ScalingStacks

Verified tagged author-source HTML · 0905.4718v1 · cited publication edition alignment unverified.

Next, we show (2.11). Recall from (3.10) and (3.24) that on X\SX\backslash S we have

(3.29) trωX​ω~t≤C​eC0​eB​σ−λ.\textrm{tr}_{\omega_{X}}\tilde{\omega}_{t}\leq Ce^{C_{0}e^{B\sigma^{-\lambda}}}.
(3.30) trω~t​ωX≤Ct​eC0​eB​σ−λ,\textrm{tr}_{\tilde{\omega}_{t}}\omega_{X}\leq\frac{C}{t}e^{C_{0}e^{B\sigma^{-\lambda}}},

for uniform constants B,C,C0B,C,C_{0}. We apply the maximum principle to the quantity

K2=e−A​eB​σ−λ​(𝒮+C​e3​C0​eB​σ−λt5/2​trωX​ω~t),K_{2}=e^{-Ae^{B\sigma^{-\lambda}}}\left(\mathcal{S}+C\frac{e^{3C_{0}e^{B\sigma^{-\lambda}}}}{t^{5/2}}\textrm{tr}_{\omega_{X}}\tilde{\omega}_{t}\right),

for suitable constants A,CA,C, where the quantity 𝒮\mathcal{S} is the same quantity as in [Y1]:

𝒮=|∇ω~t|ω~t2,\mathcal{S}=|\nabla\tilde{\omega}_{t}|^{2}_{\tilde{\omega}_{t}},

where ∇\nabla is the covariant derivative associated to the metric ωX\omega_{X}. Using φt\varphi_{t} we can write

𝒮=g~ti​p¯​g~tq​j¯​g~tk​r¯​φi​j¯​k​φp¯​q​r¯,\mathcal{S}=\tilde{g}_{t}^{i\overline{p}}\tilde{g}_{t}^{q\overline{j}}\tilde{g}_{t}^{k\overline{r}}\varphi_{i\overline{j}k}\varphi_{\overline{p}q\overline{r}},

where again lower indices are covariant derivatives with respect to ωX\omega_{X}. We are going to show that K2≤Ct5/2K_{2}\leq\frac{C}{t^{5/2}}, and using (3.29) this implies that

(3.31) 𝒮≤C​eA​eB​σ−λt5/2.\mathcal{S}\leq\frac{Ce^{Ae^{B\sigma^{-\lambda}}}}{t^{5/2}}.

We now use (3.28), which says that on XyX_{y} we have

(3.32) trωy​ω~y≤t​C​eC0​eB​σ−λ,\textrm{tr}_{\omega_{y}}\tilde{\omega}_{y}\leq tCe^{C_{0}e^{B\sigma^{-\lambda}}},

At any given point of XyX_{y} we can assume that ωX\omega_{X} is the identity and ω~t\tilde{\omega}_{t} is diagonal with positive entries λi\lambda_{i}, 1≤i≤n1\leq i\leq n, so that the first n−mn-m directions are tangent to the fiber XyX_{y}. Then (3.32) gives that

(3.33) λi≤t​C​eC0​eB​σ−λ,\lambda_{i}\leq tCe^{C_{0}e^{B\sigma^{-\lambda}}},

for 1≤i≤n−m1\leq i\leq n-m. Then using (3.31) we see that

∑i,j,k=1n−m1λi​λj​λk​|φi​j¯​k|2≤∑i,j,k=1n1λi​λj​λk​|φi​j¯​k|2=𝒮≤C​eA​eB​σ−λt5/2,\sum_{i,j,k=1}^{n-m}\frac{1}{\lambda_{i}\lambda_{j}\lambda_{k}}|\varphi_{i\overline{j}k}|^{2}\leq\sum_{i,j,k=1}^{n}\frac{1}{\lambda_{i}\lambda_{j}\lambda_{k}}|\varphi_{i\overline{j}k}|^{2}=\mathcal{S}\leq\frac{Ce^{Ae^{B\sigma^{-\lambda}}}}{t^{5/2}},

and using (3.33) we get

|∇ω~y|ωy2=∑i,j,k=1n−m|φi​j¯​k|2≤t1/2​C​e(A+3​C0)​eB​σ−λ,|\nabla\tilde{\omega}_{y}|^{2}_{\omega_{y}}=\sum_{i,j,k=1}^{n-m}|\varphi_{i\overline{j}k}|^{2}\leq t^{1/2}Ce^{(A+3C_{0})e^{B\sigma^{-\lambda}}},

and this is (2.11).

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