ScalingStacks

5.3 Conjectural meaning of NA MA II [00BK]

Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.

Complete original source context Β· Original author HTML

5.3 Conjectural meaning of NA MA II

In this section we will speculate on the concrete meaning of the Boucksom-Favre-Jonsson solution to the NA Calabi conjecture (cf. section 3.5). Let (X,L)(X,L) be a polarized algebraic degeneration family of Calabi-Yau manifolds, which needs not be a maximal degeneration. Let (𝒳,β„’)(\mathcal{X},\mathcal{L}) be a semistable snc model. An analogue of the Lebesgue measure dΞΌ0=limtβ†’0Logπ’³βˆ—dΞΌtd\mu_{0}=\lim_{t\to 0}\text{Log}_{\mathcal{X}*}d\mu_{t} exists in this setting, which is supported on the essential skeleton S​k​(X)βŠ‚Ξ”π’³Sk(X)\subset\Delta_{\mathcal{X}}. It can be found by the ideas outlined in section 3.1. To describe it, denote m=dimS​k​(X)m=\dim Sk(X), and Ξ”J\Delta_{J} be any mm-dimensional face of S​k​(X)Sk(X), corresponding to EJ=∩0mEjE_{J}=\cap_{0}^{m}E_{j} with local defining functions z0,…​zmz_{0},\ldots z_{m}. The holomorphic volume form Ξ©\Omega on 𝒳\mathcal{X} induces a holomorphic volume form on EJE_{J}, called its PoincarΓ© residue ResEJ​(Ξ©)\text{Res}_{E_{J}}(\Omega), determined by the equality in K𝒳|EJK_{\mathcal{X}}|_{E_{J}}:

Ξ©=ResEJ​(Ξ©)∧t​d​log⁑z0βˆ§β€¦β€‹d​log⁑zm.\Omega=\text{Res}_{E_{J}}(\Omega)\wedge td\log z_{0}\wedge\ldots d\log z_{m}.

This is independent of the choice of local coordinates ziz_{i}. Then up to normalising Ξ©\Omega by a global multiplicative constant, on the interior of Ξ”J\Delta_{J},

d​μ0=|d​x1​…​d​xm|β‹…βˆ«EJβˆ’1(nβˆ’m)2​ResEJ​(Ξ©)∧ResEJ​(Ξ©)Β―,d\mu_{0}=|dx_{1}\ldots dx_{m}|\cdot\int_{E_{J}}\sqrt{-1}^{(n-m)^{2}}\text{Res}_{E_{J}}(\Omega)\wedge\overline{\text{Res}_{E_{J}}(\Omega)}, (16)

Notice it is proportional to |d​x1​…​d​xm||dx_{1}\ldots dx_{m}|, which explains the name β€˜Lebesgue measure’. The union of the mm-dimensional open faces of S​k​(X)Sk(X) has the full d​μ0d\mu_{0}-measure, which is one by our normalisation.

We are interested in the distinguished solution β€–β‹…β€–C​Y=‖⋅‖ℒ​eβˆ’Ο•0\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY}=\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{\mathcal{L}}e^{-\phi_{0}} to the NA MA equation on (XKa​n,L)(X_{K}^{an},L) defined by

M​A​(β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)=(Ln)​d​μ0.MA(\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY})=(L^{n})d\mu_{0}. (17)

To give an interpretation, we boldly assume that Ο•0=Ο•0∘r𝒳\phi_{0}=\phi_{0}\circ r_{\mathcal{X}}, which can be regarded as a strong version of the comparison property. Then we are in the setting of section 5.2.

We begin with the interior of mm-dimensional faces of S​k​(X)Sk(X), which can be viewed as the generic region. Comparing with the heuristic formula (15), and making regularity assumptions on Ο•0\phi_{0}, we deduce a second order PDE

det(D2​ϕ0)​(π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)nβˆ’mβ‹…EJ)=(Ln)m!β€‹βˆ«EJβˆ’1(nβˆ’m)2​ResEJ​(Ξ©)∧ResEJ​(Ξ©)Β―,\det(D^{2}\phi_{0})(\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY})^{n-m}\cdot E_{J})=\frac{(L^{n})}{m!}\int_{E_{J}}\sqrt{-1}^{(n-m)^{2}}\text{Res}_{E_{J}}(\Omega)\wedge\overline{\text{Res}_{E_{J}}(\Omega)}, (18)

where (π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)nβˆ’mβ‹…EJ)(\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY})^{n-m}\cdot E_{J}) defines a polynomial in the gradient of Ο•0\phi_{0}.

On any other face Int​(Ξ”J)βŠ‚Ξ”π’³\text{Int}(\Delta_{J})\subset\Delta_{\mathcal{X}} of dimension pp, not necessarily on S​k​(X)Sk(X),

det(D2​ϕ0)​(π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)nβˆ’pβ‹…EJ)=0.\det(D^{2}\phi_{0})(\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY})^{n-p}\cdot E_{J})=0.

There are two obvious mechanisms for this to happen:

  • β€’

    We may have the homogeneous real MA equation det(D2​ϕ0)=0\det(D^{2}\phi_{0})=0. There is a basic mechanism for this: notice that the model choice 𝒳\mathcal{X} is not canonical, and one can blow up to obtain higher models. For simple blowups, either one subdivides an existent face, or one creates new faces. On any new face det(D2​ϕ0)=0\det(D^{2}\phi_{0})=0 is automatic, because Ο•0=Ο•0∘r𝒳\phi_{0}=\phi_{0}\circ r_{\mathcal{X}} implies that Ο•0\phi_{0} is independent of the new coordinate variable.

  • β€’

    We may have π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)nβˆ’pβ‹…EJ=0\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY})^{n-p}\cdot E_{J}=0, which is an algebraic condition on the gradient of Ο•0\phi_{0}. The author speculates that this option happens for (mβˆ’1)(m-1)-dimensional faces on S​k​(X)Sk(X), and its role is to match the gradients when we cross from one mm-dimensional open face of S​k​(X)Sk(X) to another. In Remark 5.1 we suggest π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY}) may be a nef class on EJE_{J}, and our equation precisely says this class has zero volume. The birational geometric significance seems well worth investigating. We now discuss some of the simplest ways this mechanism could work:

Example 5.2.

When n=mn=m, namely in the maximal degeneration case, for simplicity we consider an (nβˆ’1)(n-1)-dimensional face Ξ”J\Delta_{J} of S​k​(X)Sk(X), such that there are only two nn-dimensional faces of Δ𝒳\Delta_{\mathcal{X}} containing Ξ”J\Delta_{J}, and they both lie on S​k​(X)Sk(X). Then the degree condition π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)β‹…EJ=0\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY})\cdot E_{J}=0 imposes a matching condition on the gradient of Ο•0\phi_{0} across the (nβˆ’1)(n-1)-dim face.

We consider a very concrete local example where β„™1≃EJ=∩1nEi\mathbb{P}^{1}\simeq E_{J}=\cap_{1}^{n}E_{i},

degπ’ͺ(Ei)|EJ=βˆ’di≀0,i=1,2,…n,βˆ‘1ndi=2,\deg\mathcal{O}(E_{i})|_{E_{J}}=-d_{i}\leq 0,\quad i=1,2,\ldots n,\quad\sum_{1}^{n}d_{i}=2,

and the two divisors E0,E∞E_{0},E_{\infty} intersect EJE_{J} transversely at 0,βˆžβˆˆβ„™10,\infty\in\mathbb{P}^{1}, giving rise to the two nn-dimensional faces. All divisors are reduced. The complex geometric local model for 𝒳\mathcal{X} comprises of two charts β„‚z0,…​znn+1\mathbb{C}^{n+1}_{z_{0},\ldots z_{n}} and β„‚w0,…,wnn+1\mathbb{C}^{n+1}_{w_{0},\ldots,w_{n}}. On the first chart Ei={zi=0}E_{i}=\{z_{i}=0\} for i=0,1,…​ni=0,1,\ldots n, and z0z_{0} is the affine coordinate on β„™1βˆ–{∞}\mathbb{P}^{1}\setminus\{\infty\}. On the second chart Ei={wi=0}E_{i}=\{w_{i}=0\} for i=1,…​ni=1,\ldots n, E∞={w0=0}E_{\infty}=\{w_{0}=0\}, and w0w_{0} is the affine coordinate on β„™1βˆ–{0}\mathbb{P}^{1}\setminus\{0\}. The transition on the overlap is

w0=z0βˆ’1,wi=ziz0di,i=1,2,…n.w_{0}=z_{0}^{-1},\quad w_{i}=z_{i}z_{0}^{d_{i}},\quad i=1,2,\ldots n.

The holomorphic volume form Ω∼d​z0βˆ§β€¦β€‹d​zn=βˆ’d​w0βˆ§β€¦β€‹d​wn\Omega\sim dz_{0}\wedge\ldots dz_{n}=-dw_{0}\wedge\ldots dw_{n}, and the coordinate t=z0​…​zn=w0​…​wnt=z_{0}\ldots z_{n}=w_{0}\ldots w_{n}. Locally on XtX_{t}

Ξ©t∼d​log​z1βˆ§β€¦β€‹d​log​zn=βˆ’d​log​w1βˆ§β€¦β€‹d​log​wn.\Omega_{t}\sim d\log z_{1}\wedge\ldots d\log z_{n}=-d\log w_{1}\wedge\ldots d\log w_{n}.

On the two nn-dimensional faces the coordinates are xi=log⁑|zi|log⁑|t|x_{i}=\frac{\log|z_{i}|}{\log|t|} and xiβ€²=log⁑|wi|log⁑|t|x_{i}^{\prime}=\frac{\log|w_{i}|}{\log|t|} respectively, satisfying the linear constraints βˆ‘0nxi=0\sum_{0}^{n}x_{i}=0 and βˆ‘0nxiβ€²=0\sum_{0}^{n}x_{i}^{\prime}=0, so we can eliminate xn,xnβ€²x_{n},x_{n}^{\prime}. By adjusting β„’\mathcal{L} we can make it zero in the local model. The potential Ο•0\phi_{0} satisfies the real MA equation on the two nn-dimensional faces:

det(βˆ‚2Ο•0βˆ‚xiβ€‹βˆ‚xj)0≀i,j≀nβˆ’1=const,det(βˆ‚2Ο•0βˆ‚xiβ€²β€‹βˆ‚xjβ€²)0≀i,j≀nβˆ’1=const,\det\left(\frac{\partial^{2}\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{i}\partial x_{j}}\right)_{0\leq i,j\leq n-1}=\text{const},\quad\det\left(\frac{\partial^{2}\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{i}^{\prime}\partial x_{j}^{\prime}}\right)_{0\leq i,j\leq n-1}=\text{const},

and the problem is to match them on Ξ”J\Delta_{J}. The complex geometry suggests that the domain of the coordinates xi,xiβ€²x_{i},x_{i}^{\prime} can be extended outside the original nn-simplices, by the identificaton

x0β€²=βˆ’x0,xiβ€²=xi+dix0,i=1,2,…nβˆ’1,x_{0}^{\prime}=-x_{0},\quad x_{i}^{\prime}=x_{i}+d_{i}x_{0},\quad i=1,2,\ldots n-1,

and the real MA equation is satisfied also on Ξ”J\Delta_{J}. In terms of gradients at xβˆˆΞ”Jx\in\Delta_{J},

βˆ‚Ο•0βˆ‚xiβ€²=βˆ‚Ο•0βˆ‚xi,i=1,…nβˆ’1,βˆ‚Ο•0βˆ‚x0β€²=βˆ’βˆ‚Ο•0βˆ‚x0+βˆ‘1nβˆ’1diβˆ‚Ο•0βˆ‚xi.\frac{\partial\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{i}^{\prime}}=\frac{\partial\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{i}},\quad i=1,\ldots n-1,\quad\frac{\partial\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{0}^{\prime}}=-\frac{\partial\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{0}}+\sum_{1}^{n-1}d_{i}\frac{\partial\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{i}}.

The first (nβˆ’1)(n-1) conditions merely mean the tangent derivatives along Ξ”J\Delta_{J} agree. The normal derivative matching condition precisely says

π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–)β‹…EJ=βˆ‘1nβˆ’1diβ€‹βˆ‚Ο•0βˆ‚xiβˆ’βˆ‚Ο•0βˆ‚x0βˆ’βˆ‚Ο•0βˆ‚x0β€²=0.\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert)\cdot E_{J}=\sum_{1}^{n-1}d_{i}\frac{\partial\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{i}}-\frac{\partial\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{0}}-\frac{\partial\phi_{0}}{\partial x_{0}^{\prime}}=0.

From a different perspective, the zero degree condition explains why β„™1\mathbb{P}^{1} can be invisible to the metric, so Ο•0\phi_{0} is allowed to remain smooth across Int​(Ξ”J)\text{Int}(\Delta_{J}).

Example 5.3.

For m=1m=1, consider a 00-dimensional face Ξ”J\Delta_{J} of S​k​(X)Sk(X), such that there is a unique 11-dimensional face of Δ𝒳\Delta_{\mathcal{X}} containing Ξ”J\Delta_{J}, and it lies on S​k​(X)Sk(X). The simplest possibility π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)=0\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY})=0 imposes a Neumann-like boundary condition on Ο•0\phi_{0}. This example may describe the Tian-Yau region in [25][42].

Example 5.4.

For m=1m=1, consider a 00-dimensional face Ξ”J\Delta_{J} of S​k​(X)Sk(X), such that there are two 11-dimensional faces of Δ𝒳\Delta_{\mathcal{X}} containing Ξ”J\Delta_{J}, and they both lie on S​k​(X)Sk(X). A very simple geometric situation is when EJE_{J} is the smooth total space of a possibly singular β„™1\mathbb{P}^{1}-fibration over an (nβˆ’1)(n-1)-dim smooth variety DD, and the two 1-dimensional faces correspond to two disjoint sections EJβ€²,1,EJβ€²,2E_{J^{\prime},1},E_{J^{\prime},2} of the β„™1\mathbb{P}^{1}-fibration, so EJβ€²,1≃EJβ€²,2≃DE_{J^{\prime},1}\simeq E_{J^{\prime},2}\simeq D. A natural way to make π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)nβ‹…EJ=0\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY})^{n}\cdot E_{J}=0 and π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY}) nef for xβˆˆΞ”Jx\in\Delta_{J}, is to ask π’ŸJ​(x,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)\mathcal{D}_{J}(x,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY}) to be the pullback of a nef class on the base DD. We regard this nef class as the limiting element of π’ŸJ​(y,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)∈H1,1​(EJβ€²,i)\mathcal{D}_{J}(y,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY})\in H^{1,1}(E_{J^{\prime},i}) as yy approaches xx from either of the 11-dimensional faces. Then the matching condition is naturally seen as the continuity of π’ŸJ​(y,β€–β‹…β€–C​Y)\mathcal{D}_{J}(y,\left\lVert\cdot\right\rVert_{CY}) across the 00-dimensional face. This example may be relevant for the Ooguri-Vafa type neck region in [25][42] (cf. [42, section 7.1]). The possibility for the β„™1\mathbb{P}^{1}-fibration to develop nodal fibres is related to the monopole bubbling phenemenon in these papers.

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source-backed reader collection; mathematical self-containment is not assessed.