Proof of Theorem 1.1 . [00FA]
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 · Original author HTML
Proof of Theorem 1.1.
Proposition 4.1 gives us a smooth nonnegative representative, and continuously varying Kähler forms, when , such that as . Let’s assume first that the class for some nef and big line bundle . As before, Theorem 2.1 gives a morphism such that . Also by Theorem 2.2 the image of is a normal irreducible projective variety , is birational and . Then setting as Cartier divisors on , we have for some integer , so
holds as Weil divisors, but since is birational we also have (as Weil divisors), hence is Cartier and is equal to zero. So we have as -divisors, which implies that has at most canonical singularities and is a Calabi-Yau model (see also Corollary 1.5 of [Ka1]).
Denote by the smooth volume form on given by
which satisfies . We can write where , . The following argument to show that actually for some is similar to Lemma 3.2 in [EGZ]. First of all is smooth, nonnegative, and vanishes precisely on the exceptional set of . Fixing local coordinates on a polydisc and a local embedding , we see that is comparable to
on . But this is in turn comparable to
where the are holomorphic functions on , and so for some small that depends on the vanishing orders of the . Then
| (4.2) |
The compactness of gives , and so we can apply Theorem 2.1 and Proposition 3.1 of [EGZ] (which rely on the seminal work of Kołodziej [Koł]) to get a unique continuous such that
| (4.3) |
and . Moreover we can see that descends to a function on : if is a fiber of , the restriction of to is a plurisubharmonic function, because . Desingularizing and applying the maximum principle we see that has to be constant, and so descends to . Since by construction is the pullback of a (singular) Kähler form on , we see that is a singular Ricci-flat metric on , in the terminology of [EGZ]. On , the closed positive current clearly lies in the class and has continuous potentials. Intuitively, our goal is to get estimates in the open set where is positive. This can be done rigorously in the following way, which was first used by H.Tsuji [Ts] (see also [TZ], [CL] for a recent revisiting of his approach). Since is nef and big, by Kodaira’s lemma (Example 2.2.19 in [L]) there exists effective Cartier divisor such that for all small enough, is Kähler. We’ll show that is smooth on , and so is a smooth Ricci-flat metric there, and that the Ricci-flat metrics converge to in the topology on compact sets of . Notice that the metric on cannot be complete, since its diameter is finite by the result in section 3. Our argument is very similar to the proof of Theorem 3.5 in [EGZ] (see also [Y2]). Once this is proved, we can repeat the argument for any other given by Kodaira’s lemma, and by uniqueness we see that is smooth off , the intersection of the supports of all such . We claim that is equal to the null locus of , and by Nakamaye’s Theorem all we need to show is that it is equal to the augmented base locus of . If is a point outside the augmented base locus, then there exist an ample divisor and large enough so that is not in the base locus of . But this means that where is an effective divisor that doesn’t pass through , and moreover the cohomology class of is Kähler. So we can take and , and we see that is contained in the null locus of . Conversely, if belongs to the null locus, then there exists a subvariety through with and . Since the potentials for the current are continuous, the self-intersection is a well-defined closed positive current [BT], which restricts to a nonnegative Borel measure on . The integral is then equal to the cohomological intersection number (see e.g. Corollary 9.3 in [De2]) which is zero. But if is not in then is smooth and Kähler near and the volume of with respect to would be positive, which is a contradiction.
Fix once and for all an small enough so that Kodaira’s lemma holds. First of all notice that the classes are all Kähler when is close to . Choose a Kähler form , let be the canonical section, and fix a Hermitian metric on such that the following Poicaré-Lelong equation holds
| (4.4) |
where denotes the current of integration on . Then we have
and is Kähler for close to . There are smooth functions solutions of
| (4.5) |
where the positive constants approach as goes to , and . We apply Theorem 2.1 and Proposition 3.1 of [EGZ] again, and get uniform estimates independent of . Outside we have
so that the functions solve
| (4.6) |
there, for some appropriate smooth functions , defined on the whole of . As approaches , the Kähler forms are uniformly bounded in the smooth topology (with eigenvalues bounded away from uniformly), and so are the functions . Yau’s second order estimates [Y2] for the Monge-Ampère equation (4.6) give
| (4.7) |
where and are uniform positive constants, is the Laplacian of and is the Laplacian of . Now notice that on we have
and
for some uniform constant . Hence the function goes to zero when we approach , and so its maximum will be attained. The maximum principle applied to (4.7) then gives
on the whole of . But noticing that for a uniform constant , and recalling that , we get
This gives uniform interior estimates of and on compact sets of . Then the Harnack estimate of Evans-Krylov gives uniform estimates, for some , and a standard bootstrapping argument gives uniform estimates for all , on compact sets of , independent of . Thus the family is precompact for any , and any limit point belongs to , it satisfies
on , and is bounded near . Hence extends to a bounded function in and the above Monge-Ampère equation holds on because the Borel measure doesn’t charge the analytic set . Then by the uniqueness part of Theorem 2.1 of [EGZ], we must have . This implies that in on compact sets of , and that is smooth there.
If now we only have that is nef and big, then for some integer . Kodaira’s lemma still holds, the function is obviously still in , , and the reasoning proceeds as above.
If finally then we use Kodaira’s lemma for big and nef -divisors (Example 2.2.23 in [L]) to get an effective -divisor such that for all small enough, is Kähler. The proof proceeds as above, once we show that is again in , . Recall from the proof of Proposition 4.1 that we can write
where and are nef and big. Moreover
where are smooth pointwise nonnegative forms. Then, by the previous case when , we know that there exist (nonsmooth) positive functions such that and for some . As in (4.2) we see that for every
Then
and since for each the function
is bigger than or equal to a.e., it follows that a.e. for all . So
∎