ScalingStacks

Verified tagged author-source HTML · 2006.16961v1 · cited publication edition alignment unverified.

2.3 Harnack type inequality

007W

Lemma 2.3. (Almost maximum on top strata) For u∈P​S​H​(Xt,ωt)u\in PSH(X_{t},\omega_{t}) normalised to supXtu=0\sup_{X_{t}}u=0, there is some i∈Ii\in I, such that

supEi0u≥−C,∫Ei0u​ω𝒳|Xtn≥−C′.\sup_{E_{i}^{0}}u\geq-C,\quad\int_{E_{i}^{0}}u\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\geq-C^{\prime}.
007X

Proof. Let the global maximum of uu be achieved at q0∈EJ0q_{0}\in E_{J}^{0}, and denote the local potential of uu as uβu_{\beta}. Without loss of generality uβ≤0u_{\beta}\leq 0. We have uβ​(q0)≥−Cu_{\beta}(q_{0})\geq-C since |u−uβ|≤C|u-u_{\beta}|\leq C. Applying the mean value inequality around q0q_{0}, we find that the local average function u¯β\bar{u}_{\beta} produced in Lemma 2.2 satisfies supu¯β≥−C\sup\bar{u}_{\beta}\geq-C for another uniform constant CC. By the convexity of u¯β\bar{u}_{\beta} its sup is almost achieved at the boundary of the chart, which is contained in a union of less deep strata EJ′0E_{J^{\prime}}^{0} with J′⊊JJ^{\prime}\subsetneq J. Thus we can find a point q′q^{\prime} with u⁡(q′)≥−Cu(q^{\prime})\geq-C that belongs to a less deep stratum; an induction shows that there is some i∈Ii\in I, such that supEi0u≥−C\sup_{E_{i}^{0}}u\geq-C.

For the L1L^{1}-bound we recall the following Harnack inequality argument. Suppose a coordinate ball B⁡(q,3​R)B(q,3R) is contained in a local chart in a small neighbourhood of Ei0E_{i}^{0}. Applying the mean value inequality to the local psh function associated to uu, we see for y∈B⁡(q,R)y\in B(q,R) that

u⁡(y)≤C+−∫B⁡(y,2​R)u≲1+−∫B⁡(q,R)u.u(y)\leq C+\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{B(y,2R)}u\lesssim 1+\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{B(q,R)}u.

hence the Harnack inequality

−∫B⁡(q,R)|u|≲1+infB⁡(q,R)(−u).\mathchoice{{\vbox{\hbox{$\textstyle-$ }}\kern-7.83337pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptstyle-$ }}\kern-6.11674pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.48965pt}}{{\vbox{\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle-$ }}\kern-5.31259pt}}\!\int_{B(q,R)}|u|\lesssim 1+\inf_{B(q,R)}(-u).

Applying this to a chain of balls connecting any two points in Ei0E_{i}^{0} gives the L1L^{1}-bound ∫Ei0u​ω𝒳|Xtn≥−C′\int_{E_{i}^{0}}u\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\geq-C^{\prime}; the bound is uniform because the number of balls involved in the chain can be controlled independent of tt. ∎

007Y

Proposition 2.4. (Almost maximum on top strata II) There is a uniform lower bound for all |t|≪1|t|\ll 1 and all i∈Ii\in I:

supEi0u≥−C,∫Ei0u​ω𝒳|Xtn≥−C′.\sup_{E_{i}^{0}}u\geq-C,\quad\int_{E_{i}^{0}}u\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\geq-C^{\prime}. (3)
007Z

Proof. The L1L^{1}-estimate follows from the sup estimate as above, so the real problem is to transfer bounds between different Ei0E_{i}^{0}. This is nontrivial because the necks connecting Ei0E_{i}^{0} with each other are highly degenerate.

Given one divisor E0E_{0} such that ∫E00u​ω𝒳|Xtn≥−C,\int_{E_{0}^{0}}u\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\geq-C, we produce a good test function vv by Lemma 2.1. Integrating by parts,

∫Xtv​−1​∂∂¯​u∧ω𝒳|Xtn−1=∫Xtu​−1​∂∂¯​v∧ω𝒳|Xtn−1.\int_{X_{t}}v\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}u\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}=\int_{X_{t}}u\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}.

The LHS is the difference of ∫Xtv⁡(ωt+−1​∂∂¯​u)∧ω𝒳|Xtn−1\int_{X_{t}}v(\omega_{t}+\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}u)\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1} and ∫Xtv​ωt∧ω𝒳|Xtn−1\int_{X_{t}}v\omega_{t}\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}, and since −log⁡|t|≳v≥0-\log|t|\gtrsim v\geq 0 both terms are bounded between 00 and CC. Thus

|∫Xtu​−1​∂∂¯​v∧ω𝒳|Xtn−1|≤C.|\int_{X_{t}}u\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}|\leq C.

Now the form −1​∂∂¯​v∧ω𝒳|Xtn−1\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1} can only be negative on {h∼|t|2}=E00\{h\sim|t|^{2}\}=E_{0}^{0}, and is bounded below by −C​ω𝒳|Xtn-C\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}. Thus the positive part of the signed measure u​−1​∂∂¯​v∧ω𝒳|Xtn−1u\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1} has total mass controlled by ∫E00|u|​ω𝒳|Xtn≤C\int_{E_{0}^{0}}|u|\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n}\leq C. Consequently, the negative part of the signed measure must also have total mass ≤C\leq C.

By construction, for any divisor EjE_{j} intersecting E0E_{0} there is a nontrivial amount of −1​∂∂¯​v∧ω𝒳|Xtn−1\sqrt{-1}\partial\bar{\partial}v\wedge\omega_{\mathcal{X}}|_{X_{t}}^{n-1}-measure inside Ej0E_{j}^{0}. This forces supEj0u≥−C\sup_{E_{j}^{0}}u\geq-C. To summarize, we have transferred the sup bound from E00E_{0}^{0} to any Ej0E_{j}^{0} with Ej∩E0≠∅E_{j}\cap E_{0}\neq\emptyset. Since the central fibre X0X_{0} is connected, in at most |I||I| steps this sup bound is transferred to all Ei0E_{i}^{0} with i∈Ii\in I. ∎

0080

Remark 2.5. This proof is inspired by the intersection theoretic argument of [2, section 6.1], which can be viewed as a non-archimedean analogue.

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source collection and HTML conversion remain in progress.