ScalingStacks

Proof. [042Q]

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.

The periods along the generating cycles in the T2T^{2}-fibres are straightforward:

∫S1ζ~i′=∫S1−1ϑi=2π−1,i=1,2,\int_{S^{1}}\tilde{\zeta}_{i}^{\prime}=\int_{S^{1}}\sqrt{-1}\vartheta_{i}=2\pi\sqrt{-1},\quad i=1,2,

and ∫S1ζ~0′=−−1∫S1ϑ1+ϑ2=−4π−1\int_{S^{1}}\tilde{\zeta}_{0}^{\prime}=-\sqrt{-1}\int_{S^{1}}\vartheta_{1}+\vartheta_{2}=-4\pi\sqrt{-1}.

Computing the period along the other S1S^{1} requires a special trick. As a preparatory subtle remark, the Kähler metric is not globally defined over the base ℝμ1,μ22×(S1×ℝ)η\mathbb{R}^{2}_{\mu_{1},\mu_{2}}\times(S^{1}\times\mathbb{R})_{\eta} due to incompleteness issues, but the quantities v~i​j,w~,ϑi\tilde{v}^{ij},\tilde{w},\vartheta_{i} make sense globally. Consider the S1S^{1} on the base defined by {μ1=μ2=0,y=const}\{\mu_{1}=\mu_{2}=0,y=\text{const}\}. If we attempt to lift this S1S^{1} by parallel transport, in general we cannot get a closed loop, and this failure is measured by the holonomy of the T2T^{2}-connection ϑ=(ϑ1,ϑ2)\vartheta=(\vartheta_{1},\vartheta_{2}) along the S1S^{1}. When y→+∞y\to+\infty, due to the exponential decay of the xx-dependent part of v~i​j,w~,ϑi\tilde{v}^{ij},\tilde{w},\vartheta_{i}, this holonomy converges to two real numbers (θ1∞,θ2∞)(\theta_{1}^{\infty},\theta_{2}^{\infty}) modulo 2​π​ℤ2\pi\mathbb{Z}. In particular, if we twist ϑ\vartheta by a flat T2T^{2}-connection, then θ1∞,θ2∞\theta_{1}^{\infty},\theta_{2}^{\infty} receive a corresponding twist so that ζ~i\tilde{\zeta}_{i} is unaffected. Thus we can assume without loss of generality that θi∞=0\theta_{i}^{\infty}=0, namely the asymptotic holonomy of ϑ\vartheta is zero, so in the limit the S1S^{1} cycle lifts to a closed loop, on which we can evaluate the period asymptotically.

By construction ∫S1ϑi=0\int_{S^{1}}\vartheta_{i}=0, and using β~i​(0,0,η)=βi​(0,0,1)​π​cot⁡(π​η)\tilde{\beta}_{i}(0,0,\eta)=\beta_{i}(0,0,1)\pi\cot(\pi\eta) from the proof of Lemma 3.7, we compute

∫S1ζ~i′=∫S1(β~i+βi​(0,0,1)​π​−1)​𝑑ζ=limy→∞∫S1βi​(0,0,1)​(π​cot⁡(π​η)+π​−1)​𝑑η=limy→∞βi​(0,0,1)​∫S1d​log⁡(1−e2​π​−1​η)=0.\begin{split}\int_{S^{1}}\tilde{\zeta}_{i}^{\prime}&=\int_{S^{1}}(\tilde{\beta}_{i}+\beta_{i}(0,0,1)\pi\sqrt{-1})d\zeta\\ &=\lim_{y\to\infty}\int_{S^{1}}\beta_{i}(0,0,1)(\pi\cot(\pi\eta)+\pi\sqrt{-1})d\eta\\ &=\lim_{y\to\infty}\beta_{i}(0,0,1)\int_{S^{1}}d\log(1-e^{2\pi\sqrt{-1}\eta})=0.\end{split}

From this we see the integrality condition on the periods, so the holomorphic functions ZiZ_{i} are well defined without multivalue issues.

Notice the definition of ZiZ_{i} for i=0,1,2i=0,1,2 involve three unspecified multiplicative constants; by prescribing their product appropriately, the functional equation follows from Lemma 3.9. The remaining two free multiplicative constants will be fixed in later Sections. ∎

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