ScalingStacks

3.7.2. Modifying the Kähler ansatz I [043T]

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

3.7.2. Modifying the Kähler ansatz I

We now modify (g~(2),ω~(2),Ω~(2))(\tilde{g}^{(2)},\tilde{\omega}^{(2)},\tilde{\Omega}^{(2)}) to an intermediate Kähler ansatz (g~(3),ω~(3),Ω)(\tilde{g}^{(3)},\tilde{\omega}^{(3)},\Omega) designed to match up exactly with (g(1),ω(1),Ωℂ3)(g^{(1)},\omega^{(1)},\Omega_{\mathbb{C}^{3}}) over {|μ→|a≤16A1/2}\{|\vec{\mu}|_{a}\leq\frac{1}{6}A^{1/2}\}. This will be constructed using the generalised Gibbons-Hawking ansatz.

Take a standard cutoff function χ\chi on ℝ\mathbb{R} with

χ⁡(s)={1s≤1,0s≥2,\chi(s)=\begin{cases}1\quad s\leq 1,\\ 0\quad s\geq 2,\end{cases}

and let φ3=χ⁡(|μ→|a16​A1/2)​φ2\varphi_{3}=\chi(\frac{|\vec{\mu}|_{a}}{\frac{1}{6}A^{1/2}})\varphi_{2} with φ2\varphi_{2} from Corollary 3.27,

V~(3)i​j=V~(2)i​j+∂2φ3∂μi​∂μj,W~(3)i​j=W~(2)i​j−4​∂2φ3∂η​∂η¯.\tilde{V}_{(3)}^{ij}=\tilde{V}_{(2)}^{ij}+\frac{\partial^{2}\varphi_{3}}{\partial\mu_{i}\partial\mu_{j}},\quad\tilde{W}_{(3)}^{ij}=\tilde{W}_{(2)}^{ij}-4\frac{\partial^{2}\varphi_{3}}{\partial\eta\partial\bar{\eta}}.

The perturbations are sufficiently small so that positive definiteness is not affected. The generalised Gibbons-Hawking construction produces the intermediate Kähler ansatz (g~(3),ω~(3),Ω)(\tilde{g}^{(3)},\tilde{\omega}^{(3)},\Omega). We identify Mν+M^{+}_{\nu} with the underlying space of (g~(3),ω~(3),Ω)(\tilde{g}^{(3)},\tilde{\omega}^{(3)},\Omega). The T2T^{2}-connection for (g~(3),ω~(3),Ω)(\tilde{g}^{(3)},\tilde{\omega}^{(3)},\Omega) is identified as (cf. (1.13))

ϑi(3)=ϑi(2)+−1​∂2φ3∂η​∂μi​d​η−−1​∂2φ3∂η¯​∂μi​d​η¯.\vartheta_{i}^{(3)}=\vartheta_{i}^{(2)}+\sqrt{-1}\frac{\partial^{2}\varphi_{3}}{\partial\eta\partial\mu_{i}}d\eta-\sqrt{-1}\frac{\partial^{2}\varphi_{3}}{\partial\bar{\eta}\partial\mu_{i}}d\bar{\eta}.

This amounts to making a gauge choice.

By construction (g~(3),ω~(3),Ω)(\tilde{g}^{(3)},\tilde{\omega}^{(3)},\Omega) agrees identically with (g~(2),ω~(2),Ω~(2))(\tilde{g}^{(2)},\tilde{\omega}^{(2)},\tilde{\Omega}^{(2)}) over {|μ→|a≥13A1/2}\{|\vec{\mu}|_{a}\geq\frac{1}{3}A^{1/2}\}, and modulo diffeomorphism agrees identically with (g(1),ω(1),Ωℂ3)({g}^{(1)},{\omega}^{(1)},\Omega_{\mathbb{C}^{3}}) over {|μ→|a≤16A1/2}\{|\vec{\mu}|_{a}\leq\frac{1}{6}A^{1/2}\}. By Corollary 3.27,

Lemma 3.28.

Over the region {16​A1/2≤|μ→|a≤13​A1/2}\{\frac{1}{6}A^{1/2}\leq|\vec{\mu}|_{a}\leq\frac{1}{3}A^{1/2}\},

‖g~(3)−g(1)‖C0,0k,α≤CνA−3/4,‖Ω−Ωℂ3‖C0,0k,α≤CνA−3/4,\left\lVert\tilde{g}^{(3)}-g^{(1)}\right\rVert_{C^{k,\alpha}_{0,0}}\leq C\nu A^{-3/4},\quad\left\lVert\Omega-\Omega_{\mathbb{C}^{3}}\right\rVert_{C^{k,\alpha}_{0,0}}\leq C\nu A^{-3/4},

and the volume form error E~(3)\tilde{E}^{(3)} of g~(3)\tilde{g}^{(3)} satisfies

‖E~(3)−Δaφ3‖C−1,0k,α≤Cν2A−3/4.\left\lVert\tilde{E}^{(3)}-\Delta_{a}\varphi_{3}\right\rVert_{C^{k,\alpha}_{-1,0}}\leq C\nu^{2}A^{-3/4}.

Henceforth the complex structure will be fixed, and can be identified as follows. The new holomorphic differentials are

(3.10) {dlogZ~i=dlogZi+d(∂(φ3+φ1)∂μi),i=1,2,d​log⁡Z~0=d​log⁡Z0−d⁡(∂(φ3+φ1)∂μ1+∂(φ3+φ1)∂μ2).\begin{cases}d\log\tilde{Z}_{i}=d\log Z_{i}+d(\frac{\partial(\varphi_{3}+\varphi_{1})}{\partial\mu_{i}}),\quad i=1,2,\\ d\log\tilde{Z}_{0}=d\log Z_{0}-d(\frac{\partial(\varphi_{3}+\varphi_{1})}{\partial\mu_{1}}+\frac{\partial(\varphi_{3}+\varphi_{1})}{\partial\mu_{2}}).\end{cases}

These have the same T3T^{3}-periods as d​log⁡Zid\log Z_{i}, which lie inside 2​π​−1​ℤ2\pi\sqrt{-1}\mathbb{Z}, so the new holomorphic functions Z~0,Z~1,Z~2\tilde{Z}_{0},\tilde{Z}_{1},\tilde{Z}_{2} are defined without multivalue issues. The functional equation

Z~0​Z~1​Z~2=1−e2​π​−1​η=1−Z3\tilde{Z}_{0}\tilde{Z}_{1}\tilde{Z}_{2}=1-e^{2\pi\sqrt{-1}\eta}=1-Z_{3}

persists from Lemma 3.10. The results in Proposition 3.11 hold verbatim:

Proposition 3.29.

(complex structure) The map M+→{Z~0Z~1Z~2=1−Z3}M^{+}\to\{\tilde{Z}_{0}\tilde{Z}_{1}\tilde{Z}_{2}=1-Z_{3}\} is a holomorphic open embedding. The T2T^{2}-action is identified as

ei​θ1⋅(Z~0,Z~1,Z~2)=(e−i​θ1​Z~0,ei​θ1​Z~1,Z~2),ei​θ2⋅(Z~0,Z~1,Z~2)=(e−i​θ2​Z~0,Z~1,ei​θ2​Z~2),e^{i\theta_{1}}\cdot(\tilde{Z}_{0},\tilde{Z}_{1},\tilde{Z}_{2})=(e^{-i\theta_{1}}\tilde{Z}_{0},e^{i\theta_{1}}\tilde{Z}_{1},\tilde{Z}_{2}),\quad e^{i\theta_{2}}\cdot(\tilde{Z}_{0},\tilde{Z}_{1},\tilde{Z}_{2})=(e^{-i\theta_{2}}\tilde{Z}_{0},\tilde{Z}_{1},e^{i\theta_{2}}\tilde{Z}_{2}),

and the holomorphic volume form is Ω=−−12​π​Z3​d​Z~0∧d​Z~1∧d​Z~2\Omega=-\frac{\sqrt{-1}}{2\pi Z_{3}}d\tilde{Z}_{0}\wedge d\tilde{Z}_{1}\wedge d\tilde{Z}_{2}. We shall identify M+M^{+} with its image.

Over {|μ→|a≤16A1/2}\{|\vec{\mu}|_{a}\leq\frac{1}{6}A^{1/2}\} the ansatz (g~(3),ω~(3),Ω)(\tilde{g}^{(3)},\tilde{\omega}^{(3)},\Omega) is identified with (g(1),ω(1),Ωℂ3)({g}^{(1)},\omega^{(1)},\Omega_{\mathbb{C}^{3}}) after suitable diffeomorphism. An identification of complex coordinates compatible with the holomorphic differential formula (3.10) is

{Z~1=z1​exp⁡{(π​−1​β1​(0,0,1)−−1​θ1∞)​η},Z~2=z2​exp⁡{(π​−1​β2​(0,0,1)−−1​θ2∞)​η},Z~0=−2​−1​sin⁡(π​η)η​z0​exp⁡{(π​−1​β0​(0,0,1)+−1​θ1∞+−1​θ2∞)​η}.\begin{cases}\tilde{Z}_{1}=z_{1}\exp\{(\pi\sqrt{-1}\beta_{1}(0,0,1)-\sqrt{-1}\theta_{1}^{\infty})\eta\},\\ \tilde{Z}_{2}=z_{2}\exp\{(\pi\sqrt{-1}\beta_{2}(0,0,1)-\sqrt{-1}\theta_{2}^{\infty})\eta\},\\ \tilde{Z}_{0}=\frac{-2\sqrt{-1}\sin(\pi\eta)}{\eta}z_{0}\exp\{(\pi\sqrt{-1}\beta_{0}(0,0,1)+\sqrt{-1}\theta_{1}^{\infty}+\sqrt{-1}\theta_{2}^{\infty})\eta\}.\end{cases}

This fixes the normalisation for the multiplicative constants of Z~i\tilde{Z}_{i}.

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