ScalingStacks

3.4. Fubini-Study metrics [00N6]

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

3.4. Fubini-Study metrics

We study distances between Fubini-Study metrics, and gives explicit expressions for Fubini-Study metrics admitting non-Archimedean orthogonal basis. Many of the results here are also obtained in [CMor18] or in [BE18, Section 6].

Lemma 3.7.

Assume that LL is globally generated. Let ∥⋅∥1\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1} be a norm on V1​(L)V_{1}(L) and let FS⁡(∥⋅∥1)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1}) be the associated Fubini-Study metric. Then for any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}} and e⁡(x)∈L⁡(x)∖0e(x)\in L(x)\setminus 0,

|e⁡(x)|FS⁡(∥⋅∥1)=infλ∈κ^​(x),s1∈V1​(L)s1​(x)=λ⋅e⁡(x)|λ|−1⋅∥s1∥.\lvert e(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1})}=\inf_{\begin{subarray}{c}\lambda\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ s_{1}\in V_{1}(L)\\ s_{1}(x)=\lambda\cdot e(x)\end{subarray}}\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\cdot\lVert s_{1}\rVert.

(with the convention that 0−1=+∞0^{-1}=+\infty)

Proof.

This follows from Lemma 2.11. ∎

Lemma 3.8.

Let ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} be a norm on Vn​(L)V_{n}(L), then 1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}) is a continuous metric on LL. ([CMor18, Proposition 3.1])

Lemma 3.9.

Let ϕ1\phi_{1} and ϕ2\phi_{2} be two upper-semicontinuous metrics on LL, then

dist⁡(∥⋅∥ϕ1,∥⋅∥ϕ2)≤dist⁡(ϕ1,ϕ2).\dist(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{\phi_{1}},\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{\phi_{2}})\leq\dist(\phi_{1},\phi_{2}).

(see also [BE18, Lemma 6.10])

Proof.

For any s∈V1​(L)s\in V_{1}(L), if ∥s∥ϕ1≥∥s∥ϕ2\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{1}}\geq\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{2}}, let x1∈Xanx_{1}\in X^{\mathrm{an}} be a point where ∥s∥ϕ1\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{1}} is attained. One has

|log⁡∥s∥ϕ1∥s∥ϕ2|≤|log|​s⁡(x1)s⁡(x1)|κ^​(x1)|≤dist⁡(ϕ1,ϕ2).\Big|\log\frac{\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{1}}}{\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{2}}}\Big|\leq\Big|\log\Big|\frac{s(x_{1})}{s(x_{1})}\Big|_{\widehat{\kappa}(x_{1})}\Big|\leq\dist(\phi_{1},\phi_{2}).

Otherwise, let x2∈Xanx_{2}\in X^{\mathrm{an}} be a point where ∥s∥ϕ2\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{2}} is attained. Then

|log⁡∥s∥ϕ2∥s∥ϕ1|≤|log|​s⁡(x2)s⁡(x2)|κ^​(x2)|≤dist⁡(ϕ1,ϕ2).\Big|\log\frac{\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{2}}}{\lVert s\rVert_{\phi_{1}}}\Big|\leq\Big|\log\Big|\frac{s(x_{2})}{s(x_{2})}\Big|_{\widehat{\kappa}(x_{2})}\Big|\leq\dist(\phi_{1},\phi_{2}).

Hence the desired inequality holds. ∎

Lemma 3.10.

Let ∥⋅∥\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert and ∥⋅∥′\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime} be two norms on V1​(L)V_{1}(L), then

dist⁡(FS⁡(∥⋅∥),FS⁡(∥⋅∥′))≤dist⁡(∥⋅∥,∥⋅∥′).\dist(\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert),\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime}))\leq\dist(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert,\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime}).

(see also [BE18, Equation (6.2)])

Proof.

For any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}}, let e⁡(x)∈Lan​(x)∖{0}e(x)\in L^{\mathrm{an}}(x)\setminus\{0\}. Let s,s′∈V1​(L)s,s^{\prime}\in V_{1}(L) and λ,λ′∈κ^​(x)\lambda,\lambda^{\prime}\in\hat{\kappa}(x) be elements such that

s⁡(x)=λ⋅e⁡(x),∥e⁡(x)∥X|x=|λ|−1​∥s∥,s(x)=\lambda\cdot e(x),\ \lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x}=\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert,
s′​(x)=λ′⋅e⁡(x),∥e⁡(x)∥X|x=|λ′|−1​∥s′∥′.s^{\prime}(x)=\lambda^{\prime}\cdot e(x),\ \lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x}=\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert^{\prime}.

If ∥e⁡(x)∥X|x>∥e⁡(x)∥X|x′\lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x}>\lVert e(x)\rVert^{\prime}_{X|x}, one has

dist⁡(∥e⁡(x)∥X|x,∥e⁡(x)∥X|x′)=|log⁡|λ|−1​∥s∥|λ′|−1​∥s′∥′|≤|log⁡|λ|−1​∥s∥|λ|−1​∥s∥′|≤dist⁡(∥⋅∥,∥⋅∥′).\begin{split}\dist(\lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x},\lVert e(x)\rVert^{\prime}_{X|x})&=\Big|\log\frac{\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert}{\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert^{\prime}}\Big|\\ &\leq\Big|\log\frac{\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert}{\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert^{\prime}}\Big|\leq\dist(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert,\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime}).\end{split}

Otherwise, one has

dist⁡(∥e⁡(x)∥X|x,∥e⁡(x)∥X|x′)=|log⁡|λ|−1​∥s∥|λ′|−1​∥s′∥′|≤|log⁡|λ′|−1​∥s′∥|λ′|−1​∥s′∥′|≤dist⁡(∥⋅∥,∥⋅∥′).\begin{split}\dist(\lVert e(x)\rVert_{X|x},\lVert e(x)\rVert^{\prime}_{X|x})&=\Big|\log\frac{\lvert\lambda\rvert^{-1}\lVert s\rVert}{\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert^{\prime}}\Big|\\ &\leq\Big|\log\frac{\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert}{\lvert\lambda^{\prime}\rvert^{-1}\lVert s^{\prime}\rVert^{\prime}}\Big|\leq\dist(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert,\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert^{\prime}).\end{split}

Varying xx and taking the supremum, one gets the desired inequality. ∎

Proposition 3.11.

Assume that there exist a norm ∥⋅∥1\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1} on V1​(L)V_{1}(L) such that ϕ\phi is equal to FS⁡(∥⋅∥1)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{1}). Then for any n∈ℕn\in\mathbb{N}, FS⁡(∥⋅∥n​ϕ)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}) is equal to n​ϕn\phi. ([CMor18, Proposition 3.3])

Proposition 3.12.

Assume that ϕ\phi is an asymptotic Fubini-Study metric on LL, then the envelop metric 𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ)\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi}) is equal to ϕ\phi. (see also [BE18, Theorem 6.15 (iii)])

Proof.

By assumption, there exists a familly of norms {∥⋅∥n}n∈ℕ\{\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} such that uniformly for x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}},

limn→∞1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n)​(∗)​(x)=|∗|ϕ​(x),\quad\lim_{\begin{subarray}{c}n\to\infty\end{subarray}}\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})(\ast)(x)=\lvert\ast\rvert_{\phi}(x),

so for any ϵ>0\epsilon>0, there exists N0∈ℕN_{0}\in\mathbb{N} such that for any n≥N0n\geq N_{0}

dist⁡(n​ϕ,FS⁡(∥⋅∥n))≤n​ϵ,\dist(n\phi,\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}))\leq n\epsilon,

hence by Lemma 3.9 and 3.10,

dist⁡(FS⁡(∥⋅∥n​ϕ),FS⁡(∥⋅∥FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)))≤n​ϵ.\dist(\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}),\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})}))\leq n\epsilon.

By Proposition 3.11, one has OPENFS⁡(∥⋅∥FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)))=FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})}))=\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}), so

dist⁡(FS⁡(∥⋅∥n​ϕ),FS⁡(∥⋅∥n))≤n​ϵ,\dist(\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}),\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}))\leq n\epsilon,

and

dist⁡(1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n​ϕ),1n​FS​(∥⋅∥n))≤ϵ.\dist(\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n\phi}),\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}))\leq\epsilon.

Taking limit for n→∞n\to\infty and then for ϵ→0\epsilon\to 0, one has

dist(𝒫(⦀⋅⦀ϕ,ϕ)=0,\dist(\mathcal{P}(\vvvert\mathord{\cdot}\vvvert_{\phi},\phi)=0,

so the two metrics are equal. ∎

If the ultrametric norm ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} admits an orthogonal basis, one can calculate explicitly the associated Fubini-Study metric FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n}).

Lemma 3.13.

Let (K,|⋅|K)(K,\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert_{K}) be a complete ultrametric valued field extension of (k,|⋅|)(k,\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert). Then for any {rj}j∈{0,…,d}\{r_{j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}} elements in ℝ+\mathbb{R}_{+}, one has

inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1maxj⁡{|κj|K⋅rj}=minj∈{0,…,d}⁡{rj},\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\rvert_{K}\cdot r_{j}\Big\}=\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\{r_{j}\},

where {κj}j∈{0,…,d}\{\kappa_{j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}} are elements in KK.

Proof.

On the one hand, let j0∈{0,…,d}j_{0}\in\{0,\dots,d\} be an index such that rj0r_{j_{0}} is minimal. By taking κj=0\kappa_{j}=0 for j≠j0j\neq j_{0} and κj0=1\kappa_{j_{0}}=1, one sees that

inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1maxj⁡{|κj|K⋅rj}≤rj0=minj∈{0,…,d}⁡{rj}.\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\rvert_{K}\cdot r_{j}\Big\}\leq r_{j_{0}}=\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\{r_{j}\}.

On the other hand, by the ultrametricity of |⋅|K\lvert\mathord{\cdot}\rvert_{K}, if ∑jκj=1\sum_{j}\kappa_{j}=1, then there exist at least one j1∈{0,…,d}j_{1}\in\{0,\dots,d\} such that |κj1|≥1\lvert\kappa_{j_{1}}\rvert\geq 1, so

inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1maxj⁡{|κj|K⋅rj}≥inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1|κj1|K⋅rj1≥inf∑j∈{0,…,d}κj=1rj1=rj1≥minj∈{0,…,d}⁡{rj}.\begin{split}\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\rvert_{K}\cdot r_{j}\Big\}&\geq\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}\lvert\kappa_{j_{1}}\rvert_{K}\cdot r_{j_{1}}\\ &\geq\inf_{\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\kappa_{j}=1}r_{j_{1}}=r_{j_{1}}\geq\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d\}}\{r_{j}\}.\end{split}

Hence the two sides are equal. ∎

Proposition 3.14.

Assume that L⊗nL^{\otimes n} is globally generated. Let {sn,j}j∈{0,…,dn}\{s_{n,j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}} be a basis of Vn​(L)V_{n}(L). Let ∥⋅∥n\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n} be a ultrametric norm on Vn​(L)V_{n}(L) with respect to which {sn,j}j∈{0,…,dn}\{s_{n,j}\}_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}} is orthogonal. Then for any x∈Xanx\in X^{\mathrm{an}} and en​(x)∈L⊗n​(x)∖0e_{n}(x)\in L^{\otimes n}(x)\setminus 0,

|en​(x)|FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)=minj∈{0,…,dn}⁡{|en​(x)sn,j​(x)|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥n},\lvert e_{n}(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})}=\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}}\Big\{\Big|\frac{e_{n}(x)}{s_{n,j}(x)}\Big|_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}\Big\},

with the convention that 0−1=+∞0^{-1}=+\infty. (see also [CMor18, Lemma 3.3])

Proof.

For j∈{0,…,dn}j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}, let λj∈κ^​(x)\lambda_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x) be such that sn,j​(x)=λj⋅en​(x)s_{n,j}(x)=\lambda_{j}\cdot e_{n}(x). By construction,

|en​(x)|FS⁡(∥⋅∥n)=infμj∈κ^​(x),∑μj⋅sn,j​(x)=en​(x)‖∑j∈{0,…,dn}μj⋅sn,j‖=infμj∈κ^​(x),∑μj⋅sn,j​(x)=en​(x)maxj⁡{|μj|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥}=infκj∈κ^​(x),∑κj=1maxj⁡{|κj⋅λj−1|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥}=infκj∈κ^​(x),∑κj=1maxj⁡{|κj|κ^​(x)⋅|λj|κ^​(x)−1⋅∥sn,j∥}=minj∈{0,…,dn}⁡{|λj|κ^​(x)−1⋅∥sn,j∥n}.\begin{split}\lvert e_{n}(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})}=&\inf_{\mu_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ \sum\mu_{j}\cdot s_{n,j}(x)=e_{n}(x)}\Big\|\sum_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}}\mu_{j}\cdot s_{n,j}\Big\|\\ =&\inf_{\mu_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ \sum\mu_{j}\cdot s_{n,j}(x)=e_{n}(x)}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\mu_{j}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert\Big\}\\ =&\inf_{\kappa_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ \sum\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\cdot\lambda_{j}^{-1}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert\Big\}\\ =&\inf_{\kappa_{j}\in\widehat{\kappa}(x),\ \sum\kappa_{j}=1}\max_{j}\Big\{\lvert\kappa_{j}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lvert\lambda_{j}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}^{-1}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert\Big\}\\ =&\min_{j\in\{0,\dots,d_{n}\}}\Big\{\lvert\lambda_{j}\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}^{-1}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}\Big\}.\end{split}

The last equality is obtained with Lemma 3.13. ∎

Corollary 3.15.

With the same hypothesis as above, for en∨​(x)∈(L⊗n)∨​(x)∖0e_{n}^{\vee}(x)\in(L^{\otimes n})^{\vee}(x)\setminus 0, one has

|en∨​(x)|FS​(∥⋅∥n)∨=max⁡{|en∨​(x)​(sn,j)|κ^​(x)⋅∥sn,j∥n−1}.\lvert e_{n}^{\vee}(x)\rvert_{\mathrm{FS}(\lVert\mathord{\cdot}\rVert_{n})^{\vee}}=\max\Big\{\lvert e_{n}^{\vee}(x)(s_{n,j})\rvert_{\widehat{\kappa}(x)}\cdot\lVert s_{n,j}\rVert_{n}^{-1}\Big\}.
Proof.

It suffices to note that en∨​(x)​(sn,j)=λje_{n}^{\vee}(x)(s_{n,j})=\lambda_{j}. ∎

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