ScalingStacks

Proof. [01ZS]

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.

Let us remark first, that if p∈Mnp\in M^{n}, then by volume ratio monotonicity, we have for every r≤1r\leq 1 that

Vol⁡(Br​(p))≥Vol−1​(Br)Vol−1​(BD)​Vol​(BD​(p))≥C​(n,D)−1​Vol​(M4)​rn≥C−1​v​rn=:v′​rn.\displaystyle{\rm Vol}(B_{r}(p))\geq\frac{{\rm Vol}_{-1}(B_{r})}{{\rm Vol}_{-1}(B_{D})}{\rm Vol}(B_{D}(p))\geq C(n,D)^{-1}{\rm Vol}(M^{4})r^{n}\geq C^{-1}{\rm v}r^{n}=:{\rm v}^{\prime}r^{n}\,. (8.52)

Let ϵ<ϵ⁡(v′)\epsilon<\epsilon({\rm v}^{\prime}) from Lemma 8.8 with δ⁡(v,D,ϵ)\delta({\rm v},D,\epsilon) sufficiently small to satisfy Theorem 8.3 and Lemmas 8.8, 8.9, 8.10. After rescaling, it is sufficient to consider a Riemannian manifold (M4,g)(M^{4},g) with |RicM4|≤3​δ|{\rm Ric}_{M^{4}}|\leq 3\delta, diam⁡(M)≤D​δ−2=D′{\rm diam}(M)\leq D\delta^{-2}=D^{\prime} and Vol⁡(B1​(p))>v′>0{\rm Vol}(B_{1}(p))>{\rm v}^{\prime}>0 for every p∈Mp\in M.

Let us begin by efficiently covering M4M^{4} by balls {B1​(xj0)}\{B_{1}(x^{0}_{j})\} such that the balls in {B1/4​(xj0)}\{B_{1/4}(x^{0}_{j})\} are disjoint. By the usual doubling argument, there are at most N⁡(n,D,v)N(n,D,{\rm v}) such balls. For each such ball, we apply Lemma 8.10 in order to produce a collection of balls {Brj1​(xj1)}1N1\{B_{r^{1}_{j}}(x^{1}_{j})\}_{1}^{N_{1}} such that rj1=rαj1>r¯​(v,D)r^{1}_{j}=r_{\alpha^{1}_{j}}>\bar{r}({\rm v},D), N1≤N⁡(v′,D′)N_{1}\leq N({\rm v}^{\prime},D^{\prime}), Tαj1δ​(xj1)=0T^{\delta}_{\alpha^{1}_{j}}(x^{1}_{j})=0, and such that if x∈M4∖⋃jBrj1​(xj1)x\in M^{4}\setminus\bigcup_{j}B_{r^{1}_{j}}(x^{1}_{j}) then rh​(x)>r¯r_{h}(x)>\bar{r}. Furthermore, if we denote by Γj2\Gamma^{2}_{j}, the group associated to Brj1​(xj1)B_{r^{1}_{j}}(x^{1}_{j}), then if βj1\beta^{1}_{j} is the largest integer such that Vrβj1/2δ​(xj1)≥ln⁡|Γj2|−δV^{\delta}_{r_{\beta^{1}_{j}}/2}(x^{1}_{j})\geq\ln|\Gamma_{j}^{2}|-\delta, then for all x∈B2​rβj1​(xj1)x\in B_{2r_{\beta^{1}_{j}}}(x^{1}_{j}) we have

𝒱rβj1/4δ​(xj1)<ln⁡|Γj2|−δ.\displaystyle\mathcal{V}^{\delta}_{r_{\beta^{1}_{j}}/4}(x^{1}_{j})<\ln|\Gamma_{j}^{2}|-\delta\,. (8.53)

Define

ℬ1=:M4∖⋃Brj​(xj),\displaystyle\mathcal{B}^{1}=:M^{4}\setminus\bigcup B_{r_{j}}(x_{j})\,, (8.54)

as the first body region. Then we can write

M4=ℬ1​⋃B2​rj1​(xj1),\displaystyle M^{4}=\mathcal{B}^{1}\bigcup B_{2r^{1}_{j}}(x^{1}_{j})\,, (8.55)

where by using Theorem 8.3, we have that B2​rj1​(xj1)∩ℬ1B_{2r^{1}_{j}}(x^{1}_{j})\cap\mathcal{B}^{1} is diffeomorphic to ℝ×S3/Γj1\mathds{R}\times S^{3}/\Gamma^{1}_{j}.

Now to prove the theorem, let us inductively build a decomposition of M4M^{4}

M4=ℬ1∪⋃j2=1N2𝒩j22​⋃j2=1N2ℬj22∪⋯∪⋃jk=1Nk𝒩jkk​⋃jk=1Nkℬjkk∪⋃a=1Nk+1B2​rak​(xa),\displaystyle M^{4}=\mathcal{B}^{1}\cup\bigcup_{j_{2}=1}^{N_{2}}\mathcal{N}^{2}_{j_{2}}\bigcup_{j_{2}=1}^{N_{2}}\mathcal{B}^{2}_{j_{2}}\cup\cdots\cup\bigcup_{j_{k}=1}^{N_{k}}\mathcal{N}^{k}_{j_{k}}\bigcup_{j_{k}=1}^{N_{k}}\mathcal{B}^{k}_{j_{k}}\cup\bigcup_{a=1}^{N_{k+1}}B_{2r^{k}_{a}}(x_{a})\,, (8.56)

with the following properties:

  1. (1)

    If x∈ℬjℓx\in\mathcal{B}^{\ell}_{j} then rh​(x)>r0​(n,v,D)⋅diam⁡(ℬjℓ)r_{h}(x)>r_{0}(n,{\rm v},D)\cdot{\rm diam}(\mathcal{B}^{\ell}_{j}).

  2. (2)

    Each neck 𝒩jℓ\mathcal{N}^{\ell}_{j} is diffeomorphic to ℝ×S3/Γjℓ\mathds{R}\times S^{3}/\Gamma^{\ell}_{j} for some Γjℓ<O⁡(4)\Gamma^{\ell}_{j}<O(4).

  3. (3)

    𝒩jℓ∩ℬjℓ\mathcal{N}^{\ell}_{j}\cap\mathcal{B}^{\ell}_{j} are diffeomorphic to ℝ×S3/Γjℓ\mathds{R}\times S^{3}/\Gamma^{\ell}_{j}. 𝒩jℓ∩ℬj′ℓ−1\mathcal{N}^{\ell}_{j}\cap\mathcal{B}^{\ell-1}_{j^{\prime}} are either empty or diffeomorphic to ℝ×S3/Γjℓ\mathds{R}\times S^{3}/\Gamma^{\ell}_{j}.

  4. (4)

    Nℓ≤N⁡(n,v,D)N_{\ell}\leq N(n,{\rm v},D).

  5. (5)

    If 𝒩aℓ+1∩ℬjℓ≠∅\mathcal{N}^{\ell+1}_{a}\cap\mathcal{B}^{\ell}_{j}\neq\emptyset, then |Γaℓ|≤|Γjℓ|−1|\Gamma^{\ell}_{a}|\leq|\Gamma^{\ell}_{j}|-1.

  6. (6)

    We have rak=rαakr^{k}_{a}=r_{\alpha^{k}_{a}} with Tαakδ=0T^{\delta}_{\alpha^{k}_{a}}=0, and ℬjk∩Brak​(xa)⊆Arak/2,rak​(xa)\mathcal{B}^{k}_{j}\cap B_{r^{k}_{a}}(x_{a})\subseteq A_{r^{k}_{a}/2,r^{k}_{a}}(x_{a}).

  7. (7)

    If βak\beta^{k}_{a} is the largest integer such that 𝒱rβak/4δ​(xa)≥ln⁡|Γak|−δ\mathcal{V}^{\delta}_{r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}/4}(x_{a})\geq\ln|\Gamma^{k}_{a}|-\delta, then for every x∈B2​rβak​(xa)x\in B_{2r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}}(x_{a}) we have 𝒱rβak/8δ​(x)<ln⁡|Γak|−δ\mathcal{V}^{\delta}_{r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}/8}(x)<\ln|\Gamma^{k}_{a}|-\delta.

Before building the inductive decomposition, let us note that once we have it, we will have finished the proof. In fact, all we really need to see is that for some k≤k⁡(n,v,D)k\leq k(n,{\rm v},D), there are no balls {Brak​(xa)}\{B_{r^{k}_{a}}(x_{a})\} in the decomposition. To see this, observe that by the lower volume bound we have the upper order bound |Γj2|≤C⁡(v,D)|\Gamma^{2}_{j}|\leq C({\rm v},D). By condition (5) above we have by iteration that for each jj that there is some j2j_{2} such that

0≤|Γjk|≤|Γj22|−(k−2)≤C⁡(v,D)−(k−2),\displaystyle 0\leq|\Gamma^{k}_{j}|\leq|\Gamma^{2}_{j_{2}}|-(k-2)\leq C({\rm v},D)-(k-2)\,, (8.57)

and in particular this immediately implies the upper bound

k≤k⁡(v,D).\displaystyle k\leq k({\rm v},D)\,. (8.58)

To prove the inductive decomposition, we begin by noting that (8.55) provides the basic case. So let us assume that the decomposition has been constructed for some kk, and let us build the decomposition for k+1k+1.

First, we use condition (7) and Lemma 8.8 to see that there exists an open set

Arβak/2,2​rαak​(xa)⊆𝒩ak+1⊆A(1−ϵ)​rβak/2,2​(1+ϵ)​rαak​(xa),\displaystyle A_{r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}/2,2r_{\alpha^{k}_{a}}}(x_{a})\subseteq\mathcal{N}^{k+1}_{a}\subseteq A_{(1-\epsilon)r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}/2,2(1+\epsilon)r_{\alpha^{k}_{a}}}(x_{a})\,, (8.59)

and a diffeomorphism Φak+1:𝒩ak+1→Arβak/2,2​rαak​(0)\Phi^{k+1}_{a}:\mathcal{N}^{k+1}_{a}\to A_{r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}/2,2r_{\alpha^{k}_{a}}}(0) with 0∈ℝ4/Γak0\in\mathds{R}^{4}/\Gamma^{k}_{a}. By Lemma 8.9, there exists a radius ra=r¯​(v,δ)​rβakr_{a}=\bar{r}({\rm v},\delta)r_{\beta^{k}_{a}} such that

𝒱raδ​(x)<ln⁡(|Γak+1|−1)+δ,\displaystyle\mathcal{V}^{\delta}_{r_{a}}(x)<\ln\big(|\Gamma^{k+1}_{a}|-1\big)+\delta\,, (8.60)

for every x∈B2​rβak​(xa)x\in B_{2r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}}(x_{a}).

Pick some efficient covering {Bra(xa​j}\{B_{r_{a}}(x_{aj}\} of B2​rβak​(xa)B_{2r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}}(x_{a}) such that the balls in {Bra/4(xa​j}\{B_{r_{a}/4}(x_{aj}\} disjoint. Now apply Lemma 8.10 to each ball {Bra(xa​j}\{B_{r_{a}}(x_{aj}\} in order to construct a collection of balls {Bra​bk+1​(xa​bk+1)}\{B_{r^{k+1}_{ab}}(x^{k+1}_{ab})\} with ra​bk+1=rαa​bk+1>r¯​(v,δ)​rβakr^{k+1}_{ab}=r_{\alpha^{k+1}_{ab}}>\bar{r}({\rm v},\delta)r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}. Observe that since there are at most N⁡(v,D)N({\rm v},D) balls in the collection {Bra/4(xa​j}\{B_{r_{a}/4}(x_{aj}\}, and the application of Lemma 8.10 produces at most N⁡(v,D)N({\rm v},D) balls for each of these, we have at most N⁡(v,D)N({\rm v},D) such balls in total.

If we put

{ℬak+1B2​rβak(xa)∖∪Brαa​bk+1(xa​b),\displaystyle\{\mathcal{B}^{k+1}_{a}\ B_{2r_{\beta^{k}_{a}}}(x_{a})\setminus\cup B_{r_{\alpha^{k+1}_{ab}}}(x_{ab})\,, (8.61)

we see that ℬak+1\mathcal{B}^{k+1}_{a} and the collection {Bra​bk+1​(xa​bk+1)}\{B_{r^{k+1}_{ab}}(x^{k+1}_{ab})\} satisfy the inductive conditions. Specifically, what is left to check is condition (5). However, by construction, we have

ln⁡(|Γak|−1)+δ>𝒱ra​bk+1δ​(xa​b)≥ln⁡|Γa​bk+1|−δ,\displaystyle\ln(|\Gamma^{k}_{a}|-1)+\delta>\mathcal{V}^{\delta}_{r^{k+1}_{ab}}(x_{ab})\geq\ln|\Gamma^{k+1}_{ab}|-\delta\,, (8.62)

which for δ⁡(v)\delta({\rm v}) sufficiently small implies |Γa​jk+1|<|Γak||\Gamma^{k+1}_{aj}|<|\Gamma^{k}_{a}|. In particular, the decomposition

Mn≡ℬ1∪⋃j2=1N2𝒩j22​⋃j2=1N2ℬj22∪⋯∪⋃jk=1Nk𝒩jkk​⋃jk=1Nkℬjkk∪⋃a=1Nk+1𝒩ak+1​⋃ℬak+1​⋃B2​rαa​bk+1​(xa​b),\displaystyle M^{n}\equiv\mathcal{B}^{1}\cup\bigcup_{j_{2}=1}^{N_{2}}\mathcal{N}^{2}_{j_{2}}\bigcup_{j_{2}=1}^{N_{2}}\mathcal{B}^{2}_{j_{2}}\cup\cdots\cup\bigcup_{j_{k}=1}^{N_{k}}\mathcal{N}^{k}_{j_{k}}\bigcup_{j_{k}=1}^{N_{k}}\mathcal{B}^{k}_{j_{k}}\cup\bigcup_{a=1}^{N_{k+1}}\mathcal{N}^{k+1}_{a}\bigcup\mathcal{B}^{k+1}_{a}\bigcup B_{2r_{\alpha^{k+1}_{ab}}}(x_{ab})\,, (8.63)

satisfies the inductive hypothesis as well, which completes the proof.

∎

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