ScalingStacks

Proof. [054M]

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 is constructive, which will be done in two steps.

The first step, as the main part, is to find a solution uu with the prescribed growth (or decay) rate. We will use the method of separation of variables described as follows.

For a fixed slice Y2​n−1⊂𝒞nY^{2n-1}\subset\mathcal{C}^{n}, let {Λk}k=0∞\{\Lambda_{k}\}_{k=0}^{\infty} with Λ0=0\Lambda_{0}=0 be the spectrum of Δ𝒞n\Delta_{\mathcal{C}^{n}} acting on functions. Let {φk}k=0∞\{\varphi_{k}\}_{k=0}^{\infty} be the eigenfunctions satisfying

(5.220) {−Δ𝒞n​φk=Λk​φk,‖φk‖L2​(Y2​n−1)=1.\displaystyle\begin{cases}-\Delta_{\mathcal{C}^{n}}\varphi_{k}=\Lambda_{k}\varphi_{k},\\ \|\varphi_{k}\|_{L^{2}(Y^{2n-1})}=1.\end{cases}

Given a function vv and for any fixed z≥1z\geq 1, we have the fiberwise L2L^{2}-expansion on Y2​n−1Y^{2n-1},

(5.221) v⁡(z,𝒚)=∑k=1∞vk​(z)​φk​(𝒚).v(z,\bm{y})=\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}v_{k}(z)\varphi_{k}(\bm{y}).

Then we can first construct a formal solution

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

to (5.218), which holds in the L2L^{2}-sense for each fixed z≥1z\geq 1. Here the coefficient functions uk​(z)u_{k}(z) are the particular solutions constructed in Lemma 5.15. The main part is to prove that the above series u⁡(z,𝒚)u(z,\bm{y}) converges with higher regularity and hence u⁡(z,𝒚)u(z,\bm{y}) is a regular solution to (5.218).

To begin with, we will prove that the series u⁡(z,𝒚)u(z,\bm{y}) converges in the C0C^{0}-norm and hence gives a C0C^{0}-function. Combining Lemma 5.13, Lemma 5.15 and the eigenfunction estimate in Lemma 3.32, we have

(5.223) |u⁡(z,𝒚)|≤∑k=1∞|uk​(z)|⋅|φk​(𝒚)|≤C​∑k=1∞eη⋅zn2(Λk)K0−n2−12​n.\displaystyle|u(z,\bm{y})|\leq\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}|u_{k}(z)|\cdot|\varphi_{k}(\bm{y})|\leq C\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{e^{\eta\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}}{(\Lambda_{k})^{K_{0}-\frac{n}{2}-\frac{1}{2n}}}.

Applying Weyl’s law to the spectrum {Λk}k=1∞\{\Lambda_{k}\}_{k=1}^{\infty},

(5.224) C0−1​k22​n−1≤|Λk|≤C0​k22​n−1,C_{0}^{-1}k^{\frac{2}{2n-1}}\leq|\Lambda_{k}|\leq C_{0}k^{\frac{2}{2n-1}},

where C0>0C_{0}>0 depends only on Y2​n−1Y^{2n-1} and kk is sufficiently large. Let K0≥2​n+1K_{0}\geq 2n+1, then

(5.225) |u⁡(z,𝒚)|≤C⋅eη⋅zn2⋅∑k=1∞1(Λk)3​n2≤C⋅eη⋅zn2⋅∑k=1∞1k3​n2​n−1≤C⋅eη⋅zn2.|u(z,\bm{y})|\leq C\cdot e^{\eta\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}\cdot\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(\Lambda_{k})^{\frac{3n}{2}}}\leq C\cdot e^{\eta\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}\cdot\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{k^{\frac{3n}{2n-1}}}\leq C\cdot e^{\eta\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}.

Therefore, u∈C0​(𝒞n)u\in C^{0}(\mathcal{C}^{n}) and uu satisfies the C0C^{0}-asymptotic estimate in (5.219).

Based on the above C0C^{0}-regularity, we will apply the standard elliptic regularity on (𝒞n,g𝒞n)(\mathcal{C}^{n},g_{\mathcal{C}^{n}}) to show that u∈C2​(𝒞n)u\in C^{2}(\mathcal{C}^{n}) is a regular solution to Δg𝒞n​u=v\Delta_{g_{\mathcal{C}^{n}}}u=v. We take the partial sums

(5.226) UN​(z,𝒚)≡∑k=1Nuk​(z)​φk​(𝒚),VN​(z,𝒚)≡∑k=1Nvk​(z)​φk​(𝒚)\displaystyle U_{N}(z,\bm{y})\equiv\sum\limits_{k=1}^{N}u_{k}(z)\varphi_{k}(\bm{y}),\ V_{N}(z,\bm{y})\equiv\sum\limits_{k=1}^{N}v_{k}(z)\varphi_{k}(\bm{y})

of the expansions

(5.227) u⁡(z,𝒚)=∑k=1∞uk​(z)​φk​(𝒚),v⁡(z,𝒚)=∑k=1∞vk​(z)​φk​(𝒚).\displaystyle u(z,\bm{y})=\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}u_{k}(z)\varphi_{k}(\bm{y}),\ v(z,\bm{y})=\sum\limits_{k=1}^{\infty}v_{k}(z)\varphi_{k}(\bm{y}).

It is obvious that,

(5.228) Δg𝒞n​UN=VN.\Delta_{g_{\mathcal{C}^{n}}}U_{N}=V_{N}.

For every 𝒙≡(z,𝒚)∈𝒞n\bm{x}\equiv(z,\bm{y})\in\mathcal{C}^{n}, we will apply the elliptic regularity on the ball B2​(𝒙)⊂𝒞nB_{2}(\bm{x})\subset\mathcal{C}^{n} to obtain the higher regularity of uu.

As a starter, by the same arguments as the above, we have ‖VN−v‖C0​(B2​(𝒙))→0\|V_{N}-v\|_{C^{0}(B_{2}(\bm{x}))}\to 0 as N→∞N\to\infty. The proof of the higher order convergence is almost verbatim. In fact, we just need to use ‖v‖C2​K0+m\|v\|_{C^{2K_{0}+m}} with m≤K0m\leq K_{0}. Since Δg𝒞​UN=VN\Delta_{g_{\mathcal{C}}}U_{N}=V_{N}, the standard W2,pW^{2,p}- implies that regularity for every 1<p<∞1<p<\infty,

(5.229) ‖UN‖W2,p​(B1​(𝒙))≤Cp,𝒙⋅(‖VN‖C0​(B2​(𝒙))+(‖UN‖C0​(B2​(𝒙)))CLOSE.\|U_{N}\|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1}(\bm{x}))}\leq C_{p,\bm{x}}\cdot(\|V_{N}\|_{C^{0}(B_{2}(\bm{x}))}+(\|U_{N}\|_{C^{0}(B_{2}(\bm{x}))}).

By assumption v∈C3​K0​(𝒞n)v\in C^{3K_{0}}(\mathcal{C}^{n}) for K0≥2​n+1K_{0}\geq 2n+1, so it follows that ‖VN‖C2​(B2​(𝒙))≤C𝒙\|V_{N}\|_{C^{2}(B_{2}(\bm{x}))}\leq C_{\bm{x}}. Therefore, for every 1<p<∞1<p<\infty,

(5.230) ‖UN‖W4,p​(B1​(𝒙))≤Cp,𝒙​(‖UN‖W2,p​(B3/2​(𝒙))+‖VN‖W2,p​(B2​(𝒙)))≤Cp,𝒙.\|U_{N}\|_{W^{4,p}(B_{1}(\bm{x}))}\leq C_{p,\bm{x}}(\|U_{N}\|_{W^{2,p}(B_{3/2}(\bm{x}))}+\|V_{N}\|_{W^{2,p}(B_{2}(\bm{x}))})\leq C_{p,\bm{x}}.

Now it suffices to choose p>2​np>2n, so the Sobolev embedding implies

(5.231) ‖UN‖C3,α​(B1​(𝒙))≤Cp,𝒙,α≡1−2​np,\|U_{N}\|_{C^{3,\alpha}(B_{1}(\bm{x}))}\leq C_{p,\bm{x}},\ \alpha\equiv 1-\frac{2n}{p},

which implies that UN→uU_{N}\to u in the C3C^{3}-norm with respect to g𝒞ng_{\mathcal{C}^{n}}. The proof of the first step is done.

We have constructed a solution uu satisfying |u⁡(𝒙)|≤C⋅eη⋅zn2|u(\bm{x})|\leq C\cdot e^{\eta\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}. Now we are ready to show that

(5.232) |∇u​(𝒙)|≤C⋅eη⋅zn2.|\nabla u(\bm{x})|\leq C\cdot e^{\eta\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}.

This can be accomplished by the elliptic W2,pW^{2,p}-estimate. Since a Calabi space (𝒞n,g𝒞n)(\mathcal{C}^{n},g_{\mathcal{C}^{n}}) is collapsed with bounded curvatures as z→+∞z\to+\infty, so there is some constant r0>0r_{0}>0 such that for each 𝒙∈𝒞n\bm{x}\in\mathcal{C}^{n} satisfying z⁡(𝒙)≥1z(\bm{x})\geq 1, the universal cover (B2​r0​(𝒙)~,𝒙~)(\widetilde{B_{2r_{0}}(\bm{x})},\tilde{\bm{x}}) is non-collapsing. Now we lift the solution uu to this non-collapsing local universal cover, then for any p>1p>1, there exists Cp>0C_{p}>0 such that

(5.233) |u|W2,p​(Br0​(𝒙~))≤Cp⋅(|u|L∞​(B2​r0​(𝒙~))+|​v|L∞​(B2​r0​(𝒙~)))≤Cp⋅eη⋅zn2.|u|_{W^{2,p}(B_{r_{0}}(\tilde{\bm{x}}))}\leq C_{p}\cdot(|u|_{L^{\infty}(B_{2r_{0}}(\tilde{\bm{x}}))}+|v|_{L^{\infty}(B_{2r_{0}}(\tilde{\bm{x}}))})\leq C_{p}\cdot e^{\eta\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}.

We can choose any p>2​np>2n, then Sobolev embedding gives

(5.234) |u|C1,α​(Br0​(𝒙~))≤C⋅eη⋅zn2.|u|_{C^{1,\alpha}(B_{r_{0}}(\tilde{\bm{x}}))}\leq C\cdot e^{\eta\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}}.

In particular,

(5.235) |∇u​(𝒙)|≤C⋅eη⋅zn2,|\nabla u(\bm{x})|\leq C\cdot e^{\eta\cdot z^{\frac{n}{2}}},

where α≡1−2​np\alpha\equiv 1-\frac{2n}{p}. So the proof of the proposition is done.

∎

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