ScalingStacks

3.2 Solomon functional revisited [049J]

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

3.2 Solomon functional revisited

Let (X,ω,Ω)(X,\omega,\Omega) be an almost Calabi-Yau Stein manifold, and LL be an exact Lagrangian brane, with ∫LIm​(e−i​θ^​Ω)=0\int_{L}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)=0 for some suitable θ^∈(−π2,π2)\hat{\theta}\in(-\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2}). Our goal is to suggest how the Solomon functional may be well defined without the universal cover issue, and extended beyond a given exact isotopy class. Both issues are essential for the variational approach to the Thomas-Yau conjecture, see Chapter 5.

Homological nature of the Solomon functional

Write the Liouville 1-form as λ\lambda, so d​λ=ωd\lambda=\omega, and the potential of the immersed Lagrangian LL as fLf_{L}, so d​fL=λ|Ldf_{L}=\lambda|_{L}. We consider the potential as part of the brane data, so adding a constant to fLf_{L} is viewed as a different Lagrangian brane. We shall consider a path of such Lagrangians LtL_{t}, with associated Hamiltonian functions hth_{t}, so there is a preferred way to parallel transport fLf_{L}, as recalled below.

Lemma 3.3.
∫01dt∫LthtIm(e−i​θ^Ω)=∫LtfLtIm(e−i​θ^Ω)|t=0t=1−∫∪tLtλ∧Im(e−i​θ^Ω).\int_{0}^{1}dt\int_{L_{t}}h_{t}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)=\int_{L_{t}}f_{L_{t}}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)|^{t=1}_{t=0}-\int_{\cup_{t}L_{t}}\lambda\wedge\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega). (19)
Proof.

Let XtX_{t} be the Hamiltonian vector field along LtL_{t} associated to hth_{t}, namely d​ht=ω⁡(Xt,⋅)dh_{t}=\omega(X_{t},\cdot). We calculate the time derivative of fLtf_{L_{t}}: along LtL_{t}

ℒX​λ=ιX​d​λ+d⁡(ιX​λ)=ιX​ω+d⁡(ιX​λ)=d⁡(ht+ιX​λ),\mathcal{L}_{X}\lambda=\iota_{X}d\lambda+d(\iota_{X}\lambda)=\iota_{X}\omega+d(\iota_{X}\lambda)=d(h_{t}+\iota_{X}\lambda),

so there is a preferred parallel transport of fLf_{L} along the path LtL_{t},

∂tfLt=ht+ιX​λ.\partial_{t}f_{L_{t}}=h_{t}+\iota_{X}\lambda.

Hence

∂t∫LtfLt​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)=∫Lt(ht+ιX​λ)​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)+∫LtfLt​ℒX​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω).\partial_{t}\int_{L_{t}}f_{L_{t}}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)=\int_{L_{t}}(h_{t}+\iota_{X}\lambda)\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)+\int_{L_{t}}f_{L_{t}}\mathcal{L}_{X}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega).

Now by the Cartan formula and the closedness of Ω\Omega,

ℒX​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)=d​ιX​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω),\mathcal{L}_{X}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)=d\iota_{X}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega),

so after integration by part,

∫LtfLtℒXIm(e−i​θ^Ω)=−∫Ltdft∧ιXIm(e−i​θ^Ω)=−∫Ltλ∧ιXIm(e−i​θ^Ω).\int_{L_{t}}f_{L_{t}}\mathcal{L}_{X}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)=-\int_{L_{t}}df_{t}\wedge\iota_{X}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)=-\int_{L_{t}}\lambda\wedge\iota_{X}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega).

Combining the above,

∂t∫LtfLt​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)=∫Ltht​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)+∫LtιX​(λ∧Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)).\partial_{t}\int_{L_{t}}f_{L_{t}}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)=\int_{L_{t}}h_{t}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)+\int_{L_{t}}\iota_{X}(\lambda\wedge\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)).

Integrating in tt gives the result. ∎

We observe that by the Kähler condition ω∧Ω=0\omega\wedge\Omega=0, so

d⁡(λ∧Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω))=ω∧Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)=0.d(\lambda\wedge\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega))=\omega\wedge\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)=0.

This means the term ∫∪tLtλ∧Im(e−i​θ^Ω)\int_{\cup_{t}L_{t}}\lambda\wedge\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega) is a homological quantity, in the sense that we can replace ∪tLt\cup_{t}L_{t} by any compactly supported (n+1)(n+1)-current 𝒞\mathcal{C} with ∂𝒞=L1−L0\partial\mathcal{C}=L_{1}-L_{0}, which would automatically satisfy [𝒞−∪tLt]=0∈Hn+1(X)[\mathcal{C}-\cup_{t}L_{t}]=0\in H_{n+1}(X), since Hn+1​(X)=0H_{n+1}(X)=0 for Stein manifolds. In particular, this explains Solomon’s theorem that his functional is invariant under Hamiltonian deformations of the path of Lagrangians. The advantage of our homological interpretation is to allow more general currents 𝒞\mathcal{C}, which in particular can come from families of holomorphic curves.

Proposed extension of the Solomon functional

Taking the homological interpretation of (19) as starting point, a natural way to extend the Solomon functional is to make use of the bordism current 𝒞\mathcal{C} between an unobstructed Lagrangian LL and a fixed unobstructed reference Lagrangian L0L_{0}. We have ∂𝒞=L−L0\partial\mathcal{C}=L-L_{0} as currents, and 𝒞\mathcal{C} comes from the universal family of holomorphic curves. Our proposed formula is

𝒮⁡(L)=∫LfL​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)−∫L0fL0​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)−Im​∫𝒞λ∧e−i​θ^​Ω.\mathcal{S}(L)=\int_{L}f_{L}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)-\int_{L_{0}}f_{L_{0}}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)-\text{Im}\int_{\mathcal{C}}\lambda\wedge e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega. (20)

A few conceptual points are in order:

  • •

    We emphasize that this depends not only on the underlying Lagrangian, but also on the potential fLf_{L}.

  • •

    There is no need to pass to any universal cover in the space of Lagrangians, as in Solomon’s work (cf. section 2.8).

  • •

    The topology of LL is no longer fixed, and in particular the Hamiltonian isotopy class may change.

  • •

    We view (20) as a unification of the very different viewpoints of Solomon and Lotay-Pacini. In section 2.10 we suggested that this extended Solomon functional may be relevant for quantum tunneling amplitudes between the branes L0L_{0} and LL.

  • •

    Suppose we vary the Lagrangian LL within a 1-parameter exact isotopy family of unobstructed Lagrangians LtL_{t}. The bordism currents 𝒞t\mathcal{C}_{t} between LtL_{t} and L0L_{0} satisfy

    𝒞t2=𝒞t1+∪t1≤t≤t2Lt modulo exact (n+1)-dim currents,\mathcal{C}_{t_{2}}=\mathcal{C}_{t_{1}}+\cup_{t_{1}\leq t\leq t_{2}}L_{t}\text{ modulo exact $(n+1)$-dim currents},

    then the computation in Lem 3.3 proves the first variation formula for the Solomon functional

    dd​t​𝒮​(Lt)=∫Ltht​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)\frac{d}{dt}\mathcal{S}(L_{t})=\int_{L_{t}}h_{t}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega) (21)

    which is of course the defining feature of the Solomon functional. Consequently, the formula (20) extends Solomon’s definition in our exact setting, and fixes the multivaluedness problem (i.e. the need to pass to universal covers) in Solomon’s work.

Change of reference Lagrangian

The definition of the Solomon functional depends on the reference Lagrangian L0L_{0}, and we write 𝒮L0​(L)\mathcal{S}_{L_{0}}(L) when we wish to emphasize this dependence. The following feature of the Solomon functional resembles the Donaldson functional in the HYM context (cf. (9)):

Proposition 3.4.

Under the change of reference Lagrangians,

𝒮L0​(L)=𝒮L0′​(L)+𝒮L0​(L0′).\mathcal{S}_{L_{0}}(L)=\mathcal{S}_{L_{0}^{\prime}}(L)+\mathcal{S}_{L_{0}}(L_{0}^{\prime}). (22)
Proof.

We shall use the homological nature of the Solomon functional and the fact that Hn+1​(X)=0H_{n+1}(X)=0. We pick 𝒞1,𝒞2,𝒞3\mathcal{C}_{1},\mathcal{C}_{2},\mathcal{C}_{3} such that

∂𝒞1=L−L0′,∂𝒞2=L0′−L0,∂𝒞3=L−L0.\partial\mathcal{C}_{1}=L-L_{0}^{\prime},\quad\partial\mathcal{C}_{2}=L_{0}^{\prime}-L_{0},\quad\partial\mathcal{C}_{3}=L-L_{0}.

Then 𝒞1+𝒞2\mathcal{C}_{1}+\mathcal{C}_{2} is homologous to 𝒞3\mathcal{C}_{3}, so we can replace 𝒞3\mathcal{C}_{3} by 𝒞1+𝒞2\mathcal{C}_{1}+\mathcal{C}_{2} to compute 𝒮L0​(L)\mathcal{S}_{L_{0}}(L), whence (22) follows. ∎

Remark 3.5.

A more Floer theoretic argument that 𝒞1+𝒞2\mathcal{C}_{1}+\mathcal{C}_{2} is homologous to 𝒞3\mathcal{C}_{3}, which does not appeal to Hn+1​(X)=0H_{n+1}(X)=0 directly, can be sketched as follows. We assume L0,L0′,LL_{0},L_{0}^{\prime},L are three unobstructed Lagrangians mutually isomorphic in Db​F​u​k​(X)D^{b}Fuk(X), and H​F−1​(L0,L0)=0HF^{-1}(L_{0},L_{0})=0. Of course, the self Floer cohomologies of L0,L0′,LL_{0},L_{0}^{\prime},L are all isomorphic, and H​F−1=0HF^{-1}=0 is a necessary condition if the Db​F​u​k​(X)D^{b}Fuk(X) class admits any almost calibrated representative at all. We consider α∈C​F0​(L0,L0′),β∈C​F0​(L0′,L),γ∈C​F0​(L,L0)\alpha\in CF^{0}(L_{0},L_{0}^{\prime}),\beta\in CF^{0}(L_{0}^{\prime},L),\gamma\in CF^{0}(L,L_{0}) representing the generators of H​F0HF^{0}, such that at the level of Floer cohomology

γ∘β∘α=1L0,α∘γ∘β=1L0′,β∘α∘γ=1L.\gamma\circ\beta\circ\alpha=1_{L_{0}},\quad\alpha\circ\gamma\circ\beta=1_{L_{0}^{\prime}},\quad\beta\circ\alpha\circ\gamma=1_{L}.

For simplicity we first assume almost calibratedness, so that C​F−1=0CF^{-1}=0, and there is no ambiguity for these generators. Notice the compositions β∘α,γ∘β,α∘γ\beta\circ\alpha,\gamma\circ\beta,\alpha\circ\gamma provide generators of H​F0​(L0,L)HF^{0}(L_{0},L), H​F0​(L0′,L0)HF^{0}(L_{0}^{\prime},L_{0}), H​F0​(L,L0′)HF^{0}(L,L_{0}^{\prime}). Consider the nn-dimensional moduli spaces ℳ~\tilde{\mathcal{M}} of holomorphic discs with corners at α,β,γ\alpha,\beta,\gamma and the self intersection points corresponding to the bounding cochains. The corresponding universal family 𝒞~\tilde{\mathcal{C}} provides an (n+2)(n+2)-dimensional current, whose boundary comes from disc bubbling and disc breaking. Most of the boundary contributions are eliminated by the Mauer-Cartan equation of the bounding cochains, the closedness of α,β,γ\alpha,\beta,\gamma, and support dimension reasons, and only three boundary contributions survive. These are the (n+1)(n+1)-dimensional bordism currents between L0,L0′L_{0},L_{0}^{\prime} (resp. L0′,LL_{0}^{\prime},L and L,L0L,L_{0}) constructed from the universal family of holomorphic curves associated to the generators α,−γ∘β\alpha,-\gamma\circ\beta (resp. β,−α∘γ\beta,-\alpha\circ\gamma and γ,β∘α\gamma,\beta\circ\alpha). We can identify these as 𝒞2,𝒞1,−𝒞3\mathcal{C}_{2},\mathcal{C}_{1},-\mathcal{C}_{3}. The upshot is that Floer theory explicitly provides the (n+2)(n+2)-dimensional current that exhibits the homological relation between 𝒞1+𝒞2\mathcal{C}_{1}+\mathcal{C}_{2} and 𝒞3\mathcal{C}_{3}.

In general without assuming almost calibratedness, then C​F−1CF^{-1} can be nonzero. Then we need some extra nn-dimensional moduli spaces to account for the non-uniqueness of cohomological representatives of H​F0HF^{0}, an issue quite similar to section 3.1.2. A subtle new issue is that the moduli space ℳ~\tilde{\mathcal{M}} receives new boundary contributions involving the m3bm_{3}^{b} products (this shorthand notation indicates the presence of bounding cochain elements, cf. (73)) of α,β,γ\alpha,\beta,\gamma. The three cyclic permutations of α,β,γ\alpha,\beta,\gamma produce three m3bm_{3}^{b} products, which are elements in C​F−1​(L0,L0),C​F−1​(L0′,L0′)CF^{-1}(L_{0},L_{0}),CF^{-1}(L_{0}^{\prime},L_{0}^{\prime}) and C​F−1​(L,L)CF^{-1}(L,L) respectively, and the (n−1)(n-1)-dimensional moduli of polygons with one corner at the C​F−1CF^{-1} intersections and the other corners at bounding cochain elements contribute to ∂𝒞~\partial\tilde{\mathcal{C}}. Now by the A∞A_{\infty} relation, and the closedness of α,β,γ\alpha,\beta,\gamma,

m1b​(m3b​(γ,β,α))+m2b​(γ,m2b​(β,α))−m2b​(m2b​(γ,β),α)=0.m_{1}^{b}(m_{3}^{b}(\gamma,\beta,\alpha))+m_{2}^{b}(\gamma,m_{2}^{b}(\beta,\alpha))-m_{2}^{b}(m_{2}^{b}(\gamma,\beta),\alpha)=0.

Writing m2b​(γ,m2b​(β,α))=1L0+m1b​(δ1)m_{2}^{b}(\gamma,m_{2}^{b}(\beta,\alpha))=1_{L_{0}}+m_{1}^{b}(\delta_{1}) and m2b​(m2b​(γ,β),α)=1L0+m1b​(δ2)m_{2}^{b}(m_{2}^{b}(\gamma,\beta),\alpha)=1_{L_{0}}+m_{1}^{b}(\delta_{2}), we see m3b​(γ,β,α)+δ1−δ2m_{3}^{b}(\gamma,\beta,\alpha)+\delta_{1}-\delta_{2} is m1bm_{1}^{b}-closed, so by the assumption that H​F−1​(L0,L0)=0HF^{-1}(L_{0},L_{0})=0, it is in fact −m1b​(ϵ1)-m_{1}^{b}(\epsilon_{1}) for some ϵ1∈C​F−2​(L0,L0)\epsilon_{1}\in CF^{-2}(L_{0},L_{0}). We can then produce an nn-dimensional moduli space, from polygons with a corner at ϵ1\epsilon_{1}, and other corners at the bounding cochain elements. Completely analogously, one can produce two other nn-dimensional moduli spaces from ϵ2∈C​F−2​(L0′,L0′)\epsilon_{2}\in CF^{-2}(L_{0}^{\prime},L_{0}^{\prime}) and ϵ3∈C​F−2​(L,L)\epsilon_{3}\in CF^{-2}(L,L). Combining the (n+2)(n+2)-dimensional universal families over the nn-dimensional moduli spaces, results in an explicit bordism current between 𝒞1+𝒞2\mathcal{C}_{1}+\mathcal{C}_{2} and 𝒞3\mathcal{C}_{3}.

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