ad(P ) where
Ω takes values, reflects the structure of E to a better extent as End(E): a U(n) (or
unitary) connection on a rank n complex vector bundle is a complex linear connection
(i.e., the covariant derivative is complex-linear) and metric, i.e., there exist a symmetric,
positive definite, Hermitian tensor h ∈ C ∞ (E ⊗R E), (Hermitian means that such that
h(iX, iY ) = h(X, Y ) for all X, Y ∈ E, where iX is the multiplication with the complex
number i on the fibers of E) that is parallel w.r.t. the covariant derivative.) In this
case, P = U(E, h), the space of unitarz frames of E, Ad(P ) can be identified with the
subbundle of End(E) of antihermitian endomorphisms of E.
Remark 5.17. Although such a statement is false for Lie groups (see above), it is in
general true that every Lie algebra admits a finite-dimensional faithful representation
(i.e., ∃ρ : G → GL(V ) s.t. ρ̄ : g → End(V ) is injective (thus ρ is an immersion)), and
thus there is no loss of information on Ω if we consider the curvature tensor K for the
bundle associated to such a representation ρ.
From now on, we will consider that E is a vector bundle with a covariant derivative
that comes from a G-connection. The difference of two such covariant derivatives comes
thus from a section θ of Λ1 M ⊗ Ad(P ), and is precisely the image of θ through ρ̄ in
Λ1 M ⊗ End(E).
Let us compute the change of the curvature tensor when the connection changes: Let
0
∇ := ∇ + θ be another connection on E, where θ ∈ C∞ (Λ1 (E)). Then d∇ = d∇ + θ ∧ ·,
0
therefore
0
(d∇ )2 s = d∇ (d∇ s + θs) + θ ∧ (d∇ s + θs) = (d∇ )2 s + d∇ θs − θ ∧ ∇s + θ ∧ ∇s + θ ∧ θs.
the last term is not zero, even if θ is a 1–form with values in End(E); this is because
End(E) is not commutative. We get
0 1
R∇ = R∇ + d∇ θ + [θ, θ]. (10)
2
Remark 5.18. The gauge transformation law of the curvature form Ω is, for a gauge
transformation φ̄ : M → AD(P )
Ω0 := φ∗ Ω = Adφ̄−1 Ω,
which is, of course, the transformation law of a section in Λ2 ⊗ Ad(P ).
6. Yang-Mills theory
and by h on AdP .
For non-compact groups and (M, g) pseudo-Riemannian, we need to reformulate the
above integral: on g, we replace the positive-definite scalar product h0 with a non-
degenerate Ad-invariant symmetric form B (not all Lie groups admit such a form, how-
ever a large class – including GL(n, R), GL(n, C), SO(n, 1), the latter being the group
of oiented automorphisms of the Minkowski space – does), and we replace the metric
induced by g on Λk M with a non-degenerate scalar product. For the latter, it is useful
to introduce the Hodge star operator
∗ : Λk M → Λn−k M
on an oriented, pseudo-Riemannian n-manifold. As the definition is fiberwise, it is
enough to define the ∗ operator for an oriented vector space V , on which a scalar
product g of signature (p, q) (where p + q = n) has been fixed:
Let e1 , ..., ep , ep+1 , ..., en be an oriented orthonormal basis of V ∗ , such that
0, i 6= j
g(ei , ej ) = 1, i = j ≤ p
−1, i = j > p
7. Chern-Weil theory
Definition 7.1. Let g be the Lie algebra of the Lie group G. An (ad-)invariant polyno-
mial Q : g → C, resp. an (ad-)invariant symmetric multilinear form S : g ⊗ . . . ⊗ g −→
C, such that
Q(Adg A) = Q(A), ∀A ∈ g, g ∈ G,
resp. that
S(Adg A, . . . , Adg Ak ) = S(A1 , . . . , Ak ), ∀Ai ∈ g, g ∈ G.
Let E → M be a vector bundle with fiber V and (this holds for the other examples of
Lie groups above) let S be an invariant symmetric multilinear form on End(V ). Then
S induces a multilinear bundle map
S E : End(E) ⊗ . . . ⊗ End(E) → C,
given, in a frame f ∈ GL(E), by
S f (A1 , . . . , Ak ) := S(Af1 , . . . , Afk ),
where Afj is the element in End(E) defined by Aj ∈ g and the frame f . The invariance
of S ensures that S f is independent of the frame and hence S E is well-defined.
By using again the sheaf isomorphism
C∞ (Λ∗ (End(E))) ' C∞ (Λ∗ M ) ⊗C∞ (M ) End(E)
we extend S E to a multilinear map
S E : Λ∗ (End(E))⊗k → Λ∗ M,
S E (α1 ⊗ A1 , . . . , αk ⊗ Ak ) := α1 ∧ . . . ∧ αk · S E (A1 , . . . .Ak ),
forall Aj ∈ End(E), αj ∈ Λ∗ M.
We can also define P E (α) := S E (α, . . . , α) ∈ Λkp M , α ∈ Λp (End(E)), where P is the
polynomial associated to the symmetric multilinear map S.
Theorem 7.3. (Chern-Weil) Let E → M be a vector bundle with fiber V , associated
to a G-principal bundle P . Let Q be an invariant polynomial on g of degree k and ∇ a
G-connection on E, with curvature K ∇ . Then the 2k–form QE (K ∇ ) ∈ C∞ (Λ2k M ) ⊗ C
is closed, and its class in the de Rham cohomology group H 2k (M, C) is independent of
∇.
Proof. We proceed by induction over the sum of all degrees of the forms αj , that we
suppose to be arranged such that p1 ≤ · · · ≤ pk . For all pj = 0 the claimed formula is
just the covariant derivative of
S E (A1 , . . . , Ak ),
for Aj ∈ Ad(P ), where we note that S E is induced by a constant element of Hom(g⊗k , C),
therefore its derivative vanishes.
Suppose nowPthe claim is true for any αj ∈ C ∞ (Λpj (Ad(P ))) such that the sum of
the degrees is pj = ≥ 0 and let now αj0 := αj for 1 ≤ j < k and αk0 = αk ∧ β ∈
∞ pk +1
C (Λ (Ad(P ))), where β is a 1–form on M . If we show that the claim holds for
S and for all α1 , . . . αk−1 , αk0 as above and every 1–form β, then (again using that
C ∞ (Λp+1 (Ad(P ))) = C ∞ (Λ1 M ) ⊗ C ∞ (Λp (Ad(P ))) as a sheaf), the claim will be proven
for + 1.
24 FLORIN BELGUN
Note that
S E (α1 , . . . , αk0 ) = S E (α1 , . . . , αk ) ∧ β,
thus
dS E (α1 , . . . , αk0 ) =
k
X
= (−1)j S E (α1 , . . . , d∇ αj , . . . , αk ) ∧ β + (−1)−1 S E (α1 , . . . , αk ) ∧ dβ =
j=1
k−1
X
= (−1)j S E (α1 , . . . , d∇ αj , . . . , αk0 ) + (−1)k S E (α1 , . . . , d∇ αk0 ).
j=1
is the integral in t of the forms β t found above. ChS(∇0 , ∇1 ) := β is called the rela-
tive Chern-Simons form of the connections ∇0 and ∇1 , corresponding to the invariant
polynomial Q of order k.
GAUGE THEORY 25
Corollary 7.5. (Chern classes) Let E → M be a complex vector bundle and let Ck be
the homogeneous polynomial of order k in the invariant (non-homogeneous) polynomial
A
expression A 7→ det(Id + 2πi ). Let ∇ be a connection on E. Then the cohomology
classes
cRk (E) := CkE (K ∇ )
are real, i.e. the above forms represent cohmology classes cRk (E) ∈ H 2k (M, R), called
the (real) Chern classes of E. Denote by c(E) := 1 + c1 (E) + c2 (E) + ... ∈ H ∗ (M, R)
the total Chern class of E → M .
Remark 7.6. The classes cRk (E) defined above are actually induced by the integer
Chern classes ck (E) ∈ H 2k (M, Z), defined in algebraic topology [2].
Proof. It suffices to consider a particular connection and show that the resulting form
CkE (K ∇ ) is a real 2k–form.
We consider a hermitian metric on E and take ∇ a hermitian connection. Then its
curvature will be a 2–form with values in End(E), actually in the subspace (or rather,
Lie subalgebra) of antihermitian endomorphisms of E. This space is isomorphic, via an
unitary frame f : U × V → E|U (a frame that is a unitary isomorphism on the fibers),
to the space of antihermitian matrices u(V ) ⊂ End(V ).
What we need to show is that Ck (iA) ∈ R, for any antihermitian matrix A. But iA
1 1
is hermitian and Id + 2πi A too, therefore det(Id + 2πi A) is real, and so must be all its
homogeneous components.
Proposition 7.7. Let T → γ̇ 1 be the tautologic line bundle: ∀p ∈ γ̇ 1 , Tp := p ⊂ C2 . .
Then the integral over γ̇ 1 of first Chern class of T is equal to −1.
8. Characteristic classes
Definition 8.1. A (real) characteristic class q associated to the Lie group G is a map2
from the space PG of G-principal bundles on a manifold M with values in the de Rham
cohomology H ∗ (M, R) such that, for every G-bundle P → M and any smooth (contin-
uous) map f : N → M , we have q(f ∗ P ) = f ∗ q(P ).
Remark 8.2. One can define integer or Z2 characteristic classes, by considering ap-
propriate cohomology theories [2]. In fact most characteristic classes that we construct
here are realizations of integer characteristic classes.
It is clear that the Chern-Weil theory constructs characteristic classes out of invariant
polynomials. The theory of classifying spaces shows that the converse is true: every real
characteristic class is obtained from an invariant polynomial by the Chern-Weil theory.
2functor
26 FLORIN BELGUN
One of the main invariant polynomial (power series) on u(n) is the Chern character
poynomial (power series)
n
! n
!
X X 1
CHkn := exj = (1 + xj + xj 2 + ...) .
j=1
j=1
2
deg≤k (deg≤k)
The subscript (deg ≤ k) means that we truncate the corresponding power series at
degree k (CH n or CH∞
n
is the non truncated power series). For example:
1
CH2n = n + C1 + (C12 − 2C2 ).
2
Exercise 8.6. Show that, if A ∈ u(n), then
CH(A) = tr(exp(A)),
An
P
where the exponential is defined by the series exp(A) = k∈N n! (for n = 0 we set
A0 := Id).
In other words, the total Chern polynomial is multiplicative w.r.t. direct sums, and
the Chern character polynomial is additive w.r.t. direct sums, and multiplicative w.r.t.
tensor products.
Thus implies that, for complex vector bundles E, F on M , we have
c(E) ∧ c(F ) = c(E ⊕ F ); ch(E ⊕ F ) = ch(E) + ch(F ); ch(E ⊗ F ) = ch(E) ∧ ch(F ).
For a complex line bundle L on M , we have
ch(L) = 1 + c1 (L).
Let us determine the rings of invariant polynomials for SU(n), O(n) and SO(n):
Proposition 8.11. R[su(n)]SU(n) ' R[C2 , C3 , ..., Cn ].
Idea of proof: Clearly, all invariant polynomials on u(n) induce ones on su(n), and
C1 (essentially the trace) vanishes on su(n). One also shows that all polynomials on
su(n) can be extended to u(n).
For the real orthogonal group, note that O(n) = GL(n, R) ∩ U(n), the intersection
taking place inside GL(n, C). As in the case of SU(n), it can be shown that all O(n)-
invariant polynomials on so(n) (the Lie algebra of O(n), but also of SO(n), the connected
component of id ∈ O(n)) can be extended to U(n)-invariant polynomials on u(n). It
1
is also easy to see that Ck |so(n) = 0 if k is odd: the eigenvalues of 2πi A, for a generic
matrix A ∈ so(n) ⊂ u(n), are pairwise opposite real numbers
{x1 , −x1 , ..., x[ n2 ] , −x[ n2 ] } for n even, or {x1 , −x1 , ..., x[ n2 ] , −x[ n2 ] , 0} for n odd,
where [ n2 ] is the integer part of n2 , thus A and −A are conjugate to each other by some
matrix in O(n). Therefore, Q(A) = Q(−A) for every O(n)-invariant polynomial on
so(n), which implies that all invariant polynomials contain only terms of even degree.
These facts can be summarized as follows:
Proposition 8.12. R[so(n)]O(n) = R[x21 , ..., x2[n ] ] = R[P1 , ..., P[ n2 ] ], where
2
j
Pj := (−1) C2j |so(n)
are the Pontryagin polynomials.
Exercise 8.13. Using Exercise 8.4 show that, for A ∈ so(n), P1 (A) = − 8π1 2 trA2 .
It can easily be shown that, for odd n, the O(n)-invariant polynomials on so(n) are
also SO(n)-invariant, thus
Proposition 8.14. Let n be odd. Then R[so(n)]SO(n) = R[x21 , ..., x2[n ] } = R[P1 , ..., P[ n2 ] }.
2
On the other hand, for n even, there is another SO(n)-invariant polynomial on so(n):
Definition 8.15. Let n := 2k and A ∈ so(n) ' Λ2 (Rn ). Then A ∧ ... ∧ A (k times)
is a 2k-form on Rn , thus a volume form. It is thus a real multiple of the standard,
SO(n)-invariant volume form on Rn voln . We define the Pfaffian Pf : so(n) → R as
A ∧ ... ∧ A
Pf (A) := .
n!(2π)n voln
The caharcteristic class induced on a real, oriented vector bundle E of rank 2k over
a manifold M by the Pfaffian on so(2k) is a cohomology class in H 2k (M, R) called the
Euler class of E.
Exercise 8.16. Show that Pf (BAB −1 ) = det B · Pf (A), for all B ∈ O(n), and if
{x1 , −x1 , ..., xk , −xk } are the eigenvalues of 2πiA, corresponding to an oriented basis
{e1 , ..., en } of Rn (more precisely, an eigenvector for the eigenvalue 2πixj is e2j−1 + ie2j ,
and an eigenvector for the eigenvalue −2πixj is e2j−1 − ie2j ), then Pf (A) = x1 · ... · xk .
Proposition 8.17. Let n := 2k. Then R[so(n)]SO(n) = R[x21 , ..., x2k , x1 · ... · xk } =
R[P1 , ..., Pk−1 , Pf ].
Remark 8.18. One can show in general (Th. Chevalley) that the ring of Ad-invariant
polynomials on a compact Lie algebra is a polynomial ring generated by a finite number
of such invariant polynomials.
Proof. If we decompose K ∇ = K+∇ + K−∇ in the SD, resp. ASD parts, we have:
B(K ∇ ∧ ∗K ∇ ) = −tr(K+∇ ∧ K+∇ ) + tr(K−∇ ∧ K−∇ ) = kK+∇ k2 + kK−∇ k2 ,
because the wedge product of a SD form with an ASD one is always zero. On the other
hand, applying the first Pontryagin polynomial to K ∇ (and using Exercise 8.13) yields:
1 1
P1 (K ∇ ) = 2 tr K ∇ ∧ K ∇ = 2 kK+∇ k2 − kK−∇ k2 .
8π 8π
The result follows by integration. (Note that ∇ is SD, resp. ASD, iff K−∇ , resp. K+∇
identically vanishes.)
30 FLORIN BELGUN
We can define, using the Chern-Weil Theorem, classes in some more special coho-
mology groups, for example: Let M be noncompact and consider only G-bundles with
compact support, i.e. G-bundles p : P → M , such that there exists a compact set K
and a trivialization of P on M r K. We can then consider the space of G-connections
∇ on P with compact support, i.e. ∇ on p−1 (M r K) is the trivial connection (given
by the fixed trivialization of P over M r K. A version “with compact support” of the
Chern-Weil theorem states then that, for every invariant polynomial Q on g, the in-
j
duced differential forms Q(K ∇ ), j = 1, 2, for ∇1 , ∇2 connections with compact support
as above, are
(1) with compact support contained in K (they vanish outside K)
(2) the relative Chern-Simons form ChS(∇1 , ∇2 ) also has compact support.
This implies that every invariant polynomial Q on g defines, for such G-bundles with
compact support on M , a cohomology class
[Q(K ∇ )] ∈ Hc∗ (M, R),
the cohomology with compact support on M .
Another version of the Chern-Weil Theorem will be needed for the Atiyah-Singer
Index Theorem, where cohomology classes on the total space of a vector bundle (the
tangent bundle) T → M are needed.
Definition 9.1. Let
σ
(σ) ... → Fi →i Fi+1 → ...
be a finite complex of vector bundles over T . We say that this complex has fiberwise
compact support (FCS) iff there exists a tubular neighborhood U ⊂ T of the zero
section M0 ⊂ T such that the sequence (σ) is exact when restricted to T r U .
Recall that a sequence of linear maps between vector bundles (σ) is called a complex
iff σi+1 ◦ σi = 0, ∀i ∈ Z. The complex is finite iff Fi 6= 0 only for finitely many i ∈ Z.
An open set U ⊃ M0 in T is tubular iff U ∩ Tx is relatively compact, ∀x ∈ M .
Example 9.2. If the complex only contains 2 non-zero terms, F0 and F1 , then it is
FCS iff σ0 is a vector bundle isomorphism outside a tubular neighborhood U ⊃ M0 .
Exercise 9.3. Let hi be Hermitean metrics on the vector bundles Fi (we need in the
sequel only the case when Fi are complex vector bundles). Then the linear maps σi∗ :
Fi+1 → Fi are the adjoint maps to σi :
hi (σi∗ (yi+1 ), yi )) = hi+1 (yj+1 , σi (yi )), ∀yi ∈ Fi , yi+1 ∈ Fi+1 .
Consider a sequence (σ) of linear maps between vector bundles as above. Show that:
(1) (σ) is a complex iff the adjoint sequence (σ ∗ ) is a complex, and that (σ ∗∗ ) ' (σ).
(2) (σ) is exact over U ⊃ M0 iff (σ ∗ ) is exact over U iff the map σeven ⊕ σodd ∗
:
Feven → Fodd is a isomorphism over U of the vector bundles
M M
Feven := F2j , Fodd := F2j−1 ,
j∈Z j∈Z
∗ ∗
σeven ⊕ σodd (..., y2j , ...) := (..., σ2j−2 (y2j−2 ) + σ2j−1 (y2j ), ...).
GAUGE THEORY 31
(3) On an open set where (σ) is exact, the subspaces ker σi ⊂ Fi and σi (Fi ) ⊂ Fi+1
are vector subbundles (i.e. they have constant rank).
Definition 9.4. Let (σ) be a finite complex with FCS on T as above. A set of linear
connections (∇) := (∇i )i∈Z is called admissible or with fiberwise compact support (FCS)
iff there exists a tubular neighborhood U ⊃ M0 such that (σ) is exact over T r U and
(1) there exists a set (h) of Hermitean metrics on the bundles (Fi )i∈Z such that
∇i hi = 0 and σi (Fi−1 ) are ∇i -stable, ∀i ∈ Z
where Λif c T are the i-forms on T whose support is contained in a tubular neighborhood
of M0 . These forms are called differential forms with fiberwise compact support.
Remark 9.5. Note that a closed form with FCS which has vanishing FCS cohomology
class iff it is the derivative on an FCS form (being exact is also not enough, it needs a
primitive with FCS).
Theorem 9.6 (Chern-Weil theorem for complexes with FCS). Let (σ) a finite complex
of vector bundles, with FCS, on the total space T of a vector bundle over M
(1) For every admissible set of connections (∇) on (σ), the differential form
i
X
ch0 (∇) := (−1)i CH(K ∇ )
i∈Z
as products of k germs in mx or, equivalently, the space of germs that vanish up to order
k − 1 at x, i.e.
f ∈ mx ⇔ f (x) = 0, df (x) = 0, ..., dk−1 f (x) = 0,
where note that the derivative of order l at x, dl f (x) is well-defined (without using
coordinates) as long as the previous derivatives at x vanish.
Remark 10.1. We have Fx /mx ' R (if we take real-valued functions, if we take
k−1 ∗
complex-valued functions we need to tensorize all relations with C), mk−1 k
x /mx ' S Tx M ,
1 2
in particular Λx M = mx /mx .
Quotienting out by mkx means “ignoring” the derivatives of higher order than k − 1.
Remark 10.2. One defines the jet bundle on M as the vector bundle J k M on M whose
fibers are Fx /mk+1
x . The construction of jet bundles can be made precise by glueing local
trivial parts (for chart domains) by k-order derivatives of the coordinate changes (the
formulas are complicated).
If we compose two linear differential operators, their orders add up, if we add two
linear differential operators D1 + D2 , the order is at most the maximum of the two
orders (like the degree of polynomials). In the first case, the symbols are composed
σ D1 ◦D2 (λ) = σ D1 (λ) ◦ σ D2 (λ) (here, and from now on, we write the multiple argument
λ ∈ T ∗ M only once), and if the polynomials D1 and D2 have the same order, their
symbols add up (possibly resulting zero, i.e. D1 + D2 has smaller order) or, if the order
of D1 is larger than the order of D2 , then σ D1 +D2 = σ D1 .
It is useful to consider complexes of differential operators
Definition 10.7. A sequence of linear differential operators
D Dk+1
... → C ∞ (Ek ) →k C ∞ (Ek+1 ) → C ∞ (Ek+2 ) → ...
is a complex iff Dk+1 ◦ Dk = 0, ∀k ∈ Z. Such a complex is called elliptic iff the
corresponding sequence of symbols
σ Dk (λ) σ Dk+1 (λ) σ Dk+2 (λ)
... → Ek → Ek+1 → Ek+2 → ...
is exact for all λ ∈ T ∗ M non-zero.
Remark 10.8. If the sequence contains only two non-trivial bundles, say E0 and E1 ,
then the corresponding complex is elliptic iff D0 : C ∞ (E0 ) →: C ∞ (E1 ) is an elliptc
differential operator in the usual sense.
Example 10.9. The de Rham complex
d d d
... → C ∞ (Λk M ) → C ∞ (Λk+1 M ) → ...
is elliptic.
Theorem 10.11. Let M be a compact manifold and (D) = (Di )i∈Z a finite elliptic
complex of linear differential operators on vector bundles over M . Then the quotient
spaces ker Di /ImDi−1 are finite dimensional. Denote by
X
ind(D) := (−1)i dim (ker Di /ImDi−1 )
i∈Z
The Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem gives a formula for the index of D uniquely in
terms of the topological properties of the symbol.
Let us first describe the relevant topological objects:
(1) Let (D) be an elliptic complex. Then the symbol determines a complex of vector
bundles
σ(Di−1 ) σ(Di ) σ(Di+1 )
(σ(D)) ... → π ∗ Ei → π ∗ Ei+1 → ...
over the total space of the cotangent bundle π : T ∗ M → M , which has FCS,
because of the ellipticity of (D). We will, however, identify T M with T ∗ M ,
because they are isomorphic bundles.
(2) Using admissible sets of connections on the bundles Fi := π ∗ Ei , the pull-backs
to T ∗ M of the bundles Ei , we can define the Chern character ch0 (σ(D)) of the
complex (σ(D)) (see Theorem 9.6).
(3) Consider T ∗ M as an oriented manifold as follows: if e1 , ..., en is a basis of Tx M ,
and e∗1 , ..., e∗n is the dual basis of Tx∗ M , then e1 , e∗1 , ..., en , e∗n defines an oriented
basis for the tangent space in α ∈ Tx∗ M of T ∗ M .
Theorem 10.12 (Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem). Let M be an even-dimensional3 man-
ifold and (D) be an elliptic complex with symbol (σ D ). Then it holds
Z
ind(D) = ch0 (σ(D)) ∧ π ∗ td(T M ⊗ C),
TM
for the above defined orientation of T M . The integration convention is that only the
homogeneous component of degree 2n in the right hand side is integrated over T M , all
other components are ignored.
The Index Theorem is already a spectacular result, because it states that two numbers
are equal, one coming from an analytic problem (“counting” the solutions of some
differential equations), the other from a topological one, that only involves the symbol
of the operator. Sometimes it is not obvious at all that the number from the right hand
side should be an integer, but this obviously follows from the Index Theorem.
However, there are many examples where the right hand side of the Index Theorem
can be simplified even further, so that in the end only the bundles (Ei ) matter (the
reference to the σ(D) totally vanishes)!
This happens if the symbol complex (σ(D)) is an universal complex:
3one can show that the index of a differential operator on an odd-dimensional manifold is always
zero
GAUGE THEORY 35
The universality of the symbol is satisfied by most differential operators that appear
in geometry, when they are determined by the structure of the the manifold M .
The idea of reducing an integration of a form with FCS on T M to an integral on M
is the Thom isomorphism:
Theorem 11.3 (Thom isomorphism). Let π : T → M be an oriented real vector bundle
of rank k over a manifold M . There exists a unique cohomology class U in Hfkc (T, R)
(cohomology with fiberwise compact support) such that
Z
U = 1, ∀x ∈ M.
Ex
(1) the wedge product with U of the pull-back π ∗ is an isomorphism of H ∗ (M, R)-
modules
ψ : H ∗ (M, R) → Hf∗+k
c (T, R), ψ(α) := U ∧ π ∗ α,
called the Thom isomorphism.
(2) The restriction of U to the zero section M0 ⊂ T , or its pull-back through the
inclusion i : M → T of the zero section, is the Euler class e(T ) of the real vector
bundle T → M .
(the sign (−1)n/2 is due to the fact that the orientation of T M needed for the Index
Theorem is different from the orientation coming from the Thom isomorphism).
The details of the following examples can be found in [4]:
which is divisible by Pf = x1 ...xn , because xi are clearly zeros of the above polynomial
(power series). Denote by Qd the corresponding quotient polynomial. The formula for
Qd · T D is very simple: it is
n
Y n
Y
xi −xi
(1 − e )(1 − e ) xk (−xk )
k=1 k=1
· n = (−1)n Pf .
x1 ...xn Y
(1 − exi )(1 − e−xi )
k=1
Thus Z Z
n n ∇
χ(M ) = ind(d) = (−1) (−1) Pf (K ) = e(T M ),
M M
which is a well-known fact: the Euler characteristic χ(M ), which is the alternated sum
of the Betti numbers dim H i (M, R), is equal to the integral of the Euler class.
38 FLORIN BELGUN
11.2. The signature operator. . The de Rham complex is equivalent, via Hodge
theory, to the following operator
d + δ : C ∞ (Λeven M ) → C ∞ (Lodd M ),
where δ is the adjoint of d for a fixed Riemannian metric. If we denote by D := d + δ :
C ∞ (Λ∗ M ) → C ∞ (L∗ M ), then D is clearly self-adjoint, so its index is zero. But if we
restrict D to the bundles Λeven and Lodd as above, then its index is not trivial and is
equal to the Euler characeristic.
But we can restrict D to some other subbundles of Λ∗ M , as follows: recall that, on
an oriented, even-dimensional manifold M 2n , the Hodge star operator has the property
∗2 |Λk M = (−1)k Id,
so it is almost an involution. The following linear operator, defined on the complexified
space Λ∗ M ⊗ C is an involution (exercise!, use Proposition 6.1):
τ (α) := ik(k+1)+n ∗ α, ∀α ∈ Λk M ⊗ C.
Exercise 11.4. Check that D ◦ τ = −τ ◦ D.
thus
ind(D+ ) = dimC (Hn (M ) ⊗ C) ∩ (Λn M ⊗ C)+ −dimC (Hn (M ) ⊗ C) ∩ (Λn M ⊗ C)− .
If n (half of the dimension of M ) is odd, then τ : Λn → Λn has its square equal to –Id,
thus the eigenspaces of τ are conjugated to each other. Moreover, every real harmonic
n-form α defines harmonic forms α ± τ (α) ∈ ((Hn (M ) ⊗ C) ∩ (Λn M ⊗ C)± ), and thus
the index of D+ is zero.
If n is even (thus dim M is divisible by 4), then τ coincides with ∗ on Λn M and the
eigenspaces of τ are real, thus
n n
ind(D+ ) = dim H+ (M ) − dim H− (M ),
n
(here H± (M ) := Hn (M ) ∩ L± (M )) which is the signature of the intersection form
q : H n (M ) × H n (M ) → R, q(α, β) := ∗(α ∧ β).
GAUGE THEORY 39
Noet that, for even n, q is bilinear and symmetric, and it induces on Hn (M ) a bilinear
n n
symmetric form which restricted to H+ (M ) is positive-definite, and restricted to H− (M )
is negative-definite.
The signature of an oriented manifold of dimension 4k (equal, by definition, to the
signature of its intersection form) is thus equal to the index of D+ .
To compute this index, we need to compute
CH(Λ+ − Λ− ),
where Λ± are the corresponding complex representations of SO(2n). It is useful, at this
point, not to restrict to even n.
Lemma 11.5. If V1 , V2 are evendimensional oriented real vector spaces, then
Λ+ (V1 ⊕ V2 ) = Λ+ (V1 ) ⊗ Λ+ (V2 ) ⊕ Λ− (V1 ) ⊗ Λ− (V2 ) ,
thus
CH(Λ+ − Λ− )(V1 ⊕ V2 ) = CH(Λ+ − Λ− )(V1 ) · CH(Λ+ − Λ− )(V2 ).
Proof. The first part (the relations between Λ± of V1 , V2 and V1 ⊕V2 ) is left as an exercise.
For the second part note that block matrices A1 ⊕ A2 ∈ so(V1 ⊕ V2 ), made of the two
blocks Ai ∈ so(Vi ), cover all conjugacy classes of so(V1 ⊕ V2 ) under the adjoint action of
SO(V1 ⊕ V2 ) (Note: this only happens because Vi are both even-dimensional). Therfore,
the Chern character polynomial of the difference (Λ+ − Λ− )(V1 ⊕ V2 ) is determined by
evaluating this polynomial on such block matrices.
The last step in computing CH(Λ+ − Λ− )(R2n ) is thus to compute it for n = 1, where
it can by done by direct computation: Take e1 , e2 an oriented ONB of R2 , such that
e1 ± ie2 ∈ R2 ⊗ C is a basis of eigenvectors of A for the eigenvalues ±2πix. Then
1 + ie1 ∧ e2 , e1 + ie2
forms a basis of eigenvectors for the action of A on Λ+ (R2 ) (the eigenvalues are zero,
resp 2πix), and
1 − ie1 ∧ e2 , e1 − ie2
forms a basis of eigenvectors of A on Λ− (R2 ), for the eigenvalues 0, resp. −2πix. The
Chern character power series, evaluated on A yields
CH(Λ+ − Λ− )(A) = 1 + ex − (1 + e−x ) = ex − e−x ,
thus the Chern character power series on Λ+ − Λ− , evaluated on a matrix A ∈ so(2n),
with eigenvalues {±2πixk }k=1,...,n , is equal to
n
Y
−
+
CH(Λ − Λ )(A) = (exk − e−xk ),
k=1
This power series will be denoted with L ∈ R[[so(2n)]]SO(2n) (it is an invariant power
series, but we can truncate it to obtain invariant polynomials).
x
Now, the analytic function tanh x
is even, and its Taylor expansion starts with
x 1
= 1 + x2 + h.o.t.,
tanh x 3
therefore we can conclude that, for a 4-dimensional , oriented manifold, its signature is
Z
p1 (M )
sign(M ) = ,
M 3
because one-third of P1 = x21 + x22 is the only term of order 2 (that corresponds to a
4-form via Chern-Weil theory) in the integrand
x1 x2
x21 x2 x2 + x22
22 2 2
= 4(1 + + h.o.t.)(1 + 2 + h.o.t.) = 4 + 1 + h.o.t. (16)
tanh x21 tanh x22 12 12 3
In general, one defines the L-genus of a manifold to be the (characteristic) cohomology
class represented by L(K ∇ ), for ∇ an SO(2n)-connection on T M . We have obtained
Theorem 11.6 (Hirzebruch’s signature Theorem). The signature of a 4k-dimensional,
oriented, compact manifold M is equal to its L-genus integrated on M .
Remark 11.7. It is clear that the L-genus is a polynomial expression in the Pontryagin
classes of M , with rational coefficients. It is a priori not obvious that the L-genus is
an integer cohomology class; for higher dimensions the denominators in the polynomial
expressions of L in terms of the Pontryagin classes grow very fast, see [4].
We have seen in Proposition 8.20 that SD and ASD connections on a compact oriented
Riemannian manifold M , if they exist, are absolute minimizers of the Yang-Mills func-
tional. In this section we briefly describe a famous theorem of Atiyah-Hitchin-Singer [1]
that describes, under some conditions, the moduli space of such connections:
The idea is to consider the space (in general, it is infinite-dimensional) of SD connec-
tions on a given principal G-bundle P → M , then to consider its orbit space w.r.t. the
action of the gauge group, which is the (infinite-dimensional) “Lie” group of gauge equiv-
alences. This quotient space is a topological space called the moduli space MSD (M, P )
of SD connections on P . It is a priori not clear that it Hausdorff or if it is (at least
piecewise) a smooth, finite-dimensional manifold.
Theorem 12.1. (Atiyah-Hitchin-Singer [1]) Let M be a compact Riemannain manifold
of self-dual type and with positive scalar curvature. Then the moduli space MSD
0 (M, P )
of irreducible self-dual connections on a given G-bundle (G is a compact semisimple Lie
group) P → M is either empty, or it is a smooth, Hausdorff, manifold of real dimension
Z
SD
dim M0 (M, P ) = p1 (AdP ) − (χ(M ) − sign(M )) dim G.
M
A compact semisimple Lie group is a compact Lie group with trivial, or discrete center
(e.g. SU(k), whose center is given by the k-th rooths of unity, is seminismple, U(k) is
not, because its center is U(1) acting on Ck diagonally).
GAUGE THEORY 41
In this case, a connection is irreducible iff AdP admits no local ∇-parallel section
(if G had a non-trivial center, then g would contain non-trivial Ad-invariant elements,
which would define non-trivial global ∇-parallel sections for every G-connection).
Finally, recall that the Riemann curvature tensor R of a manifold can be seen as a
symmetric linear map from Λ2 M → Λ2 M . If dim M = 4, the 2-forms on M decompose
in SD, resp ADS parts, thus R admits a block decomposition as a symmetric map
R : Λ2+ M ⊕ Λ2− M → Λ2+ M ⊕ Λ2− M,
and the components in End(Λ2± ) are symmetric, and the trace of each of these com-
ponents is equal to Scal6
, where Scal is the scalar curvature of M . By definition, a
manifold is self-dual if the component of R in End(Λ2+ ) reduces to this diagonal part
(the algebraic components of R depend, in general, on the Ricci tensor and the Weyl
tensors of M , [1]).
Proof. The proof is involved and only few ideas will be explained here. For a well-
prepared reader, the best reference for the proof is the original paper [1]. The proof has
3 main steps:
(1) infinitesimal (where a computation of the virtual tangent space of MSD 0 (M, P )
SD
at a point ∇ ∈ M0 (M, P ) is made)
(2) local (where it is shown that the virtual vectors from the first step correspond to
local deformations (curves in MSD 0 (M, P ) starting in ∇), thus providing local
smooth charts)
(3) global (where it is shown that the topological space MSD 0 (M, P ) is Hausdorff
and thus a smooth manifold)
We only give some details of the first step: for this, we fix ∇ an SD connection and
construct an elliptic complex
∇ d∇
−
(D) 0 → C ∞ (AdP ⊗ C) → C ∞ (Λ1 M ⊗ AdP ⊗ C) → C ∞ (Λ2− M ⊗ AdP ⊗ C) → 0,
(17)
where d∇
− is the ASD-part of d∇
, the covariant exterior differential
d∇ : C ∞ (Λ1 M ⊗ AdP ) → C ∞ (Λ2 M ⊗ AdP ).
The fact that (D) is indeed a complex is due to the fact that
d∇ ◦ ∇ = K ∇ ·, thus d∇ ∇
− (∇(s)) = K− · s = 0,
ker d∇
− /Im∇,
i.e. the middle cohmology term of (17). In order to show that its dimension (which is
finite because the complex (17) is elliptic) is exactly equal to minus the index of (D),
we need to show that the other two cohomology terms vanish.
For the term in H 0 , which is simply ker ∇, this is implied by the fact that ∇ is
irreducible, because ker ∇ is exactly the space of ∇-parallel sections of AdP .
For the term in H 2 , which is cokerd∇
− , this is implied by the conditions on the Rie-
mannian manifold M : self-dual and with positive scalar curvature. We refer the reader
to [1] for details.
We still need to compute the index of (D); this is done with the Index Theorem: we
need to compute the quotient of the Chern character polynomial of (Λ0 − Λ1 + Λ2− ),
which is one half of the difference of
CH(Λ0 − Λ1 + (Λ2− + Λ2+ ) − Λ3 − Λ4 ) = CH(2Λ0 − 2Λ1 + (Λ2− + Λ2+ )) and
CH((Λ0 + Λ4 )+ + (Λ1 + Λ3 )+ + Λ2+ − (Λ0 + Λ4 )− − (Λ1 + Λ3 )− − Λ2− = CH(Λ2+ − Λ2− ).
GAUGE THEORY 43
The first line above corresponds to the computation for the de Rham complex and the
second for the signature operator. Therefore, the integrand (recall that the integrand
also contains the Todd class) for the non-twisted elliptic complex
d d−
(D0 ) 0 → C ∞ (M ) → C ∞ (Λ1 M )C ∞ (M ) → C ∞ (Λ2− M ) → 0
is half of the difference of the integrands for the de Rham complex and for the signature
operator, i.e.,
1 1
(Pf − L) = −2 + (χ(M ) − sign(M ))volM ,
2 2
where we have only written the 0 degree term, which is 12 (0 − 4) = −2, and the term of
degree 4, which is the result of the R integral (hence the index of (D0 )) times the volume
element of M (chosen such that M volM = 1). Recall the formula for L from (16).
For the twisted complex (17), we need to multiply this integrand with the Chern
character of AdP ⊗ C, which is
1 1
ch(AdP ⊗C) = rank(AdP ⊗C)+c1 (AdP ⊗C)+ (c21 −c2 )(AdP ⊗C) = dim G+ p1 (AdP ).
2 2
Here again, we have only considered the terms of degree at most 4.
We conclude
Z
1
ind(D) = − dim G(χ(M ) − sign(M )).
p1 (AdP ) +
M 2
As the index of D is equal to minus the dimension of the virtal tangent space, we
conclude (assuming the steps 2 and 3 of the proof – see [1]) that MSD
0 (M, P ) is a
smooth manifold of dimension
Z
1
p1 (AdP ) − dim G(χ(M ) − sign(M )),
M 2
as claimed.
Moreover, the round S 4 is not only seld-dual, but anti-self-dual as well, i.e. it it also
self-dual for the opposite orientation (in fact, S 4 is the only compact orientable manifold
with positive scalar curvature being at the same time self-dual and anti-self-dual), so
the conditions of the AHS theorem also apply for S 4 with opposite orientation. But SD
connections for this opposite orientation are ASD for the standard orientation, thus
Corollary 12.3. The moduli space of irreducible anti-self-dual connections on an SU(2)-
principal bundle of type k ∈ N over the round sphere S 4 is a smooth manifold of dimen-
sion −8k − 3.
44 FLORIN BELGUN
In fact, all these moduli spaces can be shown to be non-empty, if their dimension,
as given by the AHS theorem, is positive. For k = 1 there are explicit solutions of the
Yang-Mills self-dual equations covering all the moduli space.
Note that for k = 0 (the trivial bundle), all SD connections are automatically also
ASD, thus flat (the curvature vanishes identically). However, since S 4 is simply-
connected, this implies that it is a trivial connection, therefore non irreducible. So
MSD 4
0 (S , 0) = M0
ASD
(S 4 , 0) = ∅.
For k > 0, MSD 4
0 (S , k) is a smooth manifold as above and M0
ASD
(S 4 , k) = ∅ and for
k < 0, MASD
0 (S 4 , k) is a smooth manifold as above and MSD 4
0 (S , k) = ∅.
References
[1] M. Atiyah, N. Hitchin, I. Singer, Self-duality in 4-dimensional riemannian geometry. Proc. Roy.
Soc. London Series A., 362 (1978), 425-461.
[2] J. Milnor, Stasheff, Characteristic classes, Princeton Univ. Press, 1974
[3] H. Baum, Eichfeldtheorie, Springer 2009
[4] P. Shanahan, The Atiyah-Singer Index Theorem, LNM 638 (1978)