there exists a unique g21 on any hyperelliptic curve with g≥2.
KX is very ample if and only if X is not hyperelliptic.
Proposition: If C⊆Pn is a complete intersection curve and is smooth of genus at least 2, then C is not hyperelliptic.
Proof.NC/Pn=⨁OPn(d), ⋀n−1NC/P1=OPn(∑di)∣C. The canonical bundle of C is given by
KC=(KPn⊗⋀n−1NC/Pn)∣C=OPn(∑di−n−1)∣C,
where we've used adjunction and the fact that KPn=OPn(−n−1). Since g(C)≥2, we need to have ∑di−n−1>0.
Through any pair of points p and q on C, we can find a hypersurface of degree ∑di−n−1 which passes through p but not q (this is true as long as ∑di−n−1>0). This works for double points as well -- we can find such a hypersurface which vanishes to order 1 at a specified point. Since KC is cut out by hypersurfaces, this means KC is very ample, hence C is not hyperelliptic curve by (2) above.
Question: If given a P1 with specified branch points p1,...,pb∈P1, can you find a corresponding cover X→P1 whose branch points are precisely these pi?
First attempt at constructing this: You want a cover of P1 that is unramified away from the pi. So consider first P1∖{p1,...,pb} topologically. The fundamental group of this is generated by loops γi based at p0 and going around pi. They are subject to the relation ∏γi=id. This means that interchanging any of these two generators corresponds to permuting the sheets of the cover.
For any cover Xd:1P1 branched at the pi, then we have d sheets and therefore we get a group homomorphism
π1(P1∖{p1,...,pb},p0)→Sd.
Thus we get permutations τi∈Sd such that
i=1∏dτi=id.
These permutations additionally must generate a transitive subgroup of Sd, if we want X to be connected.
Note 1 at this point: We haven't prescribed ramificaiton indices to the points pi, but they are encoded in this picture as well. As constructed, the ramification index of pi corresponds to the "number of sheets" in the cover of P1{m}inus{p1,...,pb} which meet at pi, and this number is equal to the number of cycles in the cycle decomposition of τi. To see this, consider the analytic picture: locally near pi, the map will be given z↦zri where ri is the ramification index of pi.
Note 2 at this point: We're trying to construct X and a map to P1 by first constructing a topological cover U→P1{m}inus{p1,...,pb} and then gluing our branch points back in. One way to construct this cover is to take U=U×{p1,...,pb}/G, where U is the universal cover and G=π1(P1{m}inus{p1,...,pb},p0) acts diagonally by deck transformation.
This leads us to a theorem that says constructing a cover in this way is always possible.
Theorem: (Riemann Existence). There is a bijection between degree d covers X→P1 simply branched over p1,...,pb up to isomorphism and transpositions τi∈Sd (1≤i≤b) such that ∏τi=id and the group generated by the τi acts transitively on {1,...,d} up to simultaneous conjugation by an element in Sd.
Example: For any even number b of branch points there is a unique hyperelliptic curve X with X→2:1P1 is branched over the pi. Riemann-Hurwitz says
[2g−2=di(2h−2)+deg(R)]
so
2g−2=−4+b⟺b=2g+2.
The dimension of the space of hyperelliptic curves of genus g is 2g+2−3=2g−1.
Note that this theorem only works when the base field is C. Moving from the topological construction of the cover Ud:1P1∖{p1,...,pb} as we sketched above to an algebraic cover X→P1 requires that there is a unique complex structure we can impose on X. The analytic picture is therefore quite essential in this case.
Example:(Degree 3 simply ramified covers.) The relevant permutation group is S3. Then 2g−2=−6+b⟺b=2g+4. If I choose 2g+3 transpositions, their composition is again a transposition. Then 632g+3−3 is the number of simpy ramified degree 3 covers X→P1 with g(X)=g and branched over fixed points p1,...,pb up to isomorphism.
Example: For a fixed ramification profile, there does not need to exist a cover of that profile, even if the numerics of Riemann-Hurwitz are satisfied: for d=4, {(2)(2),(2)(2),(3)}. Then 2g−2=−8+6=−2 which implies g=0. But there are no elements τ1,τ2,τ3∈S4 of types (2)(2),(2)(2) and (3) such that ∏τi=id.
It's a very open question to determine which covers are allowed and which are not.
Genus 2: Any genus 2 curve is hyperelliptic, and the unique g21 is the canonical sheaf. The number of branch points allowed by a map X→P1 is 2=−4+b⟺b=6. Morally, genus 2 curves are paramterized by (P1)3. We have an action of S6 on {(0,1,∞)}×(P1)3 given on (0,1,∞,p1,p2,p3) given by applying the permutation naturally on the 6-tuple and then applying an automorphism of P1 to each coordinate so that the first three coordinates are again 0, 1 and ∞. Removing 0,1 and ∞ from each copy of P1 as the diagonal from the product (P1)3 makes this action free, allowing us to take a quotient giving us the moduli space M2:
M2=(A1∖{0,1,}3∖Δ/S6,dim=3=2g−1=3g−3.
Genus 3: If X is not hyperelliptic then φKX realizes X as a degree 2g−2=4 curve in Pg−1=P2. Conversely, any smooth plane quartic is a canonically embedded genus 2 curve. Indeed, by adjunction,
KC=(OP2(−3+4))∣C=OP2(1)∣C.
Suppose C is hyperelliptic with g21 with g21=OC(p+q). Then 2=h0(OC(p+q) . Then
2=h0(OC(p+q))=2−3+1+h0(KC−p−q).
But for geometric reasons h0(Kc−p−q)=1. The dimension of the space of non-hyperelliptic genus 3 curves thus is h0(OP2(4))−1−8=(26)−g=15−g=6. As before, the space of hyperelliptic curves has dimension 2g−1=5.