ScalingStacks

Verified tagged author-source HTML · 2006.13068v1 · cited publication edition alignment unverified.

3. Diameter lower bound

In this section we prove the diameter lower bound in Theorem 1.1.

The setting is the same as in the previous section, so X→Δ∗X\to\Delta^{*} is a polarized Calabi-Yau degeneration family with m=dimSk⁡(X)>0m=\dim\mathrm{Sk}(X)>0, with a semistable model 𝔛→Δ\mathfrak{X}\to\Delta with X0=∑i∈IEiX_{0}=\sum_{i\in I}E_{i} and K𝔛/Δ=∑i∈Iai​EiK_{\mathfrak{X}/\Delta}=\sum_{i\in I}a_{i}E_{i}. We fix also an embedding of the family 𝔛↪ℙN×Δ\mathfrak{X}\hookrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{N}\times\Delta and denote by 𝔏→𝔛\mathfrak{L}\to\mathfrak{X} the restriction of the hyperplane bundle.

We choose a nonempty EJE_{J} which realizes the maximum in (2.2), with m=|J|−1m=|J|-1, and relabel so that J={0,…,m}J=\{0,\dots,m\}. We also denote by UU an open neighborhood of EJE_{J} in 𝔛\mathfrak{X} which can be covered by finitely many adapted coordinate charts as above. In particular, in these charts we have

(3.1) in2​Ωt∧Ωt¯=|fJ|2​∏j=1mi​d​zjzj∧d​zj¯zj¯∧∏k=m+1ni​d​zk∧d​zk¯.i^{n^{2}}\Omega_{t}\wedge\overline{\Omega_{t}}=|f_{J}|^{2}\prod_{j=1}^{m}i\frac{dz_{j}}{z_{j}}\wedge\frac{d\overline{z_{j}}}{\overline{z_{j}}}\wedge\prod_{k=m+1}^{n}idz_{k}\wedge d\overline{z_{k}}.

We need the following construction:

00DJ

Proposition 3.1. We can find a metric ωt′\omega_{t}^{\prime} on XtX_{t} in the class 1|log⁡|t||​c1​(𝔏)|Xt\frac{1}{|\log|t||}c_{1}(\mathfrak{L})|_{X_{t}}, a Lipschitz function ρt\rho_{t} on XtX_{t}, and an open neighborhood UU of EJE_{J} in 𝔛\mathfrak{X} as above, with the following properties:

  • (a)

    The function ρt\rho_{t} is supported on the closure of Bt={ρt<0}⊂U∩XtB_{t}=\{\rho_{t}<0\}\subset U\cap X_{t}. On BtB_{t} the function ρt\rho_{t} is comparable to a quadratic function in the logarithmic variables xj=log⁡|zj||log⁡|t||x_{j}=\frac{\log|z_{j}|}{|\log|t||}, for j=1,2,…​mj=1,2,\ldots m, in adapted coordinate charts, with min⁡ρt=−1\min\rho_{t}=-1 and max⁡ρt=0\max\rho_{t}=0.

  • (b)

    On BtB_{t} in adapted coordinate charts we have

    (3.2) ωt′⩾C−1​i|log⁡|t||2​∑j=1md​zjzj∧d​zj¯zj¯,\omega_{t}^{\prime}\geqslant C^{-1}\frac{i}{|\log|t||^{2}}\sum_{j=1}^{m}\frac{dz_{j}}{z_{j}}\wedge\frac{d\overline{z_{j}}}{\overline{z_{j}}},

    and

    (3.3) |d​ρt|ωt′2⩽C,|d\rho_{t}|^{2}_{\omega^{\prime}_{t}}\leqslant C,

    for a fixed constant CC independent of tt.

For ease of notation, in the rest of the paper we will denote by C>0C>0 a generic uniform constant, independent of tt, which may vary from line to line.

00DK

Proof. Given any point x∈EJx\in E_{J} we can find k≫1k\gg 1 and sections s0,…,sN∈H0​(𝔛,𝔏k)s_{0},\dots,s_{N}\in H^{0}(\mathfrak{X},\mathfrak{L}^{k}) so that in some adapted coordinate chart VxV_{x} near xx we have that none of the sections s0,sm+1,…,sNs_{0},s_{m+1},\dots,s_{N} vanishes, while sj=0s_{j}=0 is a defining equation for EjE_{j}, 1⩽j⩽m1\leqslant j\leqslant m, and so sj/s0s_{j}/s_{0} is comparable to zjz_{j} for 1⩽j⩽m1\leqslant j\leqslant m.

We construct a Kähler metric ωx,t′\omega_{x,t}^{\prime} on XtX_{t} by pulling back a suitable toric metric on ℙN\mathbb{P}^{N} , which on the complement of the zeros of all the sis_{i}’s is given by

ωx,t′=1k​i​∂∂¯​u​(log⁡|s1/s0|log⁡|t|,…,log⁡|sN/s0|log⁡|t|),\omega^{\prime}_{x,t}=\frac{1}{k}i\partial\bar{\partial}u\left(\frac{\log|s_{1}/s_{0}|}{\log|t|},\dots,\frac{\log|s_{N}/s_{0}|}{\log|t|}\right),

where u⁡(x1,…,xN)u(x_{1},\dots,x_{N}) is a smooth convex function in ℝN\mathbb{R}^{N} which is asymptotic to v⁡(x1,…,xN)=max⁡(0,x1,…,xN)v(x_{1},\dots,x_{N})=\max(0,x_{1},\dots,x_{N}) at infinity, and with D2​u⩾C−1​IdD^{2}u\geqslant C^{-1}\mathrm{Id} on a ball of radius comparable to 1 containing the image of Vx∩XtV_{x}\cap X_{t} in the logarithmic coordinates. For example, an explicit such uu can be produced as the convolution of vv with a smooth mollifier. By construction, ωx,t′\omega^{\prime}_{x,t} lies in the class 1|log⁡|t||​c1​(𝔏)|Xt\frac{1}{|\log|t||}c_{1}(\mathfrak{L})|_{X_{t}}, and it satisfies (3.2) on Vx∩XtV_{x}\cap X_{t}.

We then choose finitely many x(1),…,x(M)∈EJx^{(1)},\dots,x^{(M)}\in E_{J} such that the corresponding Vx(1),…,Vx(M)V_{x^{(1)}},\dots,V_{x^{(M)}} cover EJE_{J}, let UU be their union, and define

ωt′=1M​∑k=1Mωx(k),t′.\omega^{\prime}_{t}=\frac{1}{M}\sum_{k=1}^{M}\omega^{\prime}_{x^{(k)},t}.

This is our desired Kähler metric on XtX_{t} in 1|log⁡|t||​c1​(𝔏)|Xt\frac{1}{|\log|t||}c_{1}(\mathfrak{L})|_{X_{t}} which satisfies (3.2) in adapted coordinate charts on U∩XtU\cap X_{t}.

Next, we consider the function

ρ^=A​∑j=1m(x~j2−bj)2−1=A​∑j=1m(log⁡rj2​log⁡|t|−bj)2−1,\hat{\rho}=A\sum_{j=1}^{m}\left(\frac{\tilde{x}_{j}}{2}-b_{j}\right)^{2}-1=A\sum_{j=1}^{m}\left(\frac{\log r_{j}}{2\log|t|}-b_{j}\right)^{2}-1,

on U\⋃i∈IEiU\backslash\bigcup_{i\in I}E_{i}. Choosing the constants bjb_{j} in the strict interior of ΔJ\Delta_{J} we can ensure the minimum of ρ^\hat{\rho} on U∩XtU\cap X_{t} equals −1-1, and choosing AA suitably large independent of tt, we can ensure {ρ^⩽0}\{\hat{\rho}\leqslant 0\} is compactly contained in UU. Now we define

ρt={min⁡(ρ^,0)|Xt on ​U∩Xt0 on ​Xt\U,\rho_{t}=\begin{cases}\min(\hat{\rho},0)|_{X_{t}}\quad&\text{ on }U\cap X_{t}\\ 0\quad&\text{ on }X_{t}\backslash U\end{cases},

which satisfies the requirements in (a). We let Bt={ρt<0}⊂XtB_{t}=\{\rho_{t}<0\}\subset X_{t}. Lastly, (3.3) follows immediately from part (a) and (3.2). ∎

We can now give the proof of the diameter lower bound in Theorem 1.1:

00DL

Proof of the diameter lower bound in Theorem 1.1. Thanks to Proposition 3.1, on Bt⊂XtB_{t}\subset X_{t} we have

|d​ρt|ωt′2⩽C,|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}^{\prime}}^{2}\leqslant C,

for some constant CC independent of tt. We then use this together with the elementary inequality |d​ρt|ωt2⩽|d​ρt|ωt′2​trωt​ωt′|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}}^{2}\leqslant|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}^{\prime}}^{2}\Tr_{\omega_{t}}\omega_{t}^{\prime} to get

(∫Xt|d​ρt|ωt​d​μt)2=(∫Bt|d​ρt|ωt​d​μt)2⩽∫Bt|d​ρt|ωt2​d​μt⩽C​∫Xttrωt⁡ωt′​d​μt,\left(\int_{X_{t}}|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}}d\mu_{t}\right)^{2}=\left(\int_{B_{t}}|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}}d\mu_{t}\right)^{2}\leqslant\int_{B_{t}}|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}}^{2}d\mu_{t}\leqslant C\int_{X_{t}}\Tr_{\omega_{t}}\omega_{t}^{\prime}d\mu_{t},

while from (2.1) we get

∫Xttrωt⁡ωt′​d​μt=n​∫Xtωt′∧ωtn−1∫Xtωtn=n​∫Xtc1​(𝔏)⋅c1​(L)n−1∫Xtc1​(L)n⩽C,\int_{X_{t}}\Tr_{\omega_{t}}\omega_{t}^{\prime}d\mu_{t}=\frac{n\int_{X_{t}}\omega^{\prime}_{t}\wedge\omega_{t}^{n-1}}{\int_{X_{t}}\omega_{t}^{n}}=\frac{n\int_{X_{t}}c_{1}(\mathfrak{L})\cdot c_{1}(L)^{n-1}}{\int_{X_{t}}c_{1}(L)^{n}}\leqslant C,

and so

(3.4) ∫Xt|d​ρt|ωt​d​μt⩽C.\int_{X_{t}}|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}}d\mu_{t}\leqslant C.

Define two subsets of XtX_{t} by A1={ρt<−23}A_{1}=\{\rho_{t}<-\frac{2}{3}\} and A2={−13⩽ρt⩽0}A_{2}=\{-\frac{1}{3}\leqslant\rho_{t}\leqslant 0\}. Given two points x∈A1,y∈A2x\in A_{1},y\in A_{2} which are connected by a unique minimal geodesic γx,y\gamma_{x,y} (w.r.t. ωt\omega_{t}), we can bound

(3.5) ρt​(y)−ρt​(x)⩽∫γx,y|d​ρt|ωt​𝑑s,\rho_{t}(y)-\rho_{t}(x)\leqslant\int_{\gamma_{x,y}}|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}}ds,

where γx,y\gamma_{x,y} is parametrized with respect to ωt\omega_{t}-arclength.

Combining (3.5) with Cheeger-Colding’s segment inequality [4, Theorem 2.11] applied to the function |d​ρt|ωt|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}} we obtain

(3.6) Dt​(μt​(A1)+μt​(A2))​∫Xt|d​ρt|ωt​d​μt⩾C−1​∫A1×A2(∫γx,y|d​ρt|ωt​𝑑s)​d​μx​d​μy⩾C−1​∫A1×A2(ρt​(y)−ρt​(x))​d​μx​d​μy⩾C−13​μt​(A1)​μt​(A2),\begin{split}D_{t}(\mu_{t}(A_{1})+\mu_{t}(A_{2}))\int_{X_{t}}|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}}d\mu_{t}&\geqslant C^{-1}\int_{A_{1}\times A_{2}}\left(\int_{\gamma_{x,y}}|d\rho_{t}|_{\omega_{t}}ds\right)d\mu_{x}d\mu_{y}\\ &\geqslant C^{-1}\int_{A_{1}\times A_{2}}(\rho_{t}(y)-\rho_{t}(x))d\mu_{x}d\mu_{y}\\ &\geqslant\frac{C^{-1}}{3}\mu_{t}(A_{1})\mu_{t}(A_{2}),\end{split}

where Dt=diam⁡(Xt,ωt)D_{t}=\mathrm{diam}(X_{t},\omega_{t}), and in the ∫A1×A2\int_{A_{1}\times A_{2}} we are actually only integrating over the subset of pairs (x,y)(x,y) which are joined by a unique ωt\omega_{t}-minimal geodesic, which has full measure (cf. [4]).

Combining (3.4) and (3.6) gives

μt​(A1)​μt​(A2)⩽C​Dt​(μt​(A1)+μt​(A2))⩽C​Dt.\mu_{t}(A_{1})\mu_{t}(A_{2})\leqslant CD_{t}(\mu_{t}(A_{1})+\mu_{t}(A_{2}))\leqslant CD_{t}.

Lastly, from the definition of ρt\rho_{t} and from (3.1), a direct computation in polar coordinates (analogous to the one in [3]) gives

μt​(A1)⩾C−1,μt​(A2)⩾C−1,\mu_{t}(A_{1})\geqslant C^{-1},\quad\mu_{t}(A_{2})\geqslant C^{-1},

for a fixed constant CC, and so Dt⩾C−1,D_{t}\geqslant C^{-1}, as desired.

∎

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