ScalingStacks

Proof. [054H]

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 proof consists of two steps.

In the first step, we will apply separation of variables to show that if a harmonic function uu satisfies (5.182), then u⁡(z,𝒚)=k0⋅z+c0+h⁡(z,𝒚)u(z,\bm{y})=k_{0}\cdot z+c_{0}+h(z,\bm{y}) for some k0,c0∈ℝk_{0},c_{0}\in\mathbb{R} and h⁡(z,𝒚)h(z,\bm{y}) has some exponential decaying rate.

Since uu is smooth, for any fixed z≥1z\geq 1, we have the fiber-wise L2L^{2}-expansion of uu as follows,

(5.185) u⁡(z,𝒚)=∑k=1∞uk​(z)⋅φk​(𝒚),u(z,\bm{y})=\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}u_{k}(z)\cdot\varphi_{k}(\bm{y}),

where 𝒚∈Y2​n−1\bm{y}\in Y^{2n-1} and uku_{k} satisfies the equation

(5.186) d2​uk​(z)d​z2−(jk2​n24⋅zn+n​λk)​zn−2​uk​(z)=0,z≥1,\frac{d^{2}u_{k}(z)}{dz^{2}}-(\frac{j_{k}^{2}n^{2}}{4}\cdot z^{n}+n\lambda_{k})z^{n-2}u_{k}(z)=0,\ z\geq 1,

for some jk∈ℕj_{k}\in\mathbb{N} and λk≥0\lambda_{k}\geq 0. Notice that the expansion (5.185) converges in the C∞C^{\infty}-topology. This follows from Lemma 5.13, Lemma 3.32 and the Weyl law for spectrum asymptotics.

For k=0k=0 we have jk=λk=0j_{k}=\lambda_{k}=0, and uku_{k} is a linear function of the form κ0⋅z+c0\kappa_{0}\cdot z+c_{0}. For k≥1k\geq 1, we can write uku_{k} as a linear combination of the two linearly independent solutions discussed in Section 5.2 and 5.3.

(5.187) uk​(z)=Ck⋅𝒟k​(z)+Ck∗⋅𝒢k​(z),u_{k}(z)=C_{k}\cdot\mathcal{D}_{k}(z)+C_{k}^{*}\cdot\mathcal{G}_{k}(z),

where 𝒢k\mathcal{G}_{k} is a growing and 𝒟k\mathcal{D}_{k} is decaying.

We claim Ck∗=0C_{k}^{*}=0 for all k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}. To see this, we apply Lemma 5.13 to u⁡(z,𝒚)u(z,\bm{y}), then for all k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}

(5.188) |uk​(z)|=O⁡(eδ​zn2).|u_{k}(z)|=O(e^{\delta z^{\frac{n}{2}}}).

So the claim follows from the asymptotics of 𝒢k​(z)\mathcal{G}_{k}(z) in Lemma 5.4 and 5.7 which corresponds to jk=0j_{k}=0 and jk∈ℤ+j_{k}\in\mathbb{Z}_{+} respectively.

Now we define

(5.189) h⁡(z,𝒚)≡u⁡(z,𝒚)−(κ0⋅z+c0)=∑k=1∞uk​(z)⋅φk​(𝒚).h(z,\bm{y})\equiv u(z,\bm{y})-(\kappa_{0}\cdot z+c_{0})=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}u_{k}(z)\cdot\varphi_{k}(\bm{y}).

It suffices to show h⁡(z,𝒚)h(z,\bm{y}) decays at the desired rate. Let z0>(2​δb)2/nz_{0}>(2\delta_{b})^{2/n} be sufficiently big so that uu is defined on {z≥z0}\{z\geq z_{0}\}. Now we fix K0≡2​n+1K_{0}\equiv 2n+1. Applying Lemma 5.13 to u⁡(z0,𝒚)u(z_{0},\bm{y}) we get for all k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+},

(5.190) |uk​(z0)|≤C1​(Λk)−K0.|u_{k}(z_{0})|\leq C_{1}(\Lambda_{k})^{-K_{0}}.

We separate in several cases. First, we consider k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+} with jk=0j_{k}=0. Applying (5.74), then for any ϵ>0\epsilon>0 with δ¯=(1−ϵ)​δb<δb\underline{\delta}=(1-\epsilon)\delta_{b}<\delta_{b}, if z≥1ϵ2n⋅z0z\geq\frac{1}{\epsilon^{\frac{2}{n}}}\cdot z_{0},

(5.191) |uk​(z)uk​(z0)|=|𝒟k​(z)𝒟k​(z0)|≤Ce−2λkn⋅(zn2−z0n2)≤Ce−(1−ϵ)δb⋅zn2=Ce−δ¯⋅zn2.\Big|\frac{u_{k}(z)}{u_{k}(z_{0})}\Big|=\Big|\frac{\mathcal{D}_{k}(z)}{\mathcal{D}_{k}(z_{0})}\Big|\leq Ce^{-2\sqrt{\frac{\lambda_{k}}{n}}\cdot(z^{\frac{n}{2}}-z_{0}^{\frac{n}{2}})}\leq Ce^{-(1-\epsilon)\delta_{b}\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}=Ce^{-\underline{\delta}\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}.

This implies that

(5.192) |∑k>0jk=0uk​(z)uk​(z0)⋅uk​(z0)⋅φk​(𝒚)|\displaystyle\Big|\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}k>0\\ j_{k}=0\end{subarray}}\frac{u_{k}(z)}{u_{k}(z_{0})}\cdot u_{k}(z_{0})\cdot\varphi_{k}(\bm{y})\Big| ≤\displaystyle\leq ∑k>0jk=0|uk​(z)uk​(z0)|⋅|uk​(z0)|⋅|φk​(𝒚)|\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}k>0\\ j_{k}=0\end{subarray}}\Big|\frac{u_{k}(z)}{u_{k}(z_{0})}\Big|\cdot|u_{k}(z_{0})|\cdot|\varphi_{k}(\bm{y})|
≤\displaystyle\leq Ce−δb⋅zn2⋅∑k>0jk=01(Λk)K0−n2,\displaystyle Ce^{-\delta_{b}\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}\cdot\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}k>0\\ j_{k}=0\end{subarray}}\frac{1}{(\Lambda_{k})^{K_{0}-\frac{n}{2}}},

where the eigenfunction estimate

(5.193) ‖φk‖L∞​(Y2​n−1)≤C⋅(Λk)n2.\|\varphi_{k}\|_{L^{\infty}(Y^{2n-1})}\leq C\cdot(\Lambda_{k})^{\frac{n}{2}}.

follows from Lemma 3.32.

When jk∈ℤ+j_{k}\in\mathbb{Z}_{+} we divide into two cases. When Q≥1Q\geq 1 we apply Corollary 5.9.1 and Lemma 5.11 (with η=2​δb\eta=2\delta_{b}) to get

(5.194) |∑jk≥1Q≥1uk​(z)uk​(z0)⋅uk​(z0)⋅φk​(𝒚)|\displaystyle\Big|\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{k}\geq 1\\ Q\geq 1\end{subarray}}\frac{u_{k}(z)}{u_{k}(z_{0})}\cdot u_{k}(z_{0})\cdot\varphi_{k}(\bm{y})\Big| ≤\displaystyle\leq ∑jk≥1Q≥1|uk​(z)uk​(z0)|⋅|uk​(z0)|⋅|φk​(𝒚)|\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{k}\geq 1\\ Q\geq 1\end{subarray}}\Big|\frac{u_{k}(z)}{u_{k}(z_{0})}\Big|\cdot|u_{k}(z_{0})|\cdot|\varphi_{k}(\bm{y})|
≤\displaystyle\leq Ce−δb⋅zn2∑jk≥1Q≥11(Λk)K0−n2−1.\displaystyle Ce^{-\delta_{b}\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{k}\geq 1\\ Q\geq 1\end{subarray}}\frac{1}{(\Lambda_{k})^{K_{0}-\frac{n}{2}-1}}.

Now when Q≤1Q\leq 1 we apply instead Corollary 5.12.1 to get

(5.195) |∑jk≥1Q≤1uk​(z)uk​(z0)⋅uk​(z0)⋅φk​(𝒚)|\displaystyle\Big|\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{k}\geq 1\\ Q\leq 1\end{subarray}}\frac{u_{k}(z)}{u_{k}(z_{0})}\cdot u_{k}(z_{0})\cdot\varphi_{k}(\bm{y})\Big| ≤\displaystyle\leq ∑jk≥1Q≤1|uk​(z)uk​(z0)|⋅|uk​(z0)|⋅|φk​(𝒚)|\displaystyle\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{k}\geq 1\\ Q\leq 1\end{subarray}}\Big|\frac{u_{k}(z)}{u_{k}(z_{0})}\Big|\cdot|u_{k}(z_{0})|\cdot|\varphi_{k}(\bm{y})|
≤\displaystyle\leq C​e−zn2​∑jk≥1Q≤11(Λk)K0−n2−1.\displaystyle Ce^{-\frac{z^{n}}{2}}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}j_{k}\geq 1\\ Q\leq 1\end{subarray}}\frac{1}{(\Lambda_{k})^{K_{0}-\frac{n}{2}-1}}.

Summing up all the above we get

(5.196) |h(z,𝒚)|≤Ce−δb⋅zn2∑k=1∞1(Λk)K0−n2−1.|h(z,\bm{y})|\leq Ce^{-\delta_{b}\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(\Lambda_{k})^{K_{0}-\frac{n}{2}-1}}.

Since K0=2​n+1K_{0}=2n+1 we see the series converges. So the proof of the first step is done.

The second step is to prove the higher decaying estimate for the error function h⁡(z,𝒚)h(z,\bm{y}), which follows from the uniform Schauder estimate. We have proved that the error function h⁡(z,𝒚)h(z,\bm{y}) as a harmonic function satisfies

(5.197) |h(z,𝒚)|≤C0⋅e−δ¯⋅zn2.|h(z,\bm{y})|\leq C_{0}\cdot e^{-\underline{\delta}\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}.

By explicit and straightforward computations, a Calabi space (𝒞n,g𝒞n)(\mathcal{C}^{n},g_{\mathcal{C}^{n}}) is collapsing with bounded curvatures as z→+∞z\to+\infty. We just lift the harmonic function hh to the local universal cover which is non-collapsed with uniformly bounded geometry. So the following Schauder estimate holds for any k∈ℤ+k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+} and α∈(0,1)\alpha\in(0,1) on the local universal cover,

(5.198) |h|Ck,α​(Br0​(𝒙))≤Ck⋅|h|C0​(B2​r0​(𝒙))≤Ck⋅e−δ¯⋅zn2.|h|_{C^{k,\alpha}(B_{r_{0}}(\bm{x}))}\leq C_{k}\cdot|h|_{C^{0}(B_{2r_{0}}(\bm{x}))}\leq C_{k}\cdot e^{-\underline{\delta}\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}.

where r0>0r_{0}>0 is some fixed constant of some definite size which is independent of 𝒙∈𝒞n\bm{x}\in\mathcal{C}^{n}. In particular, at the center 𝒙=(z,𝒚)\bm{x}=(z,\bm{y}), we have

(5.199) |∇kh(z,𝒚)|≤Ck⋅|h|C0​(B2​r0​(𝒙))≤Ck⋅e−δ¯⋅zn2.|\nabla^{k}h(z,\bm{y})|\leq C_{k}\cdot|h|_{C^{0}(B_{2r_{0}}(\bm{x}))}\leq C_{k}\cdot e^{-\underline{\delta}\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}.

This completes the proof of (5.184).

∎

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