Peng Zhou

stream of notes

User Tools

Site Tools

You are here: Hi, welcome! » blog » 2023-07-16
blog:2023-07-16

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision		Previous revision
blog:2023-07-16 [2023/07/16 17:02] – created pzhoublog:2023-07-16 [2023/07/16 17:53] (current) – pzhou
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== 2023-07-16 ====== ====== 2023-07-16 ======
 +  * planning for the Coulomb branch
 +
 +===== planning =====
  
 Let me think about my desired statement first. What do I want to state in this section. Yes, I need to discuss about the geometry of the Coulomb branch in this section. What is my point? Don't be bind up by the setup, do your own setup. If I were to rewrite this paper, I would do this: immediately after the introduction, I will do the most important computation, 2 strands nilhecke, and the interaction ones. They can be stated without any reference to the Coulomb branches.  Let me think about my desired statement first. What do I want to state in this section. Yes, I need to discuss about the geometry of the Coulomb branch in this section. What is my point? Don't be bind up by the setup, do your own setup. If I were to rewrite this paper, I would do this: immediately after the introduction, I will do the most important computation, 2 strands nilhecke, and the interaction ones. They can be stated without any reference to the Coulomb branches. 
Line 10: Line 13:
  
  
 +==== Aside: do we care about codimension 2 guys? ====
 Question: suppose you have a Kahler manifold, that you only know very well up to complex codimension two loci, is that good enough to define a Fukaya category? Hmm, what does codimension two mean? It means that you start with a space, singular maybe, and you deleted something from it. Why it should not matter? Because when we define things, because a (complex) codimension 2 guy intersect a dimension 1 guy is a complex codimension 1 condition. And, when we build things in a family, like, checking associativity condition, one only need to build real one-dimensional disk moduli spaces, so it is OK. You will not see it.  Question: suppose you have a Kahler manifold, that you only know very well up to complex codimension two loci, is that good enough to define a Fukaya category? Hmm, what does codimension two mean? It means that you start with a space, singular maybe, and you deleted something from it. Why it should not matter? Because when we define things, because a (complex) codimension 2 guy intersect a dimension 1 guy is a complex codimension 1 condition. And, when we build things in a family, like, checking associativity condition, one only need to build real one-dimensional disk moduli spaces, so it is OK. You will not see it. 
  
-Well, if you say so, how do you define the Fukaya category of $T^*\P^1$, which is a resolution of the nilpotent cone of $sl_2$? The singularity downstairs is codimension 2. It is the tip of a cone. +Well, if you say so, how do you define the Fukaya category of $T^*\P^1$, which is a resolution of the nilpotent cone of $sl_2$? The singularity downstairs is codimension 2. It is the tip of a cone. In this case, you can certainly imagine a disk bounded by Lagrangian that run through the exceptional divisor. So, it would be a 'sin' to delete this seemingly harmless singularity part, unless we know that apriori, the original space is smooth.  
 + 
 +Answer: If the ambient space is smooth, then we don't care about codim 2 guy, no matter if it is smooth or not.  
 + 
 +==== Just write it. in 1 hour ==== 
 +10:53am now.  
 + 
 + 
 + 
 + 
 + 
 + 
  
  
blog/2023-07-16.1689526922.txt.gz · Last modified: 2023/07/16 17:02 by pzhou