Alphabeta Math
PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedaudited 2026-09-22
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Complexification is conjugation invariant

Statement

Assume AC. Let B be a path-connected paracompact Hausdorff CW complex, let EB be a numerable real vector bundle with complexification EC=ERC, and let all complex bundles below be numerable bundles over B. Then:

  1. EC is canonically complex-linearly isomorphic to its conjugate EC;
  2. for every such complex vector bundle VB the conjugate bundle satisfies ci(V)=(1)ici(V)(i0).

Facts & Assumptions

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice is assumed, exactly as inherited from the bundle, splitting and metric suppliers (The Axiom of Choice).

[F1]

Conjugation, direct sums and pullback are given by their transition matrices (Whitney sum, tensor, dual, Hom, and exterior-power bundles, Real and complex topological vector bundles). Continuous linear transition cocycles glue vector bundles (Vector bundles are glued from transition cocycles).

[F2]

For a complex line L, c1(L)=c1(L), with LL when a Hermitian metric is chosen (First Chern class of tensor, dual, and conjugate lines).

[F3]

On CW bases Chern classes are natural, normalized on lines and multiplicative over Whitney sums (Naturality, normalization, and Whitney sum for Chern classes). A positive-rank complex bundle has a flag splitting with integral injective pullback and a CW-type total base (Complex splitting principle with integral injective pullback).

[F4]

Homotopic maps induce equal cohomology maps, so a homotopy equivalence induces a cohomology isomorphism (Homotopic maps induce equal maps in singular cohomology).

Proof

technique · direct

Given: AC, a real bundle EB and a complex bundle VB over a path-connected CW base.

1.1

Complexification is constructed by viewing the real transition matrices of E as complex matrices; the same cocycle and numeration define a complex vector bundle by [F1]. Its fibers identify with EbRC. The map φ:ECEC, vzvz, is complex-linear: φ(i(vz))=φ(viz)=viz=i(vz) while in the conjugate structure iφ(vz) is by definition i(vz); real balancing makes this tensor formula well defined. In every real bundle chart it is ordinary coordinate conjugation, which commutes with real transition matrices. It and its inverse are continuous by that same local formula, so it is an isomorphism of complex bundles. This is assertion 1.

F1given
1.2

For a complex line L, conjugating transition functions inverts the first Chern class: c1(L)=c1(L), which identifies the conjugate of each root with its negative.

F2
2.1

First suppose V has rank n1. Let q:FB be its flag splitting from [F3], and choose a homotopy equivalence h:WF from a path-connected CW complex with a vertex. Write r=qh and Kj=hLj, so rV=jKj and rV=jKj by the transition formulas of [F1]. These are bundles over the actual CW base W, where [F3] gives Whitney multiplication. Put sj=c1(Kj). Naturality and step 1.2 give rc(V)=j(1+sj) and rc(V)=j(1sj). Every degree-i elementary symmetric monomial has exactly i factors, so rci(V)=(1)irci(V). No root transformation is attributed to a metric theorem, and no CW-only Whitney interface is applied on the merely CW-type space F.

F1F3step 1.2
3.1

The map r=hq is injective, because q is injective by [F3] and h is an isomorphism by [F4]. Thus the equality in step 2.1 descends to ci(V)=(1)ici(V). If V has rank zero, its conjugate is again zero and [F3] gives c0=1 and all higher classes zero, so the same conclusion holds without a flag construction.

F3F4step 2.1
4.1

Applying assertion 2 to V=EC and using the canonical isomorphism of step 1.1 gives ci(EC)=ci(EC)=(1)ici(EC), so the odd Chern classes of a complexified real bundle are two-torsion; this consistency is used in the next items.

step 1.1step 3.1
5.1

Boundary cases. Rank zero was settled in step 3.1. For i=0 both sides are 1; for a rank-one V the statement is step 1.2. The empty base is excluded by the path-connected hypothesis, and the coefficient ring Z is nonzero. The metric is used only to identify L with L inside [F2]; no orientation or choice of frames enters. AC is used only through [A1] in the splitting and metric suppliers.

A1F2step 1.2step 3.1

Source notes

Miller's Lecture 36 (printed pp. 134-137) uses this conjugation symmetry: the complexification of a real bundle is isomorphic to its conjugate, so the odd Chern classes of a complexified bundle are two-torsion and disappear after inverting two.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

28 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources