ScalingStacks

6.1. The neck region: a doubly periodic analogue of the Ooguri-Vafa metric [03II]

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 Β· Original author HTML

6.1. The neck region: a doubly periodic analogue of the Ooguri-Vafa metric

Given m0βˆˆβ„€+m_{0}\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}, the neck region (𝒩m04,gG​H)(\mathcal{N}_{m_{0}}^{4},g_{GH}) is obtained from a Gibbons-Hawking space based on 𝕋2×ℝ\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R} with m0m_{0} monopole points. The Gibbons-Hawking metric is determined by a harmonic function on 𝕋2×ℝ\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R}. Notice that, the topology of K3⁑3\K 3 requires

(6.9) m0=bβˆ’+b+.m_{0}=b_{-}+b_{+}.

Consider the flat cylinder (𝕋2×ℝ,g0)(\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R},g_{0}) and denote by 𝒫m0≑{p1,…,pm0}βŠ‚π•‹2×ℝ\mathcal{P}_{m_{0}}\equiv\{p_{1},\ldots,p_{m_{0}}\}\subset\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R} a finite set of monopoles, let V∞V_{\infty} be the Green’s function from Corollary 2.7, which satisfies

(6.10) βˆ’Ξ”g0​V∞=2β€‹Ο€β€‹βˆ‘m=1m0Ξ΄pm.-\Delta_{g_{0}}V_{\infty}=2\pi\sum\limits_{m=1}^{m_{0}}\delta_{p_{m}}.

In the gluing procedure, we need to modify the above Green’s function V∞V_{\infty} such that the metric on the neck matches up with the metric of the Tian-Yau parts. For this purpose, we analyze the asymptotic behavior of V∞V_{\infty} at the two ends of the neck region. By Corollary 2.7, there are bounded harmonic functions h+h_{+} and hβˆ’h_{-} on 𝕋2×ℝ\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R} such that

(6.11) Vβˆžβ€‹(z)={π⁑(bβˆ’+b+)A​z+Ξ²βˆ’+hβˆ’,zβ‰ͺβˆ’1,βˆ’Ο€β‘(bβˆ’+b+)A​z+Ξ²++h+,z≫1,\displaystyle V_{\infty}(z)=\begin{cases}\frac{\pi(b_{-}+b_{+})}{A}z+\beta_{-}+h_{-},&z\ll-1,\\ -\frac{\pi(b_{-}+b_{+})}{A}z+\beta_{+}+h_{+},&z\gg 1,\end{cases}

and hΒ±h_{\pm} satisfy the asymptotic behavior h±​(𝒙)=O⁑(eβˆ’Ο΅0​|z⁑(𝒙)|)h_{\pm}(\bm{x})=O(e^{-\epsilon_{0}|z(\bm{x})|}).

For fixed Ξ²>0\beta>0, we define a new harmonic function on 𝕋2×ℝ\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R},

(6.12) Vβ​(z)≑Vβˆžβ€‹(z)+k​z+Ξ²V_{\beta}(z)\equiv V_{\infty}(z)+kz+\beta

such that the metric on the neck can be glued with the metric on the Tian-Yau space. First, we need to match the slopes, that is, the slope parameter kk should be chosen as

(6.13) k=π⁑(bβˆ’βˆ’b+)A.\displaystyle k=\frac{\pi(b_{-}-b_{+})}{A}.

Then near to the two ends of the neck region, the harmonic function VΞ²V_{\beta} can be written as

(6.14) Vβ​(z)={2​π​bβˆ’A​z+Ξ²βˆ’+Ξ²+hβˆ’,zβ‰ͺβˆ’1,βˆ’2​π​b+A​z+Ξ²++Ξ²+h+,z≫1.\displaystyle V_{\beta}(z)=\begin{cases}\frac{2\pi b_{-}}{A}z+\beta_{-}+\beta+h_{-},&z\ll-1,\\ -\frac{2\pi b_{+}}{A}z+\beta_{+}+\beta+h_{+},&z\gg 1.\end{cases}

Using this potential, we next define the neck metric through the Gibbons-Hawking ansatz. Letting 𝒫m0\mathcal{P}_{m_{0}} denote the set of monopole points, we note that H2​((𝕋2×ℝ)βˆ–π’«m0,β„€)H^{2}((\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R})\setminus\mathcal{P}_{m_{0}},\mathbb{Z}) has dimension m0+1m_{0}+1 with generators being small spheres around the monopole points, and any torus of the form 𝕋2Γ—{zβ€²}\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\{z^{\prime}\} where zβ€²z^{\prime} is any value of zz for which there are no monopole points. It is easy to see that the 22-form 12β€‹Ο€βˆ—d​VΞ²\frac{1}{2\pi}*dV_{\beta} attains integer values on these cycles, which implies that the cohomology class [12β€‹Ο€βˆ—d​VΞ²][\frac{1}{2\pi}*dV_{\beta}] lies in the image of the natural inclusion

(6.15) H2​((𝕋2×ℝ)βˆ–π’«m0,β„€)β†ͺH2​((𝕋2×ℝ)βˆ–π’«m0,ℝ).\displaystyle H^{2}((\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R})\setminus\mathcal{P}_{m_{0}},\mathbb{Z})\hookrightarrow H^{2}((\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R})\setminus\mathcal{P}_{m_{0}},\mathbb{R}).

Therefore, we let 𝒩m04\mathcal{N}_{m_{0}}^{4} be the total space of the S1S^{1}-bundle over (𝕋2×ℝ)βˆ–π’«m0(\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R})\setminus\mathcal{P}_{m_{0}} corresponding to the class [12β€‹Ο€βˆ—d​VΞ²][\frac{1}{2\pi}*dV_{\beta}], completed by adding finitely many points corresponding to 𝒫m0\mathcal{P}_{m_{0}}. Choose a connection 11-form ΞΈ\theta on 𝒩m0\mathcal{N}_{m_{0}} so that

(6.16) dΞΈ=βˆ—dVΞ².\displaystyle d\theta=*dV_{\beta}.

Then applying the Gibbons-Hawking construction to VΞ²V_{\beta}, we obtain a smooth hyperkΓ€hler triple 𝝎N\bm{\omega}^{N} over 𝒩m04\mathcal{N}_{m_{0}}^{4}, which induces an incomplete hyperkΓ€hler metric over the part in 𝕋2×ℝ\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R} where VΞ²V_{\beta} is strictly positive.

For parameters Tβˆ’>0T_{-}>0 and T+>0T_{+}>0, we define,

(6.17) 𝒩m04(βˆ’Tβˆ’,T+)β‰‘Ο€βˆ’1(U∩{βˆ’Tβˆ’<z<T+}),\mathcal{N}_{m_{0}}^{4}(-T_{-},T_{+})\equiv\pi^{-1}\big(U\cap\{-T_{-}<z<T_{+}\}\big),

where Ο€:𝒩m04β†’U≑(𝕋2×ℝ)βˆ–π’«m0\pi:\mathcal{N}_{m_{0}}^{4}\rightarrow U\equiv(\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R})\setminus\mathcal{P}_{m_{0}} is the bundle projection.

Proposition 6.1.

There is a diffeomorphism

(6.18) Ξ¦βˆ’N:(βˆ’Tβˆ’,βˆ’Tβˆ’+1,)Γ—Nilbβˆ’3(Ο΅,Ο„)→𝒩m04(βˆ’Tβˆ’,βˆ’Tβˆ’+1),\displaystyle\Phi^{N}_{-}:(-T_{-},-T_{-}+1,)\times\Nil^{3}_{b_{-}}(\epsilon,\tau)\rightarrow\mathcal{N}_{m_{0}}^{4}(-T_{-},-T_{-}+1),

which preserves the zz-coordinate, such that

(6.19) (Ξ¦βˆ’N)βˆ—β€‹ΞΈ=ΞΈbβˆ’+O⁑(eβˆ’Ξ΄N​Tβˆ’),(\Phi^{N}_{-})^{*}\theta=\theta_{b_{-}}+O(e^{-\delta_{N}T_{-}}),

as Tβˆ’β†’βˆžT_{-}\rightarrow\infty. Similarly, there is a diffeomorphism

(6.20) Ξ¦+N:(T+βˆ’1,T+)Γ—Nilβˆ’b+3⁑(Ο΅,Ο„)→𝒩m04​(T+βˆ’1,T+),\displaystyle\Phi^{N}_{+}:(T_{+}-1,T_{+})\times\Nil^{3}_{-b_{+}}(\epsilon,\tau)\rightarrow\mathcal{N}_{m_{0}}^{4}(T_{+}-1,T_{+}),

which preserves the zz-coordinate, such that

(6.21) (Ξ¦+N)βˆ—β€‹ΞΈ=ΞΈβˆ’b++O⁑(eβˆ’Ξ΄N​T+),(\Phi^{N}_{+})^{*}\theta=\theta_{-b_{+}}+O(e^{-\delta_{N}T_{+}}),

as T+β†’βˆžT_{+}\rightarrow\infty. Furthermore, there exist triples of 11-forms on the ends of the neck such that

(6.22) (Ξ¦βˆ’N)βˆ—β€‹πŽNβˆ’πŽbβˆ’=d⁑(π’‚βˆ’N)\displaystyle(\Phi^{N}_{-})^{*}\bm{\omega}^{N}-\bm{\omega}_{b_{-}}=d(\bm{a}^{N}_{-})
(6.23) (Ξ¦+N)βˆ—β€‹πŽNβˆ’πŽβˆ’b+=d⁑(𝒂+N),\displaystyle(\Phi^{N}_{+})^{*}\bm{\omega}^{N}-\bm{\omega}_{-b_{+}}=d(\bm{a}^{N}_{+}),

with

(6.24) |βˆ‡k𝒂±N|≀C​eβˆ’Ξ΄N​|z|\displaystyle|\nabla^{k}\bm{a}^{N}_{\pm}|\leq Ce^{-\delta_{N}|z|}

for any integer kβ‰₯0k\geq 0 and Ο΅>0\epsilon>0, where Ξ΄N>0\delta_{N}>0 is a uniform constant in Proposition 3.4, π›šbβˆ’\bm{\omega}_{b_{-}} and π›šβˆ’b+\bm{\omega}_{-b_{+}} are the hyperkΓ€hler triples on the corresponding Calabi model spaces.

Proof.

We just deal with the negative end of the neck, the positive end is similar. Let

(6.25) Uβˆ’={p∈(𝕋2×ℝ)βˆ–{p1,…,pm0}|βˆ’βˆž<z<βˆ’Tβˆ’/2}.\displaystyle U_{-}=\{p\in(\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R})\setminus\{p_{1},\dots,p_{m_{0}}\}\ |\ -\infty<z<-T_{-}/2\}.

Note that Uβˆ’U_{-} deformation retracts to 𝕋2\mathbb{T}^{2}, so H2​(Uβˆ’,β„€)=β„€H^{2}(U_{-},\mathbb{Z})=\mathbb{Z}. The neck is a circle bundle over U=(𝕋2×ℝ)βˆ–{p1,…,pm0}U=(\mathbb{T}^{2}\times\mathbb{R})\setminus\{p_{1},\dots,p_{m_{0}}\}, and call the restriction to Uβˆ’U_{-} by 𝒩Uβˆ’\mathcal{N}_{U_{-}}. Note this bundle has Euler number bβˆ’b_{-}.

Over Uβˆ’U_{-} there exists another S1S^{1}-bundle explicitly identified with an open subset of the model space

(6.26) 𝒩bβˆ’=(βˆ’βˆž,βˆ’Tβˆ’+1,)Γ—Nilbβˆ’3(Ο΅,Ο„),\displaystyle\mathcal{N}_{b_{-}}=(-\infty,-T_{-}+1,)\times\Nil^{3}_{b_{-}}(\epsilon,\tau),

with connection form ΞΈbβˆ’\theta_{b_{-}}, which has curvature form βˆ’2​π​bβˆ’A​d​x∧d​y-\frac{2\pi b_{-}}{A}dx\wedge dy, so this bundle also has Euler number bβˆ’b_{-}. From the exponential sheaf sequence, H1​(Uβˆ’,β„°βˆ—)β‰…H2​(Uβˆ’,β„€)H^{1}(U_{-},\mathcal{E}^{*})\cong H^{2}(U_{-},\mathbb{Z}), so there exists a bundle equivalence

(6.27) H:𝒩bβˆ’β†’π’©Uβˆ’\displaystyle H:\mathcal{N}_{b_{-}}\rightarrow\mathcal{N}_{U_{-}}

which covers the identity map on the base, and such that the pullback bundle Hβˆ—β€‹π’©Uβˆ’=𝒩bβˆ’H^{*}\mathcal{N}_{U_{-}}=\mathcal{N}_{b_{-}}. The 11-forms Hβˆ—β€‹ΞΈH^{*}\theta and ΞΈbβˆ’\theta_{b_{-}} are therefore both connection forms on 𝒩bβˆ’\mathcal{N}_{b_{-}}. Note that

(6.28) d(Hβˆ—ΞΈ)=Hβˆ—dΞΈ=Hβˆ—(βˆ—dV)=βˆ—dVΞ²,\displaystyle d(H^{*}\theta)=H^{*}d\theta=H^{*}(*dV)=*dV_{\beta},

and

(6.29) d​θbβˆ’=βˆ’2​π​bβˆ’A​d​x∧d​y.\displaystyle d\theta_{b_{-}}=-\frac{2\pi b_{-}}{A}dx\wedge dy.

From the asymptotics on VΞ²V_{\beta} in (6.14), we have

(6.30) d⁑(Hβˆ—β€‹ΞΈβˆ’ΞΈbβˆ’)=O⁑(eδ′​z),\displaystyle d(H^{*}\theta-\theta_{b_{-}})=O(e^{\delta^{\prime}z}),

as zβ†’βˆ’βˆžz\rightarrow-\infty. By same method from the proof of Lemma 3.7, we conclude that

(6.31) d⁑(Hβˆ—β€‹ΞΈβˆ’ΞΈbβˆ’)=d​a,\displaystyle d(H^{*}\theta-\theta_{b_{-}})=da,

where a=O⁑(eδ′​z)a=O(e^{\delta^{\prime}z}), as zβ†’βˆ’βˆžz\to-\infty. Therefore

(6.32) d⁑(Hβˆ—β€‹ΞΈβˆ’ΞΈ~bβˆ’)=0\displaystyle d(H^{*}\theta-\tilde{\theta}_{b_{-}})=0

where ΞΈ~bβˆ’=ΞΈbβˆ’+a\tilde{\theta}_{b_{-}}=\theta_{b_{-}}+a. Since Hβˆ—β€‹ΞΈH^{*}\theta and ΞΈ~bβˆ’\tilde{\theta}_{b_{-}} are two connections with the same curvature form, and since H1​(Uβˆ’,ℝ)β‰…H1​(𝕋2,ℝ)β‰…β„βŠ•β„H^{1}(U_{-},\mathbb{R})\cong H^{1}(\mathbb{T}^{2},\mathbb{R})\cong\mathbb{R}\oplus\mathbb{R}, we conclude that

(6.33) Hβˆ—β€‹ΞΈβˆ’ΞΈ~bβˆ’=d​f+p​d​x+q​d​y,\displaystyle H^{*}\theta-\tilde{\theta}_{b_{-}}=df+pdx+qdy,

for some function f:Uβˆ’β†’β„f:U_{-}\rightarrow\mathbb{R}, and constants p,qβˆˆβ„p,q\in\mathbb{R}.

Next, there exists a gauge transformation, that is, a mapping G:𝒩bβˆ’β†’π’©bβˆ’G:\mathcal{N}_{b_{-}}\rightarrow\mathcal{N}_{b_{-}}, covering the identity map, given by fiber rotation by ei​fe^{if}, so that

(6.34) Gβˆ—β€‹Hβˆ—β€‹ΞΈβˆ’ΞΈ~bβˆ’=p​d​x+q​d​y.\displaystyle G^{*}H^{*}\theta-\tilde{\theta}_{b_{-}}=pdx+qdy.

Then, by the discussion in Subsection 2.2, there exists a mapping R:𝒩bβˆ’β†’π’©bβˆ’R:\mathcal{N}_{b_{-}}\rightarrow\mathcal{N}_{b_{-}} which is the lift of a rotation on the torus, so that Rβˆ—β€‹ΞΈbβˆ’=ΞΈbβˆ’βˆ’p​d​xβˆ’q​d​yR^{*}\theta_{b_{-}}=\theta_{b_{-}}-pdx-qdy. Pulling back (6.34),

(6.35) Rβˆ—β€‹Gβˆ—β€‹Hβˆ—β€‹ΞΈβˆ’Rβˆ—β€‹ΞΈ~bβˆ’=Rβˆ—β€‹(p​d​x+q​d​y).\displaystyle R^{*}G^{*}H^{*}\theta-R^{*}\tilde{\theta}_{b_{-}}=R^{*}(pdx+qdy).

Since RR covers a rotation on the torus, the right hand side is invariant under RR, so this can be rewritten as

(6.36) Rβˆ—β€‹Gβˆ—β€‹Hβˆ—β€‹ΞΈβˆ’ΞΈbβˆ’β€²=0,\displaystyle R^{*}G^{*}H^{*}\theta-\theta_{b_{-}}^{\prime}=0,

where ΞΈbβˆ’β€²=ΞΈbβˆ’+O⁑(eδ​z)\theta_{b_{-}}^{\prime}=\theta_{b_{-}}+O(e^{\delta z}) as zβ†’βˆ’βˆžz\rightarrow-\infty. Then we define Ξ¦βˆ’N=H∘G∘R\Phi^{N}_{-}=H\circ G\circ R. The zz coordinate is not affected because HH and GG both cover the identity map, and RR covers a rotation on the torus.

Next, it follows from (6.19) that the leading terms of the hyperkΓ€hler triple on the neck agree with the model hyperkΓ€hler triple for zβ‰ͺ0z\ll 0 (note we can allow VV to become negative, the triple is still defined). The same method from the proof of Lemma 3.7 then yields (6.22).

∎

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