ScalingStacks

4. More Monge-Ampère equations [02E9]

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

4. More Monge-Ampère equations

As we aim at constructing singular Kähler-Einstein metrics, it is important to consider Monge-Ampère equations of the following type,

(ω+d​dc​φ)n=et​φ​μ,(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=e^{t\varphi}\mu,

where μ\mu is a probability measure which satisfies condition ℋ⁡(α,A,ω){\mathcal{H}}(\alpha,A,\omega) (see definition 1.3), and tt is a real parameter. The case t=0t=0, treated in Theorem 2.1, will correspond to Ricci-flat metrics (see section 6). We focus here on case t>0t>0.

Theorem 4.1.

Let μ\mu be a probability measure which satisfies condition ℋ⁡(α,A,ω){\mathcal{H}}(\alpha,A,\omega) and fix t>0t>0. There exists a unique function φt∈P​S​H​(X,ω)∩𝒞0​(X)\varphi_{t}\in PSH(X,\omega)\cap{\mathcal{C}}^{0}(X) such that

(ω+d​dc​φt)n=et​φ​μ.(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi_{t})^{n}=e^{t\varphi}\mu.
Proof.

The uniqueness easily follows from the comparison principle as we explain in proposition 4.3 below. We are going to prove the existence by a fixed point method.

Fix ψ∈ℰ1​(X,ω)\psi\in{\mathcal{E}}^{1}(X,\omega) such that ∫Xψ​𝑑μ=0\int_{X}\psi d\mu=0, and let us consider the equation

M​A​(ψ)(ω+d​dc​φ)n=et​ψ−cψ​μ,MA(\psi)\hskip 56.9055pt(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=e^{t\psi-c_{\psi}}\mu,

where the constant cψ:=log⁡[∫Xet​ψ​𝑑μ]c_{\psi}:=\log[\int_{X}e^{t\psi}d\mu] is chosen so that

1=∫X(ω+d​dc​φ)n=e−cψ​∫Xet​ψ​𝑑μ.1=\int_{X}(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=e^{-c_{\psi}}\int_{X}e^{t\psi}d\mu.

Observe that μψ:=et​ψ−cψ​μ\mu_{\psi}:=e^{t\psi-c_{\psi}}\mu satisfies condition ℋ⁡(α,Aψ,ω){\mathcal{H}}(\alpha,A_{\psi},\omega), where Aψ=exp⁡(t​supXψ−cψ)A_{\psi}=\exp(t\sup_{X}\psi-c_{\psi}). It follows therefore from Theorem 2.1 that there exists a unique continuous function φ∈P​S​H​(X,ω)\varphi\in PSH(X,\omega) solution to M​A​(ψ)MA(\psi) and normalized by ∫Xφ​𝑑μ=0\int_{X}\varphi d\mu=0. We use here this linear normalization rather than the non-linear sup\sup-normalization: they are comparable thanks to proposition 2.7 in [GZ 1], which shows that

−Mμ≤∫Xu​𝑑μ−supXu≤0,-M_{\mu}\leq\int_{X}ud\mu-\sup_{X}u\leq 0,

for all functions u∈P​S​H​(X,ω)u\in PSH(X,\omega) and for some uniform constant Mμ>0M_{\mu}>0. Since ∫Xψ​𝑑μ=0\int_{X}\psi d\mu=0, we infer

(6) 0≤ℰω​(φ):=∫X|φ|​ωφn=e−cψ​∫X|φ|​et​ψ​𝑑μ≤2​Mμ​et​Mμ,0\leq{\mathcal{E}}_{\omega}(\varphi):=\int_{X}|\varphi|\omega_{\varphi}^{n}=e^{-c_{\psi}}\int_{X}|\varphi|e^{t\psi}d\mu\leq 2M_{\mu}e^{tM_{\mu}},

by observing that cψ≥0c_{\psi}\geq 0 since t≥0t\geq 0, and

∫X|φ|​𝑑μ≤∫X|φ−supXφ|​𝑑μ+supXφ≤2​Mμ,\int_{X}|\varphi|d\mu\leq\int_{X}|\varphi-\sup_{X}\varphi|d\mu+\sup_{X}\varphi\leq 2M_{\mu},

since ∫Xφ​𝑑μ=0\int_{X}\varphi d\mu=0.

The important fact here is that the energy ℰω​(φ){\mathcal{E}}_{\omega}(\varphi) of φ\varphi is bounded from above by a constant M0:=2​Mμ​et​MμM_{0}:=2M_{\mu}e^{tM_{\mu}} which is independent of ψ\psi. We have thus defined an operator

T:ψ∈𝒞M↦φ∈𝒞M0T:\psi\in{\mathcal{C}}_{M}\mapsto\varphi\in{\mathcal{C}}_{M_{0}}

which associates to ψ∈𝒞M\psi\in{\mathcal{C}}_{M} the unique solution φ∈𝒞M0\varphi\in{\mathcal{C}}_{M_{0}} to M​A​(ψ)MA(\psi), where

𝒞M:={ψ∈ℰ1(X,ω)/∫Xψdμ=0 and ℰω(ψ)≤M}.{\mathcal{C}}_{M}:=\left\{\psi\in{\mathcal{E}}^{1}(X,\omega)\,/\,\int_{X}\psi d\mu=0\text{ and }{\mathcal{E}}_{\omega}(\psi)\leq M\right\}.

It follows from proposition 3.2.3 in [GZ 2] that ℰ1​(X,ω){\mathcal{E}}^{1}(X,\omega) is convex. So is the subset of functions ψ∈ℰ1​(X,ω)\psi\in{\mathcal{E}}^{1}(X,\omega) such that ∫Xψ​𝑑μ=0\int_{X}\psi d\mu=0. The set 𝒞M{\mathcal{C}}_{M} is not convex, but it is relatively compact in L1​(X)L^{1}(X) and its closed convex hull 𝒞^M\hat{{\mathcal{C}}}_{M} is contained in 𝒞κn​M{\mathcal{C}}_{\kappa_{n}M} for some uniform constant κn\kappa_{n} which only depends on the dimension of XX: this follows from easy computations (see lemma 7.2 and the proof of proposition 3.2 in [GZ 2]). Therefore TT maps the compact convex set 𝒞^M\hat{{\mathcal{C}}}_{M} into itself if MM is large enough.

We claim that TT is continuous. Let (ψj)∈𝒞Mℕ(\psi_{j})\in{\mathcal{C}}_{M}^{\mathbb{N}} be a sequence of functions which converges in L1​(X)L^{1}(X) towards ψ∈𝒞M\psi\in{\mathcal{C}}_{M}. We need to show that φj:=T⁡(ψj)\varphi_{j}:=T(\psi_{j}) converges in L1​(X)L^{1}(X) towards T⁡(ψ)T(\psi). Since the set {u∈PSH(X,ω)/\{u\in PSH(X,\omega)\,/ ∫Xudμ=0}\,\int_{X}ud\mu=0\} is relatively compact in L1​(X)L^{1}(X) (see proposition 2.7 in [GZ 1]), we can assume – relabelling if necessary – that (φj)(\varphi_{j}) converges in L1​(X)L^{1}(X) towards a function φ∈P​S​H​(X,ω)\varphi\in PSH(X,\omega). We show in lemma 4.2 below that (φj)(\varphi_{j}) converges in L1​(μ)L^{1}(\mu) towards φ\varphi. In particular ∫Xφ​𝑑μ=0\int_{X}\varphi d\mu=0 and, passing to a subsequence if necessary, we can assume that et​ψj​(x)→et​ψ​(x)e^{t\psi_{j}(x)}\rightarrow e^{t\psi(x)} for μ\mu almost every point xx. Set

φ^j:=(supl≥jφl)∗​ and ​ψˇj:=infl≥jψl.\hat{\varphi}_{j}:=\left(\sup_{l\geq j}\varphi_{l}\right)^{*}\;\;\text{ and }\;\;\check{\psi}_{j}:=\inf_{l\geq j}\psi_{l}.

Observe that (φ^j)(\hat{\varphi}_{j}) decreases towards φ\varphi, while (et​ψˇj)(e^{t\check{\psi}_{j}}) increases towards et​ψe^{t\psi} at μ\mu almost every point. The energy of φ^j\hat{\varphi}_{j} is controlled by that of φj\varphi_{j} since φ^j≥φj\hat{\varphi}_{j}\geq\varphi_{j} (see lemma 7.2 in [GZ 2]), and ℰω​(φj)≤M0{\mathcal{E}}_{\omega}(\varphi_{j})\leq M_{0} by (5), therefore φ∈ℰ1​(X,ω)\varphi\in{\mathcal{E}}^{1}(X,\omega) and (ω+d​dc​φ^j)n→(ω+d​dc​φ)n(\omega+dd^{c}\hat{\varphi}_{j})^{n}\rightarrow(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}. It follows from an inequality of J.-P.Demailly [Dem 1] that

(ω+d​dc​φ^j)n≥et​ψˇj−c^j​μ,(\omega+dd^{c}\hat{\varphi}_{j})^{n}\geq e^{t\check{\psi}_{j}-\hat{c}_{j}}\mu,

where c^j:=supl≥jcψl\hat{c}_{j}:=\sup_{l\geq j}c_{\psi_{l}}. Observe that c^j→cψ\hat{c}_{j}\rightarrow c_{\psi}, thus

(ω+d​dc​φ)n≥et​ψ−cψ​μ.(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}\geq e^{t\psi-c_{\psi}}\mu.

Since these are two probability measures, there is actually equality hence φ=T⁡(ψ)\varphi=T(\psi): this shows that TT is continuous.

We can now invoke Schauder fixed point theorem, which yields a fixed point φ=T⁡(φ),φ∈𝒞M\varphi=T(\varphi),\varphi\in{\mathcal{C}}_{M}. The function φ\varphi is automatically continuous (by Theorem 2.1, since et​φ−cφ​μe^{t\varphi-c_{\varphi}}\mu satisfies OPENℋ⁡(α,A′,ω)){\mathcal{H}}(\alpha,A^{\prime},\omega)), hence Φ:=φ−t−1​cφ\Phi:=\varphi-t^{-1}c_{\varphi} is the solution we were looking for. ∎

Lemma 4.2.

The functions φj=T⁡(ψj)\varphi_{j}=T(\psi_{j}) (respectively et​ψje^{t\psi_{j}}) converge in L1​(μ)L^{1}(\mu) towards φ\varphi (respectively et​ψe^{t\psi}).

Proof.

We first show that (φj)(\varphi_{j}) converges to φ\varphi in L1​(μ)L^{1}(\mu). Observe that the sequence (φj)(\varphi_{j}) is uniformly bounded: this follows from Theorem 2.1 since (ω+d​dc​φj)n(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi_{j})^{n} satisfies ℋ⁡(α,Aj,ω){\mathcal{H}}(\alpha,A_{j},\omega), where Aj=et​supXψj−cψj​A≤et​Mμ​AA_{j}=e^{t\sup_{X}\psi_{j}-c_{\psi_{j}}}A\leq e^{tM_{\mu}}A is bounded from above. It follows then from standard arguments that ∫Xφj​𝑑μ→∫Xφ​𝑑μ\int_{X}\varphi_{j}d\mu\rightarrow\int_{X}\varphi d\mu (see e.g. the proof of lemma 5.2 in [Ce]).

Fix ε>0\varepsilon>0 and let GG be an open set of XX such that φ\varphi is continuous on X∖GX\setminus G and C​a​pω​(G)≤εCap_{\omega}(G)\leq\varepsilon (see corollary 3.8 in [GZ 1]). By Hartogs’ lemma, φj≤φ+ε\varphi_{j}\leq\varphi+\varepsilon on the compact set X∖GX\setminus G, if j≥jεj\geq j_{\varepsilon}. Observe that

∫X∖G|φ−φj|​𝑑μ≤2​ε+∫X∖G[φ−φj]​𝑑μ≤3​ε,\int_{X\setminus G}|\varphi-\varphi_{j}|d\mu\leq 2\varepsilon+\int_{X\setminus G}[\varphi-\varphi_{j}]d\mu\leq 3\varepsilon,

if j≥jε′j\geq j^{\prime}_{\varepsilon}. O the other hand since μ\mu satisfies ℋ⁡(α,A,ω){\mathcal{H}}(\alpha,A,\omega), we get

∫G|φ−φj|​𝑑μ≤2​M​μ​(G)≤2​M​A​ε1+α,\int_{G}|\varphi-\varphi_{j}|d\mu\leq 2M\mu(G)\leq 2MA\varepsilon^{1+\alpha},

where M=supj‖φj‖L∞​(X)M=\sup_{j}||\varphi_{j}||_{L^{\infty}(X)}. This shows that ‖φ−φj‖L1​(μ)→0||\varphi-\varphi_{j}||_{L^{1}(\mu)}\rightarrow 0.

The proof for (et​ψj)(e^{t\psi_{j}}) is similar: it suffices to note that the functions uj:=et​ψj−t​supXψju_{j}:=e^{t\psi_{j}-t\sup_{X}\psi_{j}} are ω\omega-psh and uniformly bounded. One can then apply the rest of the argument. ∎

Proposition 4.3.

Let φ,ψ∈ℰ1​(X,ω)\varphi,\psi\in{\mathcal{E}}^{1}(X,\omega) and t>0t>0 be such that

(ω+d​dc​φ)n​e−t​φ=(ω+d​dc​ψ)n​e−t​ψ.(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}e^{-t\varphi}=(\omega+dd^{c}\psi)^{n}e^{-t\psi}.

Then φ≡ψ\varphi\equiv\psi.

Proof.

It follows from the comparison principle (see [GZ 2]) that

∫(φ<ψ)(ω+d​dc​ψ)n≤∫(φ<ψ)(ω+d​dc​φ)n=∫(φ<ψ)et⁡(φ−ψ)​(ω+d​dc​ψ)n.\int_{(\varphi<\psi)}(\omega+dd^{c}\psi)^{n}\leq\int_{(\varphi<\psi)}(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=\int_{(\varphi<\psi)}e^{t(\varphi-\psi)}(\omega+dd^{c}\psi)^{n}.

Since et⁡(φ−ψ)<1e^{t(\varphi-\psi)}<1 on (φ<ψ)(\varphi<\psi), we infer φ≥ψ\varphi\geq\psi for ν\nu almost every point, where ν=(ω+d​dc​ψ)n\nu=(\omega+dd^{c}\psi)^{n}. Reversing the roles of φ,ψ\varphi,\psi yields φ=ψ\varphi=\psi for ν\nu almost every point. Therefore (ω+d​dc​φ)n=(ω+d​dc​ψ)n(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=(\omega+dd^{c}\psi)^{n}, hence φ−ψ=c\varphi-\psi=c is constant by Theorem 3.4 in [GZ 2]. Finally c=0c=0 since et​c=1e^{tc}=1 and t>0t>0. ∎

When KXK_{X} is nef and big, H.Tsuji constructed in [Ts] – using Kähler-Ricci flow techniques – a function ψ∈P​S​H​(X,ω)\psi\in PSH(X,\omega) such that

∫Xet​ψ​𝑑μ=1,ψ∈𝒞∞​(X∖E)​ and ​(ω+d​dc​ψ)n=et​ψ​μ​ in ​X∖E,\int_{X}e^{t\psi}d\mu=1,\;\psi\in{\mathcal{C}}^{\infty}(X\setminus E)\;\text{ and }(\omega+dd^{c}\psi)^{n}=e^{t\psi}\mu\text{ in }X\setminus E,

where EE is some exceptional divisor, ψ\psi is smooth outside the exceptionnal divisor of map associated to the base point free linear sustem |N​KX||NK_{X}|, N∈ℕN\in\mathbb{N} big enough and the current TK​E=ω+d​dc​ψT_{KE}=\omega+dd^{c}\psi defines a Kähler-Einstein metric. This function coincides with our solution thanks to the following unicity result.

Proposition 4.4.

Let μ\mu be a probability measure and t>0t>0. Let φ,ψ∈P​S​H​(X,ω)\varphi,\psi\in PSH(X,\omega) be such that ∫Xet​φ​𝑑μ=∫Xet​ψ​𝑑μ=1\int_{X}e^{t\varphi}d\mu=\int_{X}e^{t\psi}d\mu=1. Assume φ∈ℰ1​(X,ω)\varphi\in{\mathcal{E}}^{1}(X,\omega) is a global solution to the complex Monge-Ampère equation (ω+d​dc​φ)n=et​φ​μ(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=e^{t\varphi}\mu, while ψ∈𝒞0​(X∖E)\psi\in{\mathcal{C}}^{0}(X\setminus E) satisfies (ω+d​dc​ψ)n=et​ψ​μ(\omega+dd^{c}\psi)^{n}=e^{t\psi}\mu only in X∖EX\setminus E.

Then ψ∈ℰ1​(X,ω)\psi\in{\mathcal{E}}^{1}(X,\omega) and ψ≡φ\psi\equiv\varphi.

Proof.

Set ψj:=max⁡(ψ,−j)∈P​S​H​(X,ω)∩L∞​(X)\psi_{j}:=\max(\psi,-j)\in PSH(X,\omega)\cap L^{\infty}(X). Observe that the probability measures (ω+d​dc​ψj)n(\omega+dd^{c}\psi_{j})^{n} converge in X∖EX\setminus E towards the measure ν=et​ψ​μ\nu=e^{t\psi}\mu. Since ν⁡(X)=ν⁡(X∖E)=1\nu(X)=\nu(X\setminus E)=1, it follows that (ω+d​dc​φj)n(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi_{j})^{n} converges to ν\nu on all of XX.

Fix ε>0\varepsilon>0 and set vε:=(ψ+ε​v)/(1+ε)∈P​S​H​(X,ω)v_{\varepsilon}:=(\psi+\varepsilon v)/(1+\varepsilon)\in PSH(X,\omega), where v∈P​S​H​(X,ω)v\in PSH(X,\omega), v≤0v\leq 0, is such that eve^{v} is continuous and (v=−∞)=E(v=-\infty)=E. It follows from lemma 2.2 that for all s>0s>0,

Capω(ψj<−s−1)≤∫(ψj<−s)(ω+ddcψj)n≤∫(vε≤−s/(1+ε))(ω+ddcψj)n.Cap_{\omega}(\psi_{j}<-s-1)\leq\int_{(\psi_{j}<-s)}(\omega+dd^{c}\psi_{j})^{n}\leq\int_{(v_{\varepsilon}\leq-s/(1+\varepsilon))}(\omega+dd^{c}\psi_{j})^{n}.

Observe that evεe^{v_{\varepsilon}} is continuous on XX, hence the sublevel sets (vε≤c)(v_{\varepsilon}\leq c) are compact. We infer, letting j→+∞j\rightarrow+\infty,

Capω(ψ<−s−1)≤∫(vε≤−s/(1+ε))et​ψdμ.Cap_{\omega}(\psi<-s-1)\leq\int_{(v_{\varepsilon}\leq-s/(1+\varepsilon))}e^{t\psi}d\mu.

Letting ε\varepsilon go to zero and using that μ⁡(X)=1\mu(X)=1 yields

C​a​pω​(ψ<−s−1)≤∫(ψ<−s)et​ψ​𝑑μ≤e−s.Cap_{\omega}(\psi<-s-1)\leq\int_{(\psi<-s)}e^{t\psi}d\mu\leq e^{-s}.

Therefore the capacity of the sublevel sets of ψ\psi decreases fast as s→+∞s\rightarrow+\infty, hence by lemma 6.2 in [GZ 2] we get ψ∈ℰ1​(X,ω)\psi\in{\mathcal{E}}^{1}(X,\omega). Since e−t​φ​(ω+d​dc​φ)n≡e−t​ψ​(ω+d​dc​ψ)ne^{-t\varphi}(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}\equiv e^{-t\psi}(\omega+dd^{c}\psi)^{n}, it follows from proposition 4.3 that φ≡ψ\varphi\equiv\psi. ∎

Theorem 4.5.

Let XX be projective algebraic complex manifold, ω0\omega_{0} a smooth semi Kähler form that is Kähler outside a complex subvariety S⊂XS\subset X, and fix Ω\Omega be a Kähler form on XX. Assume that ωon=D​Ωn\omega_{o}^{n}=D\Omega^{n}, where D−εD^{-\varepsilon} is in L1​(Ωn)L^{1}(\Omega^{n}), and that [ω0],[Ω]∈N​Sℝ​(X)[\omega_{0}],[\Omega]\in NS_{\mathbb{R}}(X).

Let s1,…,sps_{1},...,s_{p} (resp. t1,…,tqt_{1},...,t_{q}) be holomorphic sections of some line bundle LL (resp L′L^{\prime}) on XX. Fix k∈ℝ≥0k\in\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}, l∈ℝ≥0l\in\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0} and F∈𝒞∞​(X,ℝ)F\in{\mathcal{C}}^{\infty}(X,\mathbb{R}). Assume that

∫X1|t1|2​l+…+|tq|2​l​Ωn<∞​ and ​∫X|s1|2​k+…+|sp|2​k|t1|2​l+…+|tq|2​l​eF​Ωn=∫XΩn.\int_{X}\frac{1}{|t_{1}|^{2l}+\ldots+|t_{q}|^{2l}}\Omega^{n}<\infty\text{ and }\int_{X}\frac{|s_{1}|^{2k}+\ldots+|s_{p}|^{2k}}{|t_{1}|^{2l}+\ldots+|t_{q}|^{2l}}e^{F}\Omega^{n}=\int_{X}\Omega^{n}.

For each t>0t>0, the unique function φ∈P​S​H​(X,ω0)∩𝒞0​(X)\varphi\in PSH(X,\omega_{0})\cap{\mathcal{C}}^{0}(X) such that

(ω0+d​dc​φ)n=|s1|2​k+…+|sp|2​k|t1|2​l+…+|tq|2​l​eF+t​φ​Ωn(\omega_{0}+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=\frac{|s_{1}|^{2k}+\ldots+|s_{p}|^{2k}}{|t_{1}|^{2l}+\ldots+|t_{q}|^{2l}}e^{F+t\varphi}\,\Omega^{n}

is smooth outside B=S∪∩i{si=0}∪∩i{ti=0}B=S\cup\cap_{i}\{s_{i}=0\}\cup\cap_{i}\{t_{i}=0\}.

Proof.

The proof of Theorem 3.5 applies here almost verbatim. ∎

Remark 4.6.

We will apply Theorem 4.1 in section 6 to construct singular Kähler-Einstein metrics on manifolds of general type. This will follow from the resolution of (ω+d​dc​φ)n=et​φ​μ(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=e^{t\varphi}\mu for large enough values of t>0t>0. The Monge-Ampère equations

(ω+d​dc​φ)n=e−t​φ​μ,t>0,(\omega+dd^{c}\varphi)^{n}=e^{-t\varphi}\mu,\;\;t>0,

can also be solved with a similar method, but only for small values of t<tXt<t_{X}. The critical exponent tXt_{X} depends on the manifold XX, and may be too small to produce Kähler-Einstein metrics when c1​(X)>0c_{1}(X)>0: even smooth manifolds of positive scalar curvature do not necessarily admit Kähler-Einstein metrics (see [T]). Since technical details are much more involved in this case, we postpone this study to a forthcoming article.

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