ScalingStacks

Proof. [031D]

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.

Recall that from (4.13) we see that on B×ℂn−mB\times\mathbb{C}^{n-m}

λt∗​p∗​T−σ∗​ω~t=p∗​(ω0+ωS​F)+−1​∂∂¯​ut,\lambda_{t}^{*}p^{*}T_{-\sigma}^{*}\tilde{\omega}_{t}=p^{*}(\omega_{0}+\omega_{SF})+\sqrt{-1}\partial\overline{\partial}u_{t},

where the functions ut=φ~t−t​λt∗​p∗​T−σ∗​ξu_{t}=\tilde{\varphi}_{t}-t\lambda_{t}^{*}p^{*}T_{-\sigma}^{*}\xi have uniform C∞C^{\infty} bounds on compact sets. We need to show that as tt goes to zero we have ut→(f∘p)∗​φu_{t}\to(f\circ p)^{*}\varphi in Cl​o​c∞​(B×ℂn−m,δ)C^{\infty}_{loc}(B\times\mathbb{C}^{n-m},\delta), where f∗​φf^{*}\varphi is the C1,αC^{1,\alpha} limit of φt\varphi_{t} from [38]. To prove this we need another estimate from the second-named author’s work [38, (3.9)], which implies that there is a constant CC (that depends on the initial choice of BB) so that for all 0<t⩽10<t\leqslant 1 we have

(4.21) supy∈BoscMy​φt⩽C​t.\sup_{y\in B}\mathrm{osc}_{M_{y}}\varphi_{t}\leqslant Ct.

We now use this together with the fact that φt→f∗​φ\varphi_{t}\to f^{*}\varphi in C0C^{0} to get that for any (y,z)(y,z) in B×ℂn−mB\times\mathbb{C}^{n-m} we have

|φ~t​(y,z)−(f∘p)∗​φ​(y,z)|=|φt∘T−σ∘p⁡(y,zt)−φ⁡(y)|⩽|φt∘p⁡(y,zt−σ~​(y))−φt∘p⁡(y,z)|+|φt∘p⁡(y,z)−((f∗​φ)∘p)​(y)|⩽C​t+supU|φt−f∗​φ|,\begin{split}|\tilde{\varphi}_{t}(y,z)-(f\circ p)^{*}\varphi(y,z)|&=\left|\varphi_{t}\circ T_{-\sigma}\circ p\left(y,\frac{z}{\sqrt{t}}\right)-\varphi(y)\right|\\ &\leqslant\left|\varphi_{t}\circ p\left(y,\frac{z}{\sqrt{t}}-\tilde{\sigma}(y)\right)-\varphi_{t}\circ p(y,z)\right|\\ &\ \ \ \ +|\varphi_{t}\circ p(y,z)-((f^{*}\varphi)\circ p)(y)|\\ &\leqslant Ct+\sup_{U}|\varphi_{t}-f^{*}\varphi|,\end{split}

where in the last line we used (4.21) because the points p​(y,zt−σ~​(y))p(y,\frac{z}{\sqrt{t}}-\tilde{\sigma}(y)) and p⁡(y,z)p(y,z) lie in the same fiber MyM_{y}. Letting tt go to zero we see that φ~t→(f∘p)∗​φ\tilde{\varphi}_{t}\to(f\circ p)^{*}\varphi in C0​(B×ℂn−m)C^{0}(B\times\mathbb{C}^{n-m}). On the other hand we have that t​λt∗​p∗​ξ→0t\lambda_{t}^{*}p^{*}\xi\to 0 in C0​(B×ℂn−m)C^{0}(B\times\mathbb{C}^{n-m}), and so ut→(f∘p)∗​φu_{t}\to(f\circ p)^{*}\varphi in C0​(B×ℂn−m)C^{0}(B\times\mathbb{C}^{n-m}). Thanks to the higher order estimates for utu_{t}, we also have that ut→(f∘p)∗​φu_{t}\to(f\circ p)^{*}\varphi in Cl​o​c∞​(B×ℂn−m,δ)C^{\infty}_{loc}(B\times\mathbb{C}^{n-m},\delta), up to shrinking BB slightly. ∎

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