Here the
story of an idea to construct new examples of non-commutative compact
manifolds, the computational difficulties one runs into and, when they
are solved, the white noise one gets. But, perhaps, someone else can
spot a gem among all gibberish…
[Qurves](https://lievenlb.local/toolkit/pdffile.php?pdf=/TheLibrary/papers/qaq.pdf) (aka quasi-free algebras, aka formally smooth
algebras) are the \’affine\’ pieces of non-commutative manifolds. Basic
examples of qurves are : semi-simple algebras (e.g. group algebras of
finite groups), [path algebras of
quivers](http://www.lns.cornell.edu/spr/2001-06/msg0033251.html) and
coordinate rings of affine smooth curves. So, let us start with an
affine smooth curve
qurve. First, we bring in finite groups. Let
acting on
hereditary orders). A more pompous way to phrase this is that these are
precisely the [one-dimensional smooth Deligne-Mumford
stacks](http://www.math.lsa.umich.edu/~danielch/paper/stacks.pdf).
As the 21-st century will turn out to be the time we discovered the
importance of non-Noetherian algebras, let us make a jump into the
wilderness and consider the amalgamated free algebra product
again a qurve on which
on
let
sending
group](http://mathworld.wolfram.com/SimpleGroup.html)
simple group has an involution, we have an embedding
compatible with the involution on the affine line. To study the
corresponding non-commutative manifold, that is the Abelian category
to compute the [one quiver to rule them
all](https://lievenlb.local/master/coursenotes/onequiver.pdf) for
connected components. The direct sum of representations turns the set of
all these components into an Abelian semigroup and the vertices of the
\’one quiver\’ correspond to the generators of this semigroup whereas
the number of arrows between two such generators is given by the
dimension of
may seem hard to compute but it can be reduced to the study of another
quiver, the Zariski quiver associated to
with on the left the \’one quiver\’ for
correspond to the two simples of
right the \’one quiver\’ for
many verticers as there are simple representations for
the number of arrows from a left- to a right-vertex is the number of
make matters even more concrete, let us consider the easiest example
when
Zariski quiver then turns out to be
calculate the dimensions of the EXt-spaces giving the number of arrows
in the \’one quiver\’ for
generators of the component semigroup we have to find the minimal
integral solutions to the pair of equations saying that the number of
simple
equal to that one the right-vertices. In this case it is easy to see
that there are as many generators as simple
having the first two components on the left)
info to determine the \’one quiver\’ for
result. Instead one obtains a complete graph on all vertices with plenty
of arrows. More precisely one obtains as the one quiver for
with the number of arrows (in each direction) indicated. Not very
illuminating, I find. Still, as the one quiver is symmetric it follows
that all quotient varieties
structure. Clearly, the above method can be generalized easily and all
examples I did compute so far have this \’nearly complete graph\’
feature. One might hope that if one would start with very special
curves and groups, one might obtain something more interesting. Another
time I\’ll tell what I got starting from Klein\’s quartic (on which the
simple group
to the sporadic simple Mathieu group
Tag: representations
Here is
the construction of this normal space or chart . The sub-semigroup of
(all
dimension vectors of Q) consisting of those vectors satisfying the numerical condition
is generated by six dimension vectors,
namely those of the 6 non-isomorphic one-dimensional solutions in
In
particular, in any component containing an open subset of
representations corresponding to solutions in we have a particular semi-simple solution
and in
particular . The normal space
to the -orbit of M in
can be identified with the representation
space where
and Q is the quiver of the following
form
and we can
even identify how the small matrices fit
into the block-decomposition of the base-change matrix B
Hence, it makes sense
to call Q the non-commutative normal space to the isomorphism problem in
. Moreover, under this correspondence simple
representations of Q (for which both the dimension vectors and
distinguishing characters are known explicitly) correspond to simple
solutions in .
Having completed our promised
approach via non-commutative geometry to the classification problem of
solutions to the braid relation, it is time to collect what we have
learned. Let with
, then for every
non-zero scalar the matrices
give a solution of size
n to the braid relation. Moreover, such a solution can be simple only if
the following numerical relations are satisfied
where indices are viewed
modulo 6. In fact, if these conditions are satisfied then a sufficiently
general representation of Q does determine a simple solution in and conversely, any sufficiently general simple n
size solution of the braid relation can be conjugated to one of the
above form. Here, by sufficiently general we mean a Zariski open (hence
dense) subset.
That is, for all integers n we have constructed
nearly all (meaning a dense subset) simple solutions to the braid
relation. As to the classification problem, if we have representants of
simple -dimensional representations of the quiver Q, then the corresponding
solutions of
the braid relation represent different orbits (up to finite overlap
coming from the fact that our linearizations only give an analytic
isomorphism, or in algebraic terms, an etale map). Such representants
can be constructed for low dimensional .
Finally, our approach also indicates why the classification of
braid-relation solutions of size is
easier : from size 6 on there are new classes of simple
Q-representations given by going round the whole six-cycle!