ScalingStacks

Proof. [01ZL]

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.

We will fix ϵ⁡(v)>0\epsilon({\rm v})>0 later. For the moment let any ϵ1>0\epsilon_{1}>0 be arbitrary with δ1​(v,ϵ1)>0\delta_{1}({\rm v},\epsilon_{1})>0 the corresponding number from Theorem 8.3. If Tα1δ1​(x)=0T^{\delta_{1}}_{\alpha_{1}}(x)=0 then there exists a diffeomorphism

Φα1:Arα1/2,2​rα1​(0)→Uα1,\displaystyle\Phi_{\alpha_{1}}:A_{r_{\alpha_{1}}/2,2r_{\alpha_{1}}}(0)\to U_{\alpha_{1}}\,, (8.31)

where 0∈ℝ4/Γα10\in\mathds{R}^{4}/\Gamma_{\alpha_{1}} and Arα1/2,2​rα1​(x)⊆Uα⊆A(1−ϵ)​rα1/2,(1+ϵ)​rα1​(x)A_{r_{\alpha_{1}}/2,2r_{\alpha_{1}}}(x)\subseteq U_{\alpha}\subseteq A_{(1-\epsilon)r_{\alpha_{1}}/2,(1+\epsilon)r_{\alpha_{1}}}(x), such that

‖Φα1∗​gi​j−δi​j‖C0​(Arα1/2,2​rα1)+rα1​‖∂kΦα1∗​gi​j‖C0​(Arα1/2,2​rα1)<ϵ1.\displaystyle||\Phi_{\alpha_{1}}^{*}g_{ij}-\delta_{ij}||_{C^{0}(A_{r_{\alpha_{1}}/2},2r_{\alpha_{1}})}+r_{\alpha_{1}}||\partial_{k}\Phi_{\alpha_{1}}^{*}g_{ij}||_{C^{0}(A_{r_{\alpha_{1}}/2},2r_{\alpha_{1}})}<\epsilon_{1}\,. (8.32)

In particular, if ϵ>0\epsilon>0 is fixed and 2​δ​(n,ϵ)2\delta(n,\epsilon) is the corresponding number from Theorem 8.3, then we can choose ϵ1=ϵ1​(ϵ,v)\epsilon_{1}=\epsilon_{1}(\epsilon,{\rm v}) sufficiently small so that

𝒱rα1δ​(x)<ln⁡|Γα1|+δ.\displaystyle\mathcal{V}^{\delta}_{r_{\alpha_{1}}}(x)<\ln|\Gamma_{\alpha_{1}}|+\delta\,. (8.33)

Thus, if α2\alpha_{2} is such that

𝒱rα2/2δ​(x)≥ln⁡|Γα1|−δ,\displaystyle\mathcal{V}^{\delta}_{r_{\alpha_{2}}/2}(x)\geq\ln|\Gamma_{\alpha_{1}}|-\delta\,, (8.34)

then for all α1≤α≤α2\alpha_{1}\leq\alpha\leq\alpha_{2} we have Tα2​δ​(x)=0T^{2\delta}_{\alpha}(x)=0.

By Theorem 8.3, there exists for each α1≤α≤α2\alpha_{1}\leq\alpha\leq\alpha_{2}, a diffeomorphism

Φα:Arα/2,2​rα​(0)→Uα,\displaystyle\Phi_{\alpha}:A_{r_{\alpha}/2,2r_{\alpha}}(0)\to U_{\alpha}\,, (8.35)

where 0∈ℝ4/Γα0\in\mathds{R}^{4}/\Gamma_{\alpha} and Arα/2,2​rα​(x)⊆Uα⊆A(1−ϵ)​rα/2,2​(1+ϵ)​rα​(x)A_{r_{\alpha}/2,2r_{\alpha}}(x)\subseteq U_{\alpha}\subseteq A_{(1-\epsilon)r_{\alpha}/2,2(1+\epsilon)r_{\alpha}}(x), such that

‖Φα∗​gi​j−δi​j‖C0​(Arα/2,2​rα)+rα​‖∂kΦα∗​gi​j‖C0​(Arα/2,2​rα)<ϵ.\displaystyle||\Phi_{\alpha}^{*}g_{ij}-\delta_{ij}||_{C^{0}(A_{r_{\alpha}/2},2r_{\alpha})}+r_{\alpha}||\partial_{k}\Phi_{\alpha}^{*}g_{ij}||_{C^{0}(A_{r_{\alpha}/2},2r_{\alpha})}<\epsilon\,. (8.36)

In particular this implies that Γα=Γ\Gamma_{\alpha}=\Gamma is independent of α\alpha.

Next we focus on the inverse maps

Φα−1:Uα→Arα/2,2​rα​(0).\displaystyle\Phi_{\alpha}^{-1}:U_{\alpha}\to A_{r_{\alpha}/2,2r_{\alpha}}(0)\,. (8.37)

Observe that by (8.36), after possibly composing Φα\Phi_{\alpha} with a rotation of ℝ4/Γ\mathds{R}^{4}/\Gamma we can assume for x∈Uα∩Uβx\in U_{\alpha}\cap U_{\beta} that

|Φα−1​(x)−Φβ−1​(x)|<ϵ​rα.\displaystyle|\Phi_{\alpha}^{-1}(x)-\Phi_{\beta}^{-1}(x)|<\epsilon r_{\alpha}\,. (8.38)

Now let ϵ<ϵ⁡(v)\epsilon<\epsilon({\rm v}) be sufficiently small, so that if x∈ℝ4/Γx\in\mathds{R}^{4}/\Gamma, then Bϵ​|x|​(x)⊆ℝ4/ΓB_{\epsilon|x|}(x)\subseteq\mathds{R}^{4}/\Gamma is isometric to the standard Euclidean ball Bϵ​|x|​(04)⊆ℝ4B_{\epsilon|x|}(0^{4})\subseteq\mathds{R}^{4}. Note in particular that if {xi}∈Bϵ​|x|​(x)\{x_{i}\}\in B_{\epsilon|x|}(x) is a collection of points, then any convex combination is well defined.

For each α\alpha let φα′:Uα→ℝ\varphi^{\prime}_{\alpha}:U_{\alpha}\to\mathds{R} be a smooth cutoff function such that

φα′​(x)={1​ if ​x∈A3​rα/8,15​rα/8​(x),0​ if ​x∉Arα/2,2​rα​(x),\displaystyle\varphi^{\prime}_{\alpha}(x)=\begin{cases}&1\text{ if }x\in A_{3r_{\alpha}/8,15r_{\alpha}/8}(x)\,,\\ &0\text{ if }x\not\in A_{r_{\alpha}/2,2r_{\alpha}}(x)\,,\end{cases}

and such that |∇φα′|≤10​rα−1|\nabla\varphi^{\prime}_{\alpha}|\leq 10r_{\alpha}^{-1}. If we set φ′​(x)=∑αφα′​(x)\varphi^{\prime}(x)=\sum_{\alpha}\varphi^{\prime}_{\alpha}(x) then 1≤φ′​(x)≤41\leq\varphi^{\prime}(x)\leq 4. In particular,

φα=φα′​(x)φ′​(x):Uα→ℝ,\displaystyle\varphi_{\alpha}=\frac{\varphi^{\prime}_{\alpha}(x)}{\varphi^{\prime}(x)}:U_{\alpha}\to\mathds{R}\,, (8.39)

sarisfies ∑φα​(x)=1\sum\varphi_{\alpha}(x)=1, and so, is a partition of unity, with |∇φα|≤40​rα−1|\nabla\varphi_{\alpha}|\leq 40r_{\alpha}^{-1}.

Define the map

Φ−1:U=⋃αUα→Arα2/2,2​rα1​(0),\displaystyle\Phi^{-1}:U=\bigcup_{\alpha}U_{\alpha}\to A_{r_{\alpha_{2}}/2,2r_{\alpha_{1}}}(0)\,, (8.40)

given by

Φ−1​(x)=∑αφα​(x)​Φα−1​(x).\displaystyle\Phi^{-1}(x)=\sum_{\alpha}\varphi_{\alpha}(x)\Phi^{-1}_{\alpha}(x)\,. (8.41)

(As previously noted, the convex combination is well defined since the Φα−1​(x)\Phi^{-1}_{\alpha}(x) all live in a ball which is isometric to a Euclidean ball.) On each domain, UαU_{\alpha}, we have by (8.32) and (8.38) that Φ−1\Phi^{-1} and Φα−1\Phi^{-1}_{\alpha} are C1C^{1}-close. Hence, Φ−1\Phi^{-1} is a diffeomorphism, and a quick computation using (8.32) and (8.38) verifies the desired estimates:

‖Φ∗​gi​j−δi​j‖C0​(Arα/2,2​rα)+rα​‖∂kΦα∗​gi​j‖C0​(Arα/2,2​rα)<C​ϵ.\displaystyle||\Phi^{*}g_{ij}-\delta_{ij}||_{C^{0}(A_{r_{\alpha}/2},2r_{\alpha})}+r_{\alpha}||\partial_{k}\Phi_{\alpha}^{*}g_{ij}||_{C^{0}(A_{r_{\alpha}/2},2r_{\alpha})}<C\epsilon\,. (8.42)

By choosing ϵ\epsilon appropriately small, we complete the proof. ∎

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