ScalingStacks

5.2.2 Bounded part of the Solomon functional revisited [04FB]

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

5.2.2 Bounded part of the Solomon functional revisited

In section 3.8.3, we discussed a Floer theoretic method to bound the difference between the Solomon functional and the elementary functional. The following alternative method is based on the homological nature of the Solomon functional (20), and has a more geometric measure theory flavour. Holomorphic curves do not feature in this approach, so the automatic transversality and the positivity conditions are not needed, and in fact the discussion works in the weak setting of varifolds and currents. It is vital to this approach that Hn+1​(X)=0H_{n+1}(X)=0 for Stein manifolds, so no homological ambiguity can arise for the bordism current.

Proposition 5.19.

Assume the Lagrangian LL with potential fLf_{L} is quantitatively almost calibrated, homologous to L0L_{0}, and satisfies (N,A)(N,A)-potential clustering. The elementary functional (45) makes sense verbatim, with no smoothness assumptions. Then |𝒮​(L)−𝒮¯​(L)||\mathcal{S}(L)-\bar{\mathcal{S}}(L)| has a uniform upper bound independent of LL.

Proof.

We know L−L0L-L_{0} is homologous to zero in XX, and contained in a bounded subset of XX by Cor. 5.13. By a version of the isoperimetric theorem (cf. Prop. 5.11), we can find some compactly supported integral current 𝒞\mathcal{C} with ∂𝒞=L−L0\partial\mathcal{C}=L-L_{0}, with mass bound

Mass​(𝒞)≤const⋅min⁡{Mass​(L−L0)(n+1)/n,Mass​(L−L0)}.\text{Mass}(\mathcal{C})\leq\text{const}\cdot\min\{\text{Mass}(L-L_{0})^{(n+1)/n},\text{Mass}(L-L_{0})\}.

This 𝒞\mathcal{C} has no relation to holomorphic curves. The quantitative almost calibratedness implies a volume bound on LL (cf. Lemma 2.1), hence Mass​(𝒞)\text{Mass}(\mathcal{C}) is a priori bounded. The homological nature of the Solomon functional (20) gives

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.

The mass bound then implies

|∫𝒞λ∧e−i​θ^​Ω|≤C​‖λ‖C0​‖Ω‖C0​Mass​(𝒞)≤const.|\int_{\mathcal{C}}\lambda\wedge e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega|\leq C\left\lVert\lambda\right\rVert_{C^{0}}\left\lVert\Omega\right\rVert_{C^{0}}\text{Mass}(\mathcal{C})\leq\text{const}.

Here since LL is contained in a bounded region, the terms λ\lambda and Ω\Omega are bounded. Finally, using the potential clustering bound,

|∫LfL​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)−∫L0fL0​Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)−𝒮¯​(L)|≤A⁡(∫L|Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)|+∫L0|Im​(e−i​θ^​Ω)|)≤A⁡(Mass​(L)+Mass​(L0))≤2​Asin⁡ϵ​∫L0Re​Ω.\begin{split}&|\int_{L}f_{L}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)-\int_{L_{0}}f_{L_{0}}\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)-\bar{\mathcal{S}}(L)|\\ &\leq A(\int_{L}|\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)|+\int_{L_{0}}|\text{Im}(e^{-i\hat{\theta}}\Omega)|)\\ &\leq A(\text{Mass}(L)+\text{Mass}(L_{0}))\leq\frac{2A}{\sin\epsilon}\int_{L_{0}}\text{Re}\Omega.\end{split}

Combining the above shows the a priori bound on |𝒮​(L)−𝒮¯​(L)||\mathcal{S}(L)-\bar{\mathcal{S}}(L)|. ∎

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